Quantification of methane emitted by ruminants: a review of methods.

The contribution of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from ruminant production systems varies between countries and between regions within individual countries. The appropriate quantification of GHG emissions, specifically methane (CH4), has raised questions about the correct reporting of GHG inventories and, perhaps more importantly, how best to mitigate CH4 emissions. This review documents existing methods and methodologies to measure and estimate CH4 emissions from ruminant animals and the manure produced therein over various scales and conditions. Measurements of CH4 have frequently been conducted in research settings using classical methodologies developed for bioenergetic purposes, such as gas exchange techniques (respiration chambers, headboxes). While very precise, these techniques are limited to research settings as they are expensive, labor-intensive, and applicable only to a few animals. Head-stalls, such as the GreenFeed system, have been used to measure expired CH4 for individual animals housed alone or in groups in confinement or grazing. This technique requires frequent animal visitation over the diurnal measurement period and an adequate number of collection days. The tracer gas technique can be used to measure CH4 from individual animals housed outdoors, as there is a need to ensure low background concentrations. Micrometeorological techniques (e.g., open-path lasers) can measure CH4 emissions over larger areas and many animals, but limitations exist, including the need to measure over more extended periods. Measurement of CH4 emissions from manure depends on the type of storage, animal housing, CH4 concentration inside and outside the boundaries of the area of interest, and ventilation rate, which is likely the variable that contributes the greatest to measurement uncertainty. For large-scale areas, aircraft, drones, and satellites have been used in association with the tracer flux method, inverse modeling, imagery, and LiDAR (Light Detection and Ranging), but research is lagging in validating these methods. Bottom-up approaches to estimating CH4 emissions rely on empirical or mechanistic modeling to quantify the contribution of individual sources (enteric and manure). In contrast, top-down approaches estimate the amount of CH4 in the atmosphere using spatial and temporal models to account for transportation from an emitter to an observation point. While these two estimation approaches rarely agree, they help identify knowledge gaps and research requirements in practice.

There is a need to accurately and precisely quantify greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, specifically methane (CH4), to ensure correct reporting of GHG inventories and, perhaps more importantly, determine how to best mitigate CH4 emissions. The objective of this study was to review existing methods and methodologies to quantify and estimate CH4 emissions from ruminants. Historically, most techniques were developed for specific purposes that may limit their widespread use on commercial farms and for inventory purposes and typically required frequent calibration and equipment maintenance. Whole animal and head respiration chambers, spot sampling techniques, and tracer gas methods can be used to measure enteric CH4 from individual animals, but each technique has its own inherent limitations. The measurement of CH4 emissions from manure depends on the type of storage, animal housing, CH4 concentration inside and outside the boundaries of the area of interest, and ventilation rate, which is likely the most complex variable creating many uncertainties. For large-scale areas, aircraft, drones, and satellites have been used in association with the tracer flux method, inverse modeling, imagery, and LiDAR (Light Detection and Ranging), but research is lagging in validating these methods. Bottom-up approaches to estimating CH4 emissions rely on empirical or mechanistic modeling to quantify the contribution of individual sources. Top-down approaches estimate the amount of CH4 in the atmosphere using spatial and temporal models to account for transportation from an emitter to an observation point.

Full adoption of the most effective strategies to mitigate methane emissions by ruminants can help meet the 1.5 °C target by 2030 but not 2050.

To meet the 1.5 °C target, methane (CH4) from ruminants must be reduced by 11 to 30% by 2030 and 24 to 47% by 2050 compared to 2010 levels. A meta-analysis identified strategies to decrease product-based (PB; CH4 per unit meat or milk) and absolute (ABS) enteric CH4 emissions while maintaining or increasing animal productivity (AP; weight gain or milk yield). Next, the potential of different adoption rates of one PB or one ABS strategy to contribute to the 1.5 °C target was estimated. The database included findings from 430 peer-reviewed studies, which reported 98 mitigation strategies that can be classified into three categories: animal and feed management, diet formulation, and rumen manipulation. A random-effects meta-analysis weighted by inverse variance was carried out. Three PB strategies­namely, increasing feeding level, decreasing grass maturity, and decreasing dietary forage-to-concentrate ratio­decreased CH4 per unit meat or milk by on average 12% and increased AP by a median of 17%. Five ABS strategies­namely CH4 inhibitors, tanniferous forages, electron sinks, oils and fats, and oilseeds­decreased daily methane by on average 21%. Globally, only 100% adoption of the most effective PB and ABS strategies can meet the 1.5 °C target by 2030 but not 2050, because mitigation effects are offset by projected increases in CH4 due to increasing milk and meat demand. Notably, by 2030 and 2050, low- and middle-income countries may not meet their contribution to the 1.5 °C target for this same reason, whereas high-income countries could meet their contributions due to only a minor projected increase in enteric CH4 emissions.

