Register      Login
Animal Production Science Animal Production Science Society
Food, fibre and pharmaceuticals from animals
Shopping Cart: ( empty )
You are here: Home > Journals > AN > EA07278
RESEARCH ARTICLE
Contents Vol 48(2)

Within- and between-animal variance in methane emissions in non-lactating dairy cows

J. B. Vlaming A D , N. Lopez-Villalobos B , I. M. Brookes C , S. O. Hoskin B and H. Clark A
+ Author Affiliations
- Author Affiliations

A AgResearch Limited, Grasslands Research Centre, Private Bag 11008, Palmerston North 4442, New Zealand.

B Institute of Veterinary Animal and Biomedical Sciences, Massey University, Private Bag 11222, Palmerston North, New Zealand.

C Institute of Food, Nutrition and Human Health, Massey University, Private Bag 11222, Palmerston North, New Zealand.

D Corresponding author. Email: ben.vlaming@agresearch.co.nz

Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture 48(2) 124-127 https://doi.org/10.1071/EA07278
Submitted: 17 August 2007  Accepted: 18 October 2007   Published: 2 January 2008

Abstract

Several studies on methane (CH4) emissions have focussed on selecting high and low CH4-emitting animals. One challenge faced by this work is the lack of consistency, or repeatability, in animal rankings over time. Repeatability for individual animals over time needs to be high to reliably detect high and low CH4-emitting animals. A possible explanation for the lack of repeatability is a relatively high within-animal variation in daily CH4 emissions, meaning that animals could then change their ranking when compared at different points in time. An experiment was undertaken with four non-lactating dairy cattle to assess the within- and between-animal variation in CH4 emissions over time when measured using the sulfur hexafluoride (SF6) tracer technique. Two contrasting diets were fed to the cattle at maintenance energy levels: lucerne silage (diet 1) and a cereal + lucerne + straw mixed ration diet (diet 2). Daily CH4 measurements were undertaken for 23 days on diet 1 and 30 days on diet 2.

There was a significant (P < 0.001) difference between diet 1 and diet 2 in daily CH4 production, with mean (±s.e.) production of 124.3 (11.1) g CH4/day from diet 1 and 169.8 (±11.0) g CH4/day from diet 2. Lower CH4 yield (g CH4/kg dry matter intake) was recorded on diet 1 (22.8 ± 2.0) than diet 2 (32.0 ± 2.0). Cows differed significantly (P < 0.05) from one another in daily CH4 yield (diet 1: cow 1 = 19.4 ± 0.6, cow 2 = 22.2 ± 0.8, cow 3 = 23.2 ± 0.7, cow 4 = 25.4 ± 0.6; diet 2: cow 1 = 26.0 ± 0.7, cow 2 = 36.4 ± 0.7, cow 3 = 29.3 ± 0.7, cow 4 = 36.6 ± 0.7). Variances for daily CH4 yield were smaller for diet 1 (within animal = 6.91, between animals = 6.23) than for diet 2 (within animal = 10.09, between animals = 27.79). Estimates of repeatability (variation between animals/total variation) for daily CH4 yield were 47 and 73% in diet 1 and 2, respectively. Coefficients of variation in average daily CH4 emissions in this experiment ranged from 8 to 18% despite the fact that each animal received the same quantity and quality of feed each day. While further research is required, the high within-animal variability in CH4 emissions measured using the SF6 tracer technique may explain why there has been difficulty in obtaining consistent rankings in CH4 yields when animals are measured on multiple occasions. The results also suggest that the SF6 tracer technique may exaggerate apparent between animal differences in CH4 emissions.


Acknowledgements

J. B. Vlaming is in receipt of a PhD scholarship from the Pastoral Greenhouse Gas Research Consortium and this research was carried out with their support.


