Performance and enteric methane emissions from housed beef cattle fed silage produced on pastures with different forage profiles
Methane (CH4) produced by ruminants is a significant source of greenhouse gases from agriculture in the United Kingdom (UK), accounting for approximately 50% of the emissions in this sector. Ration modification is linked to changes in rumen fermentation and can be an effective means of CH4 abatement...
| Main Authors: | , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Elsevier
2023-04-01
|
| Series: | Animal |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1751731123000228 |
| _version_ | 1827963134406557696 |
|---|---|
| author | P. Meo-Filho J. Hood M.R.F. Lee H. Fleming M.E. Meethal T. Misselbrook |
| author_facet | P. Meo-Filho J. Hood M.R.F. Lee H. Fleming M.E. Meethal T. Misselbrook |
| author_sort | P. Meo-Filho |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Methane (CH4) produced by ruminants is a significant source of greenhouse gases from agriculture in the United Kingdom (UK), accounting for approximately 50% of the emissions in this sector. Ration modification is linked to changes in rumen fermentation and can be an effective means of CH4 abatement. In temperate climate countries, forage silage represents a major feed component for cattle during the housing period. The objective of this study was, therefore, to compare enteric CH4 emission from cattle offered silage produced from different types of grassland. Beef cattle, steers (n = 89) and heifers (n = 88) with average liveweight (LW) of 328 ± 57.1 kg were evaluated during two housing seasons (2016–2017 and 2017–2018) from November to April, at the Rothamsted Research North Wyke Farm Platform (UK). The treatments corresponded to three diet types, comprising silage harvested from three different pastures: MRG, monoculture of perennial ryegrass (PRG, Lolium perenne L.cv. AberMagic), bred to express the high-sugar phenotype; RG-WC, a mixed sward comprised of the same perennial ryegrass cultivar with white clover (Trifolium repens L.) with a target clover proportion of 30% as land cover; and permanent pasture (PP) dominated by PRG and a small number of non-introduced species. MRG and PP received 160–200 kg N/ha/year. Cattle were weighed every 30 days, and the enteric CH4 emission was determined using GreenFeed automated systems. No significant differences in enteric CH4 emission per head or per kg LW were observed between treatments. However, emission expressed per average daily gain (ADG) in LW was greater (P < 0.001) for MRG compared with RG-WC and PP, at 270, 248 and 235 g CH4/kg ADG, respectively. This related to a lower ADG (P = 0.041) for the animals fed MRG silage compared with RG-WC and PP which were similar, with respective values of 0.67, 0.71 and 0.74 kg/day. The forages compared in this study showed little or no potential to reduce enteric CH4 emission when fed as silage to growing beef cattle during the winter housing period. |
| first_indexed | 2024-04-09T16:54:45Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-66f355a0a77b4ef28266abb1298d5d7e |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 1751-7311 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-04-09T16:54:45Z |
| publishDate | 2023-04-01 |
| publisher | Elsevier |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Animal |
| spelling | doaj.art-66f355a0a77b4ef28266abb1298d5d7e2023-04-21T06:44:01ZengElsevierAnimal1751-73112023-04-01174100726Performance and enteric methane emissions from housed beef cattle fed silage produced on pastures with different forage profilesP. Meo-Filho0J. Hood1M.R.F. Lee2H. Fleming3M.E. Meethal4T. Misselbrook5Net Zero and Resilient Farming, Rothamsted Research – North Wyke (Rothamsted Research, North Wyke, EX20 2SB, Okehampton, Devon), United Kingdom; Corresponding author.Intelligent Data Ecosystems, Rothamsted Research (West Common, AL5 2JQ, Harpenden, Hertfordshire), United KingdomNet Zero and Resilient Farming, Rothamsted Research – North Wyke (Rothamsted Research, North Wyke, EX20 2SB, Okehampton, Devon), United KingdomNet Zero and Resilient Farming, Rothamsted Research – North Wyke (Rothamsted Research, North Wyke, EX20 2SB, Okehampton, Devon), United KingdomNet Zero and Resilient Farming, Rothamsted Research – North Wyke (Rothamsted Research, North Wyke, EX20 2SB, Okehampton, Devon), United KingdomNet Zero and Resilient Farming, Rothamsted Research – North Wyke (Rothamsted Research, North Wyke, EX20 2SB, Okehampton, Devon), United KingdomMethane (CH4) produced by ruminants is a significant source of greenhouse gases from agriculture in the United Kingdom (UK), accounting for approximately 50% of the emissions in this sector. Ration modification is linked to changes in rumen fermentation and can be an effective means of CH4 abatement. In temperate climate countries, forage silage represents a major feed component for cattle during the housing period. The objective of this study was, therefore, to compare enteric CH4 emission from cattle offered silage produced from different types of grassland. Beef cattle, steers (n = 89) and heifers (n = 88) with average liveweight (LW) of 328 ± 57.1 kg were evaluated during two housing seasons (2016–2017 and 2017–2018) from November to April, at the Rothamsted Research North Wyke Farm Platform (UK). The treatments corresponded to three diet types, comprising silage harvested from three different pastures: MRG, monoculture of perennial ryegrass (PRG, Lolium perenne L.cv. AberMagic), bred to express the high-sugar phenotype; RG-WC, a mixed sward comprised of the same perennial ryegrass cultivar with white clover (Trifolium repens L.) with a target clover proportion of 30% as land cover; and permanent pasture (PP) dominated by PRG and a small number of non-introduced species. MRG and PP received 160–200 kg N/ha/year. Cattle were weighed every 30 days, and the enteric CH4 emission was determined using GreenFeed automated systems. No significant differences in enteric CH4 emission per head or per kg LW were observed between treatments. However, emission expressed per average daily gain (ADG) in LW was greater (P < 0.001) for MRG compared with RG-WC and PP, at 270, 248 and 235 g CH4/kg ADG, respectively. This related to a lower ADG (P = 0.041) for the animals fed MRG silage compared with RG-WC and PP which were similar, with respective values of 0.67, 0.71 and 0.74 kg/day. The forages compared in this study showed little or no potential to reduce enteric CH4 emission when fed as silage to growing beef cattle during the winter housing period.http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1751731123000228Greenhouse gasesGreenFeedLivestockNorth Wyke Farm PlatformRuminants |
| spellingShingle | P. Meo-Filho J. Hood M.R.F. Lee H. Fleming M.E. Meethal T. Misselbrook Performance and enteric methane emissions from housed beef cattle fed silage produced on pastures with different forage profiles Animal Greenhouse gases GreenFeed Livestock North Wyke Farm Platform Ruminants |
| title | Performance and enteric methane emissions from housed beef cattle fed silage produced on pastures with different forage profiles |
| title_full | Performance and enteric methane emissions from housed beef cattle fed silage produced on pastures with different forage profiles |
| title_fullStr | Performance and enteric methane emissions from housed beef cattle fed silage produced on pastures with different forage profiles |
| title_full_unstemmed | Performance and enteric methane emissions from housed beef cattle fed silage produced on pastures with different forage profiles |
| title_short | Performance and enteric methane emissions from housed beef cattle fed silage produced on pastures with different forage profiles |
| title_sort | performance and enteric methane emissions from housed beef cattle fed silage produced on pastures with different forage profiles |
| topic | Greenhouse gases GreenFeed Livestock North Wyke Farm Platform Ruminants |
| url | http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1751731123000228 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT pmeofilho performanceandentericmethaneemissionsfromhousedbeefcattlefedsilageproducedonpastureswithdifferentforageprofiles AT jhood performanceandentericmethaneemissionsfromhousedbeefcattlefedsilageproducedonpastureswithdifferentforageprofiles AT mrflee performanceandentericmethaneemissionsfromhousedbeefcattlefedsilageproducedonpastureswithdifferentforageprofiles AT hfleming performanceandentericmethaneemissionsfromhousedbeefcattlefedsilageproducedonpastureswithdifferentforageprofiles AT memeethal performanceandentericmethaneemissionsfromhousedbeefcattlefedsilageproducedonpastureswithdifferentforageprofiles AT tmisselbrook performanceandentericmethaneemissionsfromhousedbeefcattlefedsilageproducedonpastureswithdifferentforageprofiles |