Abstract #597
Section: Production, Management and the Environment
Session: Production, Management, and the Environment II
Format: Oral
Day/Time: Tuesday 3:30 PM–3:45 PM
Location: Panzacola H-1
Session: Production, Management, and the Environment II
Format: Oral
Day/Time: Tuesday 3:30 PM–3:45 PM
Location: Panzacola H-1
# 597
Comparison between the GreenFeed system and the sulfur hexafluoride tracer technique for measuring enteric methane emissions from dairy cows.
Joonpyo Oh*1, Fabio Giallongo1, Tyler Frederick1, Mike T. Harper1, Holley Weeks1, Antonio F. Branco2, Alexander N. Hristov1, William J. Price3, Peter J. Moate4, Matthew H. Deighton4, S. Richard O. Williams4, Maik Kindermann5, Stephane Duval6, 1The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA, 2Universidade Estadual de Maringá, Maringá, Paraná, Brazil, 3University of Idaho, Moscow, ID, 4Agriculture Research Division, Ellinbank Centre, Ellinbank, Victoria, Australia, 5DSM Nutritional Products, Base, Switzerland, 6DSM Nutritional Products France, Saint Louis Cedex, France.
Key Words: methane, GreenFeed, sulfur hexafluoride
Comparison between the GreenFeed system and the sulfur hexafluoride tracer technique for measuring enteric methane emissions from dairy cows.
Joonpyo Oh*1, Fabio Giallongo1, Tyler Frederick1, Mike T. Harper1, Holley Weeks1, Antonio F. Branco2, Alexander N. Hristov1, William J. Price3, Peter J. Moate4, Matthew H. Deighton4, S. Richard O. Williams4, Maik Kindermann5, Stephane Duval6, 1The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA, 2Universidade Estadual de Maringá, Maringá, Paraná, Brazil, 3University of Idaho, Moscow, ID, 4Agriculture Research Division, Ellinbank Centre, Ellinbank, Victoria, Australia, 5DSM Nutritional Products, Base, Switzerland, 6DSM Nutritional Products France, Saint Louis Cedex, France.
The objective of this study was to compare 2 commonly used techniques for measuring CH4 emissions from ruminant animals, the GreenFeed (GF) system and the sulfur hexafluoride (SF6) technique. The study was part of a larger experiment, in which a CH4 inhibitor, 3-nitrooxypropanol (3NOP), fed at 4 application rates (0, 40, 60, and 80 mg/kg feed DM) decreased enteric CH4 emission by 25 to 32% in a 12-wk experiment with 48 lactating Holstein cows. The larger experiment used a randomized block design and was conducted in 2 phases (Feb-May, phase 1 and Jun-Aug, phase 2), with 24 cows in each phase. Methane emissions using GF were measured during experimental wk 2, 6, 9, and 12. During each GF measurement, 8 spot samples of gas emissions were collected from each cow, staggered over a 3-d period (a total of 0.67 h/cow). Emission data using the SF6 technique were collected for 3, 24 h periods (a total of 77 h/cow) during wk 2, 6 or 9, and 12. An outlier analysis removed 1 observation from the GF data set (1,271 observations) and 6 observations from the SF6 data set (451 observations). Methane yield data (g/kg DMI) were averaged per cow for the statistical analysis. The mean CH4 yield, SD, lower and upper 95% CL, CV, and min and max values for the GF data set were (g CH4/kg DMI or as indicated): 12.8, 3.63, 12.8 and 13.9, 27.2% (18.1 and 21.2%; control and 3NOP cows, respectively), and 6.7 and 26.4. For the SF6 data set these values were: 14.7, 5.60, 14.7 and 17.0, 35.3% (30.4 and 29.9%, control and 3NOP cows), and 7.2 and 36.5. Data were analyzed within experimental phase, sampling week, and treatment to compare CH4 yield between GF and SF6. The difference between the 2 methods (SF6 – GF) within treatment was 1.9 to 4.1 g CH4/kg DMI (P < 0.001 to 0.06) for phase 1 and 1.1 to 2.4 g/kg DMI (P = 0.06 to 0.38) for phase 2. In the conditions of this experiment, the SF6 technique produced larger variability in CH4 yield than the GF method. The difference between the 2 methods was not consistent over time, perhaps influenced by barn ventilation and background CH4 and SF6 concentrations.
Key Words: methane, GreenFeed, sulfur hexafluoride
