Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 1,162

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 52 of the 52 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Nutritional management for enteric methane abatement: a review

Beauchemin, K. A., Kreuzer, M., O'Mara, F., McAllister, T. A.·2008·Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture

Abstract

A variety of nutritional management strategies that reduce enteric methane (CH4) production are discussed. Strategies such as increasing the level of grain in the diet, inclusion of lipids and supplementation with ionophores (>24 ppm) are most likely to be implemented by farmers because there is a high probability that they reduce CH4 emissions in addition to improving production efficiency. Improved pasture management, replacing grass silage with maize silage and using legumes hold some promise for CH4 mitigation but as yet their impact is not sufficiently documented. Several new strategies including dietary supplementation with saponins and tannins, selection of yeast cultures and use of fibre-digesting enzymes may mitigate CH4, but these still require extensive research. Most of the studies on reductions in CH4 from ruminants due to diet management are short-term and focussed only on changes in enteric emissions. Future research must examine long-term sustainability of reductions in CH4 production and impacts on the entire farm greenhouse gas budget.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1071/ea07199

Cites

52 of 52 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Cited by

See all 1,162

Metadata

Authors
Beauchemin, K. A., Kreuzer, M., O'Mara, F., & McAllister, T. A.
Venue
Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture
Published
2008
Volume
48
Issue
2
Pages
21
ISSN
0816-1089 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2171137093
Cited by
1,162
References
52
FWCI
71.63
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.