References


ADAS 1984 ‘Energy allowances and feeding systems for ruminants.’ (Agricultural Development and Advisory Service. Her Majesty’s Stationery Office: London)

AOAC (2005) ‘Official methods of analysis.’ 18th edn. (AOAC: Washington DC)

Blaxter KL, Clapperton JL (1965) Prediction of the amount of methane produced by ruminants. The British Journal of Nutrition 19, 511–522.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | CAS | PubMed | open url image1

Boadi DA, Wittenberg KM (2002) Methane production from dairy and beef heifers fed forages differing in nutrient density using the sulphur hexafluoride (SF6) tracer gas technique. Canadian Journal of Animal Science 82, 201–206. open url image1

Corson DC, Waghorn GC, Ulyatt MJ, Lee J (1999) Forage analysis and livestock feeding. Proceedings of the New Zealand Grassland Association 61, 127–132. open url image1

Goopy JP, Hegarty RS (2004) Repeatability of methane production in cattle fed concentrate and forage diets. Journal of Animal and Feed Sciences Suppl 1 13, 75–78. open url image1

Grainger C, Clarke T, McGinn SM, Auldist MJ, Beauchemin KA, Hannah MC, Waghorn GC, Clark H, Eckard RJ (2007) Methane emissions from dairy cows measured using the sulfur hexafluoride (SF6) tracer and chamber techniques. Journal of Dairy Science 90, 2755–2766.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | CAS | PubMed | open url image1

Lassey KR, Ulyatt MJ, Martin RJ, Walker CF, Shelton ID (1997) Methane emissions measured directly from grazing livestock in New Zealand. Atmospheric Environment 31, 2905–2914.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | CAS | open url image1

Lassey KR, Walker CF, McMillan AMS, Ulyatt MJ (2001) On the performance of SF6 permeation tubes used in determining methane emission from grazing livestock. Chemosphere – Global Change Science 3, 367–376.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | CAS | open url image1

McAllister TA, Okine EK, Mathison GW, Cheng K-J (1996) Dietary, environmental and microbiological aspects of methane production in ruminants. Canadian Journal of Animal Science 76, 231–243.
|  CAS |
open url image1

McNaughton LR, Berry DP, Clark H, Pinares-Patiño C, Harcourt S, Spelman RJ (2005) Factors affecting methane production in Friesian × Jersey dairy cattle. Proceedings of the New Zealand Society of Animal Production 65, 352–355. open url image1

Okine EK, Mathison GW, Hardin RT (1989) Effects of changes in frequency of reticular contractions on fluid and particulate passage rates in cattle. Journal of Animal Science 67, 3388–3396.
|  CAS | PubMed |
open url image1

Pinares-Patiño CS, Ulyatt MJ, Lassey KR, Barry TN, Holmes CW (2003a) Persistence of differences between sheep in methane emission under generous grazing conditions. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 140, 227–233.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | open url image1

Pinares-Patiño CS, Ulyatt MJ, Lassey KR, Barry TN, Holmes CW (2003b) Rumen function and digestion parameters associated with differences between sheep in methane emissions when fed chaffed lucerne hay. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 140, 205–214.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | open url image1

Pinares-Patiño CS , Vlaming B , Cavanagh A , Molano G , Clark H (2005) Persistence of dairy cows in animal-to-animal variation in methane emission. In ‘Proceedings of the 2nd international conference on greenhouse gases and animal agriculture (GGAA 2005)’. pp. 401–404.

SAS (2002) ‘SAS/STAT software. Release 9.1.’ (SAS Institute Inc.: Cary, NC)

Ulyatt MJ, Baker SK, McCrabb GJ, Lassey KR (1999) Accuracy of SF6 tracer technology and alternatives for field measurements. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 50, 1329–1334.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | open url image1

Vlaming JB, Brookes IM, Hoskin SO, Pinares-Patiño CS, Clark H (2007) The possible influence of intra-ruminal sulphur hexafluoride release rates on calculated methane emissions from cattle. Canadian Journal of Animal Science 87, 269–275.
|  CAS |
open url image1