Management of cover crops in temperate climates influences soil organic carbon stocks: a meta-analysis.

Increasing the quantity and quality of plant biomass production in space and time can improve the capacity of agroecosystems to capture and store atmospheric carbon (C) in the soil. Cover cropping is a key practice to increase system net primary productivity (NPP) and increase the quantity of high-quality plant residues available for integration into soil organic matter (SOM). Cover crop management and local environmental conditions, however, influence the magnitude of soil C stock change. Here, we used a comprehensive meta-analysis approach to quantify the effect of cover crops on soil C stocks from the 0-30 cm soil depth in temperate climates and to identify key management and ecological factors that impact variation in this response. A total of 40 publications with 181 observations were included in the meta-analysis representing six countries across three different continents. Overall, cover crops had a strong positive effect on soil C stocks (P < 0.0001) leading to a 12% increase, averaging 1.11 Mg C/ha more soil C relative to a no cover crop control. The strongest predictors of SOC response to cover cropping were planting and termination date (i.e., growing window), annual cover crop biomass production, and soil clay content. Cover crops planted as continuous cover or autumn planted and terminated led to 20-30% greater total soil C stocks relative to other cover crop growing windows. Likewise, high annual cover crop biomass production (>7 Mg·ha-1 ·yr-1 ) resulted in 30% higher total soil C stocks than lower levels of biomass production. Managing for greater NPP by improving synchronization in cover crop growing windows and climate will enhance the capacity of this practice to drawdown carbon dioxide (CO2 ) from the atmosphere across agroecosystems. The integration of growing window (potentially as a proxy for biomass growth), climate, and soil factors in decision-support tools are relevant for improving the quantification of soil C stock change under cover crops, particularly with the expansion of terrestrial soil C markets.

Prediction of enteric methane production, yield, and intensity in dairy cattle using an intercontinental database.

Enteric methane (CH4 ) production from cattle contributes to global greenhouse gas emissions. Measurement of enteric CH4 is complex, expensive, and impractical at large scales; therefore, models are commonly used to predict CH4 production. However, building robust prediction models requires extensive data from animals under different management systems worldwide. The objectives of this study were to (1) collate a global database of enteric CH4 production from individual lactating dairy cattle; (2) determine the availability of key variables for predicting enteric CH4 production (g/day per cow), yield [g/kg dry matter intake (DMI)], and intensity (g/kg energy corrected milk) and their respective relationships; (3) develop intercontinental and regional models and cross-validate their performance; and (4) assess the trade-off between availability of on-farm inputs and CH4 prediction accuracy. The intercontinental database covered Europe (EU), the United States (US), and Australia (AU). A sequential approach was taken by incrementally adding key variables to develop models with increasing complexity. Methane emissions were predicted by fitting linear mixed models. Within model categories, an intercontinental model with the most available independent variables performed best with root mean square prediction error (RMSPE) as a percentage of mean observed value of 16.6%, 14.7%, and 19.8% for intercontinental, EU, and United States regions, respectively. Less complex models requiring only DMI had predictive ability comparable to complex models. Enteric CH4 production, yield, and intensity prediction models developed on an intercontinental basis had similar performance across regions, however, intercepts and slopes were different with implications for prediction. Revised CH4 emission conversion factors for specific regions are required to improve CH4 production estimates in national inventories. In conclusion, information on DMI is required for good prediction, and other factors such as dietary neutral detergent fiber (NDF) concentration, improve the prediction. For enteric CH4 yield and intensity prediction, information on milk yield and composition is required for better estimation.