Impact of dietary forage proportion and crossbreeding on feed efficiency and methane emissions in lactating dairy cows.

IF 6.1 1区 农林科学 Q1 AGRICULTURE, DAIRY & ANIMAL SCIENCE Animal Nutrition Pub Date : 2024-12-28 eCollection Date: 2025-03-01 DOI:10.1016/j.aninu.2024.08.011
Sabrina Ormston, Tianhai Yan, Xianjiang Chen, Alan W Gordon, Katerina Theodoridou, Sharon Huws, Sokratis Stergiadis
{"title":"Impact of dietary forage proportion and crossbreeding on feed efficiency and methane emissions in lactating dairy cows.","authors":"Sabrina Ormston, Tianhai Yan, Xianjiang Chen, Alan W Gordon, Katerina Theodoridou, Sharon Huws, Sokratis Stergiadis","doi":"10.1016/j.aninu.2024.08.011","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Increasing forage proportion (FP) in the diets of dairy cows would reduce competition for human edible foods and reduce feed costs, particularly in low-input systems. However, increasing FP reduces productivity and may increases methane (CH<sub>4</sub>) emission parameters. This work aimed to investigate the impact of FP and breed on feed efficiency and CH<sub>4</sub> emission parameters. Data from 32 individual experiments conducted at the Agri-Food and Biosciences Institute between 1992 and 2010 were utilised in this study resulting in data from 796 Holstein-Friesian (HF), 50 Norwegian Red (NR), 46 Jersey × HF (J × HF) and 16 NR × HF cows. Diets consisted of varying proportions of forage and concentrate dependent on the experimental protocols of each experiment. A linear mixed model was used to investigate the effect of low (LFP; 10% to 30%), medium (MFP; 30% to 59%), high (HFP; 60% to 87%) and pure (FOR; 100%) FP (dry matter [DM] basis) and breed on feed efficiency, and CH<sub>4</sub> emission parameters and multivariate redundancy analysis identified associations between animal and dietary drivers on the same variables. Total dry matter intake (DMI) was higher for cows offered LFP (17.3 kg/d) and MFP (17.9 kg/d) compared to HFP (15.3 kg/d) and FOR (13.8 kg/d) (<i>P</i> < 0.001). Milk yield (<i>P</i> < 0.001), milk yield/DMI (<i>P</i> < 0.001), energy corrected milk (ECM)/DMI (<i>P</i> < 0.001) and milk energy/DMI (<i>P</i> < 0.001) were higher for LFP and MFP compared to HFP and FOR. Methane/DMI was higher for HFP (24.3 g/kg) compared to MFP (22.4 g/kg) (<i>P</i> < 0.001). Methane/milk yield (<i>P</i> < 0.001) or CH<sub>4</sub>/ECM (<i>P</i> < 0.001) was higher for HFP (22.5 or 21.6 g/kg) and FOR (27.0 or 25.8 g/kg) compared to MFP (19.1 or 17.9 g/kg). There were no differences between LFP and MFP or between HFP and FOR for milk yield, milk yield/DMI, ECM/DMI, milk energy/DMI, CH<sub>4</sub>/milk yield and CH<sub>4</sub>/ECM (<i>P</i> > 0.05). Differences existed between breeds for residual feed intake (<i>P</i> = 0.040), milk yield/DMI (<i>P</i> = 0.041) and CH<sub>4</sub>/DMI (<i>P</i> = 0.048) with multivariate redundancy analysis demonstrating negative correlations with efficiency and positive correlations with CH<sub>4</sub>/DMI and CH<sub>4</sub>/milk yield. Feeding concentrates at 70% to 90% of DMI (LFP group) would not result in any further benefits for productivity, feed efficiency or CH<sub>4</sub> yield and intensity when compared to feeding 41% to 70% concentrates of DMI (MFP group). There may be opportunity to improve profitability for lower intensity farms with less concentrate input.</p>","PeriodicalId":8184,"journal":{"name":"Animal Nutrition","volume":"20 ","pages":"419-429"},"PeriodicalIF":6.