Tea saponin reduced methanogenesis in vitro but increased methane yield in lactating dairy cows
Open accessAbstract
The effect of tea saponin supplementation in the ruminant diet on methane emissions, rumen fermentation, and digestive processes is still under debate. The objective of this study was to assess the effect of this plant extract on methanogenesis, total-tract digestibility, and lactating performances of dairy cows. The work included 2 independent and successive experiments. First, the effect of 7 tea saponin doses (from 0 to 0.50 g/L) on methane emissions and protozoa concentrations was tested in 2 repeated in vitro batch culture incubations using bovine rumen contents as inoculum and a cereal mixture as substrate. After 18 h of incubation, total gas production and composition as well as rumen fermentation parameters and protozoa concentration were analyzed. Increasing dosage of the plant extract reduced methane production and protozoa concentration, with a maximum reduction of 29% for CH 4 (mL/g of substrate) and 51% for protozoa (10 5 /mL). Tea saponin did not affect volatile fatty acids concentration, but marginally decreased