Buffalo heifers selected for lower residual feed intake have lower feed intake, better dietary nitrogen utilisation and reduced enteric methane production

2017 ◽  
Vol 102 (2) ◽  
pp. e607-e614 ◽  
Author(s):  
V. K. Sharma ◽  
S. S. Kundu ◽  
C. Datt ◽  
S. Prusty ◽  
M. Kumar ◽  
...  
2006 ◽  
Vol 46 (7) ◽  
pp. 813 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. R. Alford ◽  
R. S. Hegarty ◽  
P. F. Parnell ◽  
O. J. Cacho ◽  
R. M. Herd ◽  
...  

The expected reduction in methane emissions from the Australian beef herd resulting from using bulls identified as being more feed efficient as a result of having a lower residual feed intake (RFI) was modelled, both in a single herd in southern Australia and in the national herd. A gene flow model was developed to simulate the spread of improved RFI genes through a breeding herd over 25 years, from 2002 to 2026. Based on the estimated gene flow, the voluntary feed intakes were revised annually for all beef classes using livestock populations taken from the Australian National Greenhouse Gas Inventory (NGGI). Changes in emissions (kg methane/animal.year) associated with the reduction in feed intake were then calculated using NGGI procedures. Annual enteric methane emissions from both the individual and national herd were calculated by multiplying the livestock numbers in each beef class by the revised estimates of emissions per animal. For an individual adopting herd, the annual methane abatement in year 25 of selection was 15.9% lower than in year 1. For the national herd, differential lags and limits to adoption were assumed for northern and southern Australia. The cumulative reduction in national emissions was 568 100 t of methane over 25 years, with annual emissions in year 25 being 3.1% lower than in year 1. It is concluded that selection for reduced RFI will lead to substantial and lasting methane abatement, largely as a consequence of its implementation as a breeding objective for the grazing beef herd.


2020 ◽  
Vol 103 (8) ◽  
pp. 6967-6981 ◽  
Author(s):  
D.W. Olijhoek ◽  
G.F. Difford ◽  
P. Lund ◽  
P. Løvendahl

2017 ◽  
Vol 95 (suppl_4) ◽  
pp. 239-240
Author(s):  
A. W. Alemu ◽  
D. Vyas ◽  
G. Manafiazar ◽  
J. A. Basarab ◽  
K. A. Beauchemin

2017 ◽  
Vol 95 (8) ◽  
pp. 3687-3699 ◽  
Author(s):  
D. Warner ◽  
A. Bannink ◽  
B. Hatew ◽  
H. van Laar ◽  
J. Dijkstra

2017 ◽  
Vol 95 (8) ◽  
pp. 3687 ◽  
Author(s):  
D. Warner ◽  
A. Bannink ◽  
B. Hatew ◽  
H. van Laar ◽  
J. Dijkstra

2015 ◽  
Vol 44 (7) ◽  
pp. 255-262 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maria Eugênia Zerlotti Mercadante ◽  
Ana Paula de Melo Caliman ◽  
Roberta Carrilho Canesin ◽  
Sarah Figueiredo Martins Bonilha ◽  
Alexandre Berndt ◽  
...  

animal ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 15 (8) ◽  
pp. 100304
Author(s):  
G. Manafiazar ◽  
C. Fitzsimmons ◽  
M. Zhou ◽  
J.A. Basarab ◽  
V.S. Baron ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document