Affiliation:
1. American Institute for Goat Research, Langston University, Langston, OK 73050, USA
2. Department of Animal Sciences, Debre Berhan University, Debre Berhan P.O. Box 445, Ethiopia
3. Military Institute of Hygiene and Epidemiology, Kozielska 4, 00-163 Warsaw, Poland
4. Department of Animal and Range Sciences, Haramaya University, Dire Dawa P.O. Box 138, Ethiopia
5. Department of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences, Tuskegee University, Tuskegee, AL 36088, USA
Abstract
The study was conducted to determine appropriate numbers and times of daily gas measurements to estimate total daily methane (CH4) emission of meat goats using a GreenFeed system (GFS). A replicated 4 (four measurement protocols) × 4 (four periods) Latin square design was employed with 16 Boer wethers in a confinement pen setting. Measurement protocols entailed three (G-3T; 0600–0700, 1400–1500, and 2200–2300 h), four (G-4T; 0700–0800, 1300–1400, 1900–2000, and 0100–0200 h), and six (G-6T; 0800–0900, 1200–1300, 1600–1700, 2000–2100, 0000–0100, and 0400–0500 h) times for daily measurement periods in GFS. The fourth protocol was continuous measurement over 24 h with animals in an open-circuit respiration calorimetry system (CS). Oat hay was given in individual feeders, and a small predetermined quantity of a pelleted concentrate supplement (bait) was dispensed by the GFS or manually offered for the CS. Overall, total dry matter (DM) intake (614, 625, 635, and 577 g/day for CS, G-3T, G-4T, and G-6T, respectively; SEM = 13.9) and digestible DM intake (359, 368, 374, and 320 CS, G-3T, G-4T, and G-6T, respectively; SEM = 15.9) were lower for CS than for G-3T, G-4T, and G-6T (p < 0.05), but these variables were not different among the GFS protocols. There was a significant (p < 0.001) effect of measurement protocol on CH4 emission in g/day (11.1, 25.6, 27.3, and 26.7 for CS, G-3T, G-4T, and G-6T, respectively; SEM = 1.11), g/kg DM intake (19.3, 46.4, 43.9, and 42.4 for CS, G-3T, G-4T, and G-6T, respectively; SEM = 2.03), and g/kg body weight (0.49, 1.11, 1.18, and 1.16 for CS, G-3T, G-4T, and G-6T, respectively; SEM = 0.052), with values being much lower for CS than for G-3T, G-4T and G-6T. Conversely, CH4 emission was similar among the GFS protocols despite differences in the time and number of daily visits (2.03, 2.76, and 3.75 visits for G-3T, G-4T, and G-6T, respectively; SEM = 0.114; p < 0.001). Pearson correlation (r) analysis indicated a moderate to high (p < 0.05) correlation between CS and G-3T (r = 0.62 for CH4 in g/day and r = 0.59 for CH4 in g/kg BW), CS and G-4T (r = 0.67 for CH4 in g/day and r = 0.76 for CH4 in g/kg BW), and CS and G-6T (r = 0.70 for CH4 in g/day and r = 0.75 for CH4 in g/kg BW). However, the correlation coefficient for CH4 in g/kg DM intake was low between CS and G-3T (r = 0.11) and CS and G-6T (r = 0.31) but slightly greater between CS and G-4T (r = 0.47). In conclusion, the results suggest that CH4 emissions using GFS in a confinement setting were greater compared with the CS in goats, but CH4-emission estimation using the GFS correlated with the CH4 emission in the CS system with a stronger relationship for the four times of daily measurements.
Funder
USDA National Institute for Food and Agriculture
USDA/NRCS
Reference42 articles.
1. NCEI (2024, January 30). U.S. Billion-Dollar Weather and Climate Disasters. NOAA National Centers for Environmental Information (NCEI), Available online: https://www.ncei.noaa.gov/access/metadata/landing-page/bin/iso?id=gov.noaa.nodc:0209268.
2. WRI (2024, February 01). World Greenhouse Gas Emissions: 2019. World Resources Institute. Available online: https://www.wri.org/data/world-greenhouse-gas-emissions-2019.
3. IPCC (2014). Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, IPCC.
4. Methane Emissions from Cattle;Johnson;J. Anim. Sci.,1995
5. Predicting Enteric Methane Emission in Sheep Using Linear and Non-Linear Statistical Models from Dietary Variables;Patra;Anim. Prod. Sci.,2016