9
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Could the breed composition improve performance and change the enteric methane emissions from beef cattle in a tropical intensive production system?

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Crossbreeding has been used to improve performance in beef cattle, however the effects of breed composition on methane (CH 4) production, yield and intensity from cattle raised in tropical intensive and integrated systems remain unknown. To assess the impact of breed composition on performance and methane emissions, Nellore (NEL; yr 1: BW = 171.5 ± 19.4 kg; n = 10; yr 2: BW = 215.8 ± 32.3 kg, n = 25) and Angus x Nellore crossbred (AN; yr 1: BW = 214.2 ± 26.4 kg, n = 10; yr 2: BW = 242.5 ± 32.2 kg, n = 25) were compared. The animals grazed on integrated crop-livestock system in the growing phase (stocking rate 2452 kg BW/ha, herbage mass 4,884 kg dry matter (DM)/ha, forage allowance 5.9 kg DM/100kg BW) and then were finished in a feedlot. Steers (n = 8) from each breed composition were randomly selected in each phase to measure CH 4 production using a sulfur hexafluoride (SF 6) tracer technique and DM intake (DMI) using titanium dioxide. Compared with NEL, AN had both superior total gain and average daily gain (ADG) in the grazing period. The AN presented greater ADG in the feedlot with a shorter finishing period and resulted in greater carcass yield and carcass ADG. Methane production (kg/period) was lower in NEL (19% less) than AN in grazing ( P<0.01), and no difference was observed in feedlot. The NEL had less CH 4 intensity (CH 4/BW) in grazing but greater CH 4 per unit of ADG in the feedlot compared to AN. Breed composition did not influence the CH 4 yield (CH 4/DMI) in either phase, despite the difference in feedlot DMI (kg/day). In conclusion, crossbreeding may be an option to improve performance and reduce the CH 4 per ADG in tropical climate conditions, resulting in lower methane emission per kg of meat produced.

          Related collections

          Most cited references39

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Soil carbon sequestration and biochar as negative emission technologies

          Pete Smith (2016)
          Despite 20 years of effort to curb emissions, greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions grew faster during the 2000s than in the 1990s, which presents a major challenge for meeting the international goal of limiting warming to <2 °C relative to the preindustrial era. Most recent scenarios from integrated assessment models require large-scale deployment of negative emissions technologies (NETs) to reach the 2 °C target. A recent analysis of NETs, including direct air capture, enhanced weathering, bioenergy with carbon capture and storage and afforestation/deforestation, showed that all NETs have significant limits to implementation, including economic cost, energy requirements, land use, and water use. In this paper, I assess the potential for negative emissions from soil carbon sequestration and biochar addition to land, and also the potential global impacts on land use, water, nutrients, albedo, energy and cost. Results indicate that soil carbon sequestration and biochar have useful negative emission potential (each 0.7 GtCeq. yr(-1) ) and that they potentially have lower impact on land, water use, nutrients, albedo, energy requirement and cost, so have fewer disadvantages than many NETs. Limitations of soil carbon sequestration as a NET centre around issues of sink saturation and reversibility. Biochar could be implemented in combination with bioenergy with carbon capture and storage. Current integrated assessment models do not represent soil carbon sequestration or biochar. Given the negative emission potential of SCS and biochar and their potential advantages compared to other NETs, efforts should be made to include these options within IAMs, so that their potential can be explored further in comparison with other NETs for climate stabilization.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Technical note: a procedure for the preparation and quantitative analysis of samples for titanium dioxide.

            A procedure was developed for the rapid analysis of titanium dioxide (TiO2) concentrations in feed and fecal samples. Samples were digested in concentrated H2SO4 for 2 h, followed by addition of 30% H2O2, and absorbance was measured at 410 nm. Standards were prepared by spiking blanks with increasing amounts of TiO2, resulting in a linear standard curve. Complete analysis using this procedure can typically be accomplished within 4.5 h. This procedure was compared to a previously published dry-ash procedure for the analysis of TiO2 in bovine fecal samples. Three sources of OM devoid of TiO2 (a forage sample, a bovine fecal sample without Cr2O3, and a bovine fecal sample containing Cr2O3) were spiked with graded amounts (0, 2, 4, 6, 8, or 10 mg) of TiO2. With our procedure, TiO2 recoveries averaged 96.7, 97.5, and 98.5%, for the three OM sources, respectively, vs. 74.3, 83.8, and 53.1% for the same samples analyzed using the dry-ash method. These results suggest that our procedure is a rapid and accurate alternative to dry-ash procedures for the determination of TiO2.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Cattle selected for lower residual feed intake have reduced daily methane production.

