Development of a mobile, open-circuit indirect calorimetry system

Kelly, John; Kerrigan, B.; Milligan, L. P.; McBride, B. W.

doi:10.4141/cjas94-010

Cited by 32 publications

(26 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…As a modified version of the respiration chamber, Kelly et al (1994) describe development of a portable, open-circuit indirect calorimetry system, which can be used to measure CH 4 emissions from sheep and cattle. The system is based on O 2 , CO 2 and CH 4 analysers mounted on a cart for ease of mobility.…”

Section: Portable Analysermentioning

confidence: 99%

Methane and nitrous oxide emissions from Canadian animal agriculture: A review

Kebreab¹,

Clark²,

et al. 2006

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

. Considerable evidence of climate change associated with emissions of greenhouse gases (GHG) has resulted in international efforts to reduce GHG emissions. The agriculture sector contributes about 8% of GHG emissions in Canada mostly through methane (CH 4 ) and nitrous oxide (N 2 O). The objective of this paper was to compile an integrative review of CH 4 and N 2 O emissions from livestock by taking a whole cycle approach from enteric fermentation to manure treatment and storage, and field application of manure. Basic microbial processes that result in CH 4 production in the rumen and hindgut of animals were reviewed. An overview of CH 4 and N 2 O production processes in manure, and controlling factors are presented. Most of the studies conducted in relation to enteric fermentation were in dairy and beef cattle. To date, research has focussed on GHG emissions from the stored manures of dairy, beef cattle and swine; therefore, we focus our review on these. Several methods used to measure GHG emissions from livestock and stored manure were reviewed. A comparison of methods showed that there were agreements between most of the techniques but some systematic differences were also observed. Additional studies with comprehensive comparisons of methodologies are needed in order to allow for comparison of results obtained from studies using contrasting methodologies. The need to standardize measurement methods and reporting to facilitate comparison of results and data integration was identified. Prediction equations are often used to calculate GHG emissions. Various types of mathematical approaches, such as statistical models, mechanistic models and estimates calculated from emission factors, and studies that compare various types of models are discussed herein. A lack of process-based models describing GHG emissions from manure during storage was identified. A brief description of mitigation strategies focussing on recent studies is given. Reduction in CH 4 emissions from ruminants through the addition of fats in diets and the use of more starch was achieved and a transient beneficial effect of ionophores was reported. Grazing management and genetic selection also hold promise. Studies focussed on manure treatment options that have been suggested to reduce gas fluxes from manure storage, composting, anaerobic digestion (AD), diet manipulation, covers and solid-liquid separation, were reviewed. While some of these options have been shown to decrease GHG emissions from stored manure, different studies have obtained conflicting results, and additional research is needed to identify the most promising options. GHG emissions from pasture and croplands after manure application have been the subject of several experimental and modelling studies, but few of these have linked field emissions to diet manipulation or manure treatments. Further work focussing on the entire cycle of GHG formation from feed formulation, animal metabolism, excreta treatment and storage, to field application of manure needs to be conducted. attribua...

show abstract

Section: Portable Analysermentioning

confidence: 99%

Methane and nitrous oxide emissions from Canadian animal agriculture: A review

Kebreab¹,

Clark²,

et al. 2006

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This demand arises from the need to verify inventories, verify mitigation claims on-farm and measure large numbers of animals to determine the genetic parameters of methane output (Chagunda et al, 2009;McEwan et al, 2012). Although mobile respiration hood systems exist for on-farm use (Kelly et al, 1994), and RC studies using thousands of animals are now being conducted (Arthur et al, 2012), this is extremely slow and expensive. Robinson et al (2010) identified that short-term measures of methane production were strongly correlated with DMP and can be used to obtain short-term on-farm emission data without need for an RC.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Applicability of short-term emission measurements for on-farm quantification of enteric methane

Hegarty

2013

Animal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A short term enteric methane emission measurement is not identical to a measure of daily methane production (DMP) made in a respiration chamber (RC). While RC curtail most variation except that from quantity and composition of feed supplied, all shortterm measurements contain additional sources of variation. The points of difference can include measurement time(s) relative to feeding, feed intake before measurement, animal behaviour in selection of diet and level of activity before measurement. For systems where a short-term emission measurement is made at the same time in the daily feeding cycle (e.g. during twice-daily milking) scaling up of short-term emission rates to estimate DMP is feasible but the scaling coefficient(s) will be diet dependent. For systems such as GreenFeed where direct emission rates are measured on occasion throughout day and night, no scaling up may be required to estimate DMP. For systems where small numbers of emission measures are made, and there is no knowledge of prior feed intake, such as for portable accumulation chambers, scaling to DMP is not currently possible. Even without scaling up to DMP, short-term measured emission rates are adequate for identifying relative emission changes induced by mitigation strategies and could provide the data to support genetic selection of ruminants for reduced enteric emissions.Keywords: ruminant, greenhouse gas, enteric emissions, methane, measurement ImplicationsThe capacity to estimate daily methane production (DMP) or relative methane production of ruminants on the basis of short-term emission measurements will enable verification of enteric emission budgets and the development and verification of abatement techniques. This will enable more rapid deployment of abatement strategies and verify the emissions data used in carbon accounting transactions. Short-term emissions measurements are uniquely placed to accelerate methane abatement by genetic selection of livestock, which requires emission data for a large number of animals. IntroductionThe majority of understanding of animal energetics and daily methane production (DMP) has been obtained from indirect calorimetry using open or closed circuit respiration chambers (RC) (Blaxter, 1962;Blaxter and Clapperton, 1965). Increasingly, however, there is a demand to measure ruminant methane emissions in animals within their natural production environment. This demand arises from the need to verify inventories, verify mitigation claims on-farm and measure large numbers of animals to determine the genetic parameters of methane output (Chagunda et al., 2009;McEwan et al., 2012). Although mobile respiration hood systems exist for on-farm use (Kelly et al., 1994), and RC studies using thousands of animals are now being conducted (Arthur et al., 2012), this is extremely slow and expensive. Robinson et al. (2010) identified that short-term measures of methane production were strongly correlated with DMP and can be used to obtain short-term on-farm emission data without need for an RC. This paper summarise...

