Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-mzp66 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-02-11T16:52:34.985Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The effect of different forage based diets on enteric methane emissions from dairy cows

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 November 2017

M.G.G. Chagunda ,
J.F. Bell  and
D.J. Roberts
M.G.G. Chagunda*
Affiliation:
Scottic Agricultural College, Edinburgh, United Kingdom
J.F. Bell
Affiliation:
Scottic Agricultural College, Edinburgh, United Kingdom
D.J. Roberts
Affiliation:
Scottic Agricultural College, Edinburgh, United Kingdom
*
Email:[email protected]
Get access

Extract

Methane from enteric fermentation is a large component of livestock related greenhouse gas emissions. Typically, methane emissions from enteric fermentation represent on average 6% of dietary gross energy, but this varies greatly with diet (Johnson and Johnson, 1995). In order to mitigate methane emissions in a way that is acceptable for both the environment and animal welfare, it is important to quantify the effects of different diets on methane emissions. The objective of the current study was to determine the effect of different silages on methane emissions from dairy cows.

Type
Theatre Presentations
Information
Proceedings of the British Society of Animal Science , Volume 2008 , 2008 , pp. 65
Copyright
Copyright © The British Society of Animal Science 2008

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Blaxter, K.L., and Clapperton, J.L., 1965. British Journal of Nutrition, 19, 511–522.Google Scholar
Casey, J.W. and Holden, N.M. 2006. Agricultural Systems 90, 79–98.Google Scholar
Johnson, K.A. and Johnson, D.E. 1995. Journal of Animal Science. 73, 2483–2492.Google Scholar
Mulvanny, P 1977. Animal Production 24, 157–158.Google Scholar
SAC 2006. FeedByte, Version 3.62.Google Scholar