scholarly journals Enteric Methane Emissions and Rumen Fermentation Profile Treated by Dietary Chitosan: A Meta-Analysis of In Vitro Experiments

2020 ◽  
Vol 43 (3) ◽  
pp. 233-239
Author(s):  
R. P. Harahap ◽  
D. Setiawan ◽  
Nahrowi Nahrowi ◽  
S. Suharti ◽  
T. Obitsu ◽  
...  
Animals ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (6) ◽  
pp. 1599
Author(s):  
Rafael Jiménez-Ocampo ◽  
María Denisse Montoya-Flores ◽  
Esperanza Herrera-Torres ◽  
Gerardo Pámanes-Carrasco ◽  
Jeyder Israel Arceo-Castillo ◽  
...  

In order to meet consumer needs, the livestock industry is increasingly seeking natural feed additives with the ability to improve the efficiency of nutrient utilization, alternatives to antibiotics, and mitigate methane emissions in ruminants. Chitosan (CHI) is a polysaccharide with antimicrobial capability against protozoa and Gram-positive and -negative bacteria, fungi, and yeasts while naringin (NA) is a flavonoid with antimicrobial and antioxidant properties. First, an in vitro gas production experiment was performed adding 0, 1.5, 3.0 g/kg of CHI and NA under a completely randomized design. The substrate containing forage and concentrate in a 70:30 ratio on a dry matter (DM) basis. Compounds increased the concentration of propionic acid, and a significant reduction in methane production was observed with the inclusion of CHI at 1.5 g/kg in in vitro experiments (p < 0.001). In a dry matter rumen degradability study for 96 h, there were no differences in potential and effective degradability. In the in vivo study, six crossbred heifers fitted with rumen cannulas were assigned to a 6 × 6 Latin square design according to the following treatments: control (CTL), no additive; chitosan (CHI1, 1.5 g/kg DMI); (CHI2, 3.0 g/kg DMI); naringin (NA1, 1.5 g/kg DMI); (NA2, 3.0 g/kg DMI) and a mixture of CHI and NA (1.5 + 1.5 g/kg DMI) given directly through the rumen cannula. Additives did not affect rumen fermentation (p > 0.05), DM intake and digestibility of (p > 0.05), and enteric methane emissions (p > 0.05). CHI at a concentration of 1.5 g/kg DM in in vitro experiments had a positive effect on fermentation pattern increasing propionate and reduced methane production. In contrast, in the in vivo studies, there was not a positive effect on rumen fermentation, nor in enteric methane production in crossbred heifers fed a basal ration of tropical grass.


2019 ◽  
Vol 102 (11) ◽  
pp. 10616-10631 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. Bougouin ◽  
J. A. D. Ranga Niroshan Appuhamy ◽  
A. Ferlay ◽  
E. Kebreab ◽  
C. Martin ◽  
...  

2014 ◽  
Vol 94 (4) ◽  
pp. 557-570 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chanhee Lee ◽  
Karen A. Beauchemin

Lee, C. and Beauchemin, K. A. 2014. A review of feeding supplementary nitrate to ruminant animals: Nitrate toxicity, methane emissions, and production performance. Can. J. Anim. Sci. 94: 557–570. The purpose of this review is to discuss the risks and benefits of using supplementary nitrate to reduce enteric methane emissions in ruminants based on the results of a meta-analysis. The meta-analysis confirmed possible nitrate poisoning triggered by higher blood methemoglobin levels with increasing nitrate consumption of ruminants: methemoglobin (%)=41.3×nitrate [g kg−1 body weight (BW) d−1]+1.2; R 2=0.76, P<0.001. However, acclimatizing animals to nitrate reduced the toxicity of nitrate: methemoglobin (%)=4.2×nitrate (g kg−1 BW d−1)+0.4, R 2=0.76, P=0.002. Animals fed nitrate reduced enteric methane emissions in a dose-response manner: methane [g kg−1 dry matter intake (DMI)]=−8.3×nitrate (g kg−1 BW d−1)+15.2, R 2=0.80, P<0.001. The reduction of enteric methane emissions due to supplementary nitrate was effective and consistent in both in vitro and in vivo studies and also persistent in several long-term studies. Dry matter intake and live weight gain (LWG) of cattle were not affected by nitrate: DMI change, R 2=0.007, P=0.65; LWG change, R 2=0.03, P=0.31. It is anticipated that supplementary nitrate as a substitute for urea may change urinary nitrogen composition in a manner that increases ammonia and nitrous oxide emissions from manure. Furthermore, supplementary nitrate may have various physiological roles in nitric oxide metabolism in ruminants. In conclusion, supplementary nitrate is a viable means of mitigating enteric methane emissions due to its consistent and persistent efficacy. Risk of toxicity can be lowered by gradual acclimation of animals to nitrate. However, lowered methane production may not re-direct additional metabolizable energy towards animal production.


Author(s):  
Alireza Bayat ◽  
Kevin J. Shingfield

Since ruminants are capable of utilizing fibrous feeds not digested by mono-gastrics, they represent a valuable natural resource for meeting future increases in global food supply. Ruminants have both local (nitrogen and phosphorus pollutions) and global (greenhouse gases, GHG) environmental footprints. It is estimated that the livestock sector is responsible for 18% of global anthropogenic GHG emissions. Losses of methane represent 30 to 50% of total GHG from livestock production, with the contribution from ruminants accounting for about 80%. Due to the concerns of increases in GHG emissions into the environment and potential effects on global warming, there is a need to develop strategies to lower methane emissions from ruminants as part of an overall requirement to improve the sustainability of ruminant food production systems. Methane is produced as a by-product of anaerobic fermentation in the reticulo-rumen, largely due to the activity of methanogenic archaea. Recent research has focused on the potential of novel feed ingredients (probiotics, ionophores, acetogen-based inoculants, bacteriocins, organic acids and plant extracts) or vaccines to lower hydrogen production and/or increase the transfer and utilization of metabolic hydrogen in the production of end-products other than methane in the rumen. Research to date has provided evidence that dietary supplements of plant or marine oils, oilseeds, specific fatty acids and condensed tannins, as well as defaunation, increases in production level or decreases in the proportion of forage in the diet may lower enteric methane production. Even though dietary lipid supplements can be used to lower methane output, in high amounts a decrease in intake and milk production can be expected. While further investigations have demonstrated the efficacy of specific agents on methanogenesis in vitro, the effects have not been substantiated in vivo. Altering the ratio of H2 /non-H2 producing fibrolytic bacteria to lower methanogenesis without altering fibre digestion has been demonstrated under experimental conditions. Furthermore, non-H2 producing communities have been characterized in the digesta of certain ruminant species. In contrast, stimulating acetogenesis by inoculation with rumen acetogens or non-rumen acetogens have met with limited success in vitro and in vivo. Research has also concentrated on stimulating the ultilisation of metabolic hydrogen by sulphate reducing bacteria, but there remains concern over the toxicity of H2S in the host ruminant. Investigations of nitrate reducing bacteria which produce more NH3 and less toxic nitrite, have indicated promising results. Increasing the number of capnophilic bacteria which use CO2 and H2 to produce organic acids, succinic acid in particular, may decrease methane production. In isolation, several approaches have been shown to decrease enteric methane emissions, but often part of the changes observed are related to lowered organic matter digestion in the rumen. However, lowering methane production per unit product over the lifetime of an animal should be regarded as the central goal to decrease GHG from ruminant livestock systems. This highlights the need for integrated solutions to improve digestive efficiency, as well as fertility and health. In conclusion, any prospective solution to lower on-farm GHG emissions must be practical, cost effective and have no adverse effect on the profitability of ruminant meat and milk production. Recent research has indicated significant potential, but none of the strategies tested thus far satisfy all of the necessary criteria for immediate implementation.


2017 ◽  
Vol 17 (3) ◽  
pp. 650-656 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anuraga Jayanegara ◽  
Ki Ageng Sarwono ◽  
Makoto Kondo ◽  
Hiroki Matsui ◽  
Muhammad Ridla ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document