              Seventy-six Angus steers chosen from breeding lines divergently selected for residual feed intake (RFI) were studied to quantify the relationship between RFI and the daily rate of methane production (MPR). A 70-d feeding test using a barley-based ration was conducted in which the voluntary DMI, feeding characteristics, and BW of steers were monitored. The estimated breeding value (EBV) for RFI (RFI(EBV)) for each steer had been calculated from 70-d RFI tests conducted on its parents. Methane production rate (g/d) was measured on each steer using SF(6) as a tracer gas in a series of 10-d measurement periods. Daily DMI of steers was lower during the methane measurement period than when methane was not being measured (11.18 vs. 11.88 kg; P = 0.001). A significant relationship existed between MPR and RFI when RFI (RFI(15d)) was estimated over the 15 d when steers were harnessed for methane collection (MPR = 13.3 x RFI(15d) + 179; r(2) = 0.12; P = 0.01). Animals expressing lower RFI had lower daily MPR. The relationship established between MPR and RFI(15d) was used to calculate a reduction in daily methane emission of 13.38 g accompanied a 1 kg/d reduction in RFI(EBV) in cattle consuming ad libitum a diet of 12.1 MJ of ME/kg. The magnitude of this emission reduction was between that predicted on the basis of intake reduction alone (18 g x d(-1) x kg of DMI(-1)) and that predicted by a model incorporating steer midtest BW and level of intake relative to maintenance (5 g x d(-1) x kg of DMI(-1)). Comparison of data from steers exhibiting the greatest (n = 10) and lowest (n = 10) RFI(15d) showed the low RFI(15d) group to not only have lower MPR (P = 0.017) but also reduced methane cost of growth (by 41.2 g of CH(4)/kg of ADG; P = 0.09). Although the opportunity to abate livestock MPR by selection against RFI seems great, RFI explained only a small proportion of the observed variation in MPR. A genotype x nutrition interaction can be anticipated, and the MPR:RFI(EBV) relationship will need to be defined over a range of diet types to account for this.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: Data curationRole: Formal analysisRole: InvestigationRole: MethodologyRole: Project administrationRole: Writing – original draftRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: Funding acquisitionRole: InvestigationRole: MethodologyRole: Project administrationRole: ResourcesRole: SupervisionRole: Writing – original draftRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: Formal analysisRole: Funding acquisitionRole: MethodologyRole: ResourcesRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: Formal analysisRole: Funding acquisitionRole: MethodologyRole: ResourcesRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: Formal analysisRole: Funding acquisitionRole: MethodologyRole: Resources
                Role: InvestigationRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: InvestigationRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: Data curationRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: Writing – review & editing
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: Data curationRole: Formal analysisRole: Funding acquisitionRole: InvestigationRole: MethodologyRole: Project administrationRole: ResourcesRole: SupervisionRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: Editor
                Journal
                PLoS One
                PLoS ONE
                plos
                plosone
                PLoS ONE
                Public Library of Science (San Francisco, CA USA )
                1932-6203
                26 July 2019
                2019
                : 14
                : 7
                : e0220247
                Affiliations
                [1 ] Federal University of Minas Gerais, Department of Animal Science, Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil
                [2 ] Michigan State University, Department of Animal Science, East Lansing, MI, United States of America
                [3 ] De Heus Animal Nutrition B.V., Rubensstraat VE Ede, The Netherlands
                [4 ] Embrapa Dairy Cattle, Juiz de Fora, MG, Brazil
                [5 ] Embrapa Maize & Sorghum, Sete Lagoas, MG, Brazil
                United States Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service, UNITED STATES
                Author notes

                Competing Interests: Fabiano Alvim Barbosa is currently employed by De Heus Animal Nutrition. De Heus did not play any role in the study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript. De Heus did not provide any financial support. This does not change our adherence to PLOS ONE policies on data and materials sharing.

                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9992-8324
                Article
                PONE-D-19-05118
                10.1371/journal.pone.0220247
                6660127
                31348816
                f56e9b90-a917-4d51-b8a6-538098f5c3b8
                © 2019 Maciel et al

                This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

                History
                : 20 February 2019
                : 11 July 2019
                Page count
                Figures: 0, Tables: 5, Pages: 15
                Funding
                The authors thank Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq) for the financial support. The funder had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.
                Categories
                Research Article
                Biology and Life Sciences
                Psychology
                Behavior
                Animal Behavior
                Grazing
                Social Sciences
                Psychology
                Behavior
                Animal Behavior
                Grazing
                Biology and Life Sciences
                Zoology
                Animal Behavior
                Grazing
                Earth Sciences
                Atmospheric Science
                Atmospheric Chemistry
                Greenhouse Gases
                Methane
                Physical Sciences
                Chemistry
                Environmental Chemistry
                Atmospheric Chemistry
                Greenhouse Gases
                Methane
                Ecology and Environmental Sciences
                Environmental Chemistry
                Atmospheric Chemistry
                Greenhouse Gases
                Methane
                Physical Sciences
                Chemistry
                Chemical Compounds
                Methane
                Biology and Life Sciences
                Agriculture
                Animal Products
                Meat
                Beef
                Biology and Life Sciences
                Nutrition
                Diet
                Food
                Meat
                Beef
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Nutrition
                Diet
                Food
                Meat
                Beef
                Biology and Life Sciences
                Organisms
                Eukaryota
                Animals
                Vertebrates
                Amniotes
                Mammals
                Bovines
                Cattle
                Biology and Life Sciences
                Organisms
                Eukaryota
                Animals
                Vertebrates
                Amniotes
                Mammals
                Ruminants
                Cattle
                Biology and Life Sciences
                Agriculture
                Animal Management
                Animal Performance
                Biology and Life Sciences
                Nutrition
                Diet
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Nutrition
                Diet
                Biology and Life Sciences
                Agriculture
                Livestock
                People and places
                Geographical locations
                South America
                Brazil
                Custom metadata
                All relevant data are within the manuscript and its Supporting Information files.

                Uncategorized
                Uncategorized

                Comments

                Comment on this article