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11875188/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Animal Nutrition","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aninu.2024.08.011","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/3/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"AGRICULTURE, DAIRY & ANIMAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Increasing forage proportion (FP) in the diets of dairy cows would reduce competition for human edible foods and reduce feed costs, particularly in low-input systems. However, increasing FP reduces productivity and may increases methane (CH4) emission parameters. This work aimed to investigate the impact of FP and breed on feed efficiency and CH4 emission parameters. Data from 32 individual experiments conducted at the Agri-Food and Biosciences Institute between 1992 and 2010 were utilised in this study resulting in data from 796 Holstein-Friesian (HF), 50 Norwegian Red (NR), 46 Jersey × HF (J × HF) and 16 NR × HF cows. Diets consisted of varying proportions of forage and concentrate dependent on the experimental protocols of each experiment. A linear mixed model was used to investigate the effect of low (LFP; 10% to 30%), medium (MFP; 30% to 59%), high (HFP; 60% to 87%) and pure (FOR; 100%) FP (dry matter [DM] basis) and breed on feed efficiency, and CH4 emission parameters and multivariate redundancy analysis identified associations between animal and dietary drivers on the same variables. Total dry matter intake (DMI) was higher for cows offered LFP (17.3 kg/d) and MFP (17.9 kg/d) compared to HFP (15.3 kg/d) and FOR (13.8 kg/d) (P < 0.001). Milk yield (P < 0.001), milk yield/DMI (P < 0.001), energy corrected milk (ECM)/DMI (P < 0.001) and milk energy/DMI (P < 0.001) were higher for LFP and MFP compared to HFP and FOR. Methane/DMI was higher for HFP (24.3 g/kg) compared to MFP (22.4 g/kg) (P < 0.001). Methane/milk yield (P < 0.001) or CH4/ECM (P < 0.001) was higher for HFP (22.5 or 21.6 g/kg) and FOR (27.0 or 25.8 g/kg) compared to MFP (19.1 or 17.9 g/kg). There were no differences between LFP and MFP or between HFP and FOR for milk yield, milk yield/DMI, ECM/DMI, milk energy/DMI, CH4/milk yield and CH4/ECM (P > 0.05). Differences existed between breeds for residual feed intake (P = 0.040), milk yield/DMI (P = 0.041) and CH4/DMI (P = 0.048) with multivariate redundancy analysis demonstrating negative correlations with efficiency and positive correlations with CH4/DMI and CH4/milk yield. Feeding concentrates at 70% to 90% of DMI (LFP group) would not result in any further benefits for productivity, feed efficiency or CH4 yield and intensity when compared to feeding 41% to 70% concentrates of DMI (MFP group). There may be opportunity to improve profitability for lower intensity farms with less concentrate input.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Animal Nutrition
Animal Nutrition Agricultural and Biological Sciences-Animal Science and Zoology
CiteScore
7.40
自引率
3.20%
发文量
172
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊介绍: Animal Nutrition encompasses the full gamut of animal nutritional sciences and reviews including, but not limited to, fundamental aspects of animal nutrition such as nutritional requirements, metabolic studies, body composition, energetics, immunology, neuroscience, microbiology, genetics and molecular and cell biology related to nutrition, and more applied aspects of animal nutrition, such as raw material evaluation, feed additives, nutritive value of novel ingredients and feed safety.
期刊最新文献
Impact of krill (Euphausia superba) meal on growth performance of aquatic animals: A meta-analysis and prospective directions Black soldier fly larvae oil can partially replace fish oil in the diet of the juvenile mud crab (Scylla paramamosain) Retraction notice to "L-Leucine stimulates glutamate dehydrogenase activity and Glutamate synthesis by regulating mTORC1/SIRT4 pathway in pig liver" [Animal Nutrition 4 (2018) 329-338]. Maternal consumption of glycerol monolaurate optimizes milk fatty acid profile and enhances piglet gut health in association with G protein-coupled receptor 84 (GPR84) activation. Bacillus pumilus 315 improves intestinal microbiota and barrier function to alleviate diarrhea of neonatal goats.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1