Accessibility navigation


Challenges and opportunities to capture dietary effects in on-farm greenhouse gas emissions models of ruminant systems

Vibart, R., de Klein, C., Jonker, A., van der Weerden, T., Bannink, A., Bayat, A. R., Crompton, L., Durand, A., Eugene, M., Clumpp, K., Kuhla, B., Lanigan, G., Lund, P., Ramin, M. and Salazar, F. (2021) Challenges and opportunities to capture dietary effects in on-farm greenhouse gas emissions models of ruminant systems. Science of the Total Environment, 769. 144989. ISSN 0048-9697

[img] Text - Accepted Version
· Restricted to Repository staff only until 8 January 2022.
· Available under License Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial No Derivatives.

758kB

It is advisable to refer to the publisher's version if you intend to cite from this work. See Guidance on citing.

To link to this item DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.144989

Abstract/Summary

This paper reviews existing on-farm GHG accounting models for dairy cattle systems and their ability to capture the effect of dietary strategies in GHG abatement. The focus is on methane (CH4) emissions from enteric and manure (animal excreta) sources and nitrous oxide (N2O) emissions from animal excreta. We identified three generic modelling approaches, based on the degree to which models capture diet-related characteristics: from ‘none’ (Type 1) to ‘some’ by combining key diet parameters with emission factors (EF) (Type 2) to ‘many’ by using process-based modelling (Type 3). Most of the selected on-farm GHG models have adopted a Type 2 approach, but a few hybrid Type 2 / Type 3 approaches have been developed recently that combine empirical modelling (through the use of CH4 and/or N2O emission factors; EF) and process-based modelling (mostly through rumen and whole tract fermentation and digestion). Empirical models comprising key dietary inputs (i.e., dry matter intake and organic matter digestibility) can predict CH4 and N2O emissions with reasonable accuracy. However, the impact of GHG mitigation strategies often needs to be assessed in a more integrated way, and Type 1 and Type 2 models frequently lack the biological foundation to do this. Only Type 3 models represent underlying mechanisms such as ruminal and total-tract digestive processes and excreta composition that can capture dietary effects on GHG emissions in a more biological manner. Overall, the better a model can simulate rumen function, the greater the opportunity to include diet characteristics in addition to commonly used variables, and thus the greater the opportunity to capture dietary mitigation strategies. The value of capturing the effect of additional animal feed characteristics on the prediction of on-farm GHG emissions needs to be carefully balanced against gains in accuracy, the need for additional input and activity data, and the variability encountered on-farm.

Item Type:Article
Refereed:Yes
Divisions:Life Sciences > School of Agriculture, Policy and Development > Food Production and Quality Division > Animal, Dairy and Food Chain Sciences (ADFCS)
ID Code:96015
Publisher:Elsevier

University Staff: Request a correction | Centaur Editors: Update this record

Page navigation