show abstract

“…These include the use of respiration calorimetry chambers (Kelly et al 1994;Galbraith et al 1998;Murray et al 1999), isotopic techniques (Murray et al 1976;France et al 1993), tracer techniques [sulfur hexafluoride (SF 6 )], Kaharabata et al 2000; and mass balance/micrometeorological techniques (Lassey et al 1997;Sauer et al 1998;Harper et al 1999). The advantages and disadvantages of each method have been reviewed by Johnson and Johnson (1995).…”

Section: Measurement Of Methane Emission From Dairy Cattlementioning

confidence: 99%

Mitigation strategies to reduce enteric methane emissions from dairy cows: Update review

Boadi¹,

Benchaar²,

Chiquette³

et al. 2004

Can. J. Anim. Sci.

411

296

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

. 2004. Mitigation strategies to reduce enteric methane emissions from dairy cows: Update review. Can. J. Anim. Sci. 84: 319-335. Enteric methane (CH 4 ) emission is a major contributor to Canadian greenhouse gas emissions, and also a loss of feed energy during production. The objective of this paper is to provide an update on current management practices and new dietary strategies recently proposed to reduce CH 4 emissions from ruminants. Existing mitigation strategies for dairy, e.g., the addition of ionophores, fats, use of high-quality forages, and increased use of grains, have been well researched and applied. These nutritional changes reduce CH 4 emissions by manipulating ruminal fermentation, directly inhibiting methanogens and protozoa, or by diverting hydrogen ions away from methanogens. Current literature has identified new CH 4 mitigation options. These include the addition of probiotics, acetogens, bacteriocins, archaeal viruses, organic acids, plant extracts (e.g., essential oils) to the diet, as well as immunization, and genetic selection of cows. These new strategies are promising, but more research is needed to validate these approaches and to assess in vivo their effectiveness in reducing CH 4 production by dairy cows. It is also important to evaluate CH 4 mitigation strategies in terms of the total greenhouse gas budget and to consider the cost associated with the various strategies. More basic understanding of the natural differences in digestion efficiencies among animals as well as a better knowledge of methanogens and their interaction with other organisms in the rumen would enable us to exploit the potential of some of the new CH 4 mitigation strategies for dairy cattle production. Key words: Enteric methane, dairy cattle, mitigationBoadi, D., Benchaar, C., Chiquette, J. et Massé, D. 2004. Stratégies visant à réduire les dégagements de méthane entérique des vaches laitières: bilan. Can. J. Anim. Sci. 84: 319-335. Le méthane (CH 4 ) d'origine entérique contribue dans une large mesure aux émissions canadiennes de gaz à effet de serre et entraîne une perte de l'énergie tirée des aliments durant la production. Le présent article fait le point sur les pratiques de zootechnie actuelles et sur les stratégies d'engraissement récemment proposées pour réduire les dégagements de CH 4 des ruminants. Les stratégies d'atténuation existantes (addition d'ionophores, matière grasse, utilisation de fourrages de grande qualité, plus grande utilisation de grains) ont fait l'objet de maintes recherches et sont désormais bien appliquées. Les changements nutritionnels qu'elles introduisent diminuent les émissions de CH 4 en modifiant la fermentation dans le rumen, en inhibant directement la production de méthanogènes et la population de protozoaires ainsi qu'en détournant les ions hydrogène des méthanogènes. La documentation scientifique mentionne de nouvelles méthodes pour atténuer la libération de CH 4 . Ces méthodes comprennent l'ajout de probiotiques, d'acétogènes, de bactériocine, de virus archaïques, d'aci...

show abstract

Development of a mobile, open-circuit indirect calorimetry system

Cited by 32 publications

References 7 publications

Methane and nitrous oxide emissions from Canadian animal agriculture: A review

Methane and nitrous oxide emissions from Canadian animal agriculture: A review

Applicability of short-term emission measurements for on-farm quantification of enteric methane

Mitigation strategies to reduce enteric methane emissions from dairy cows: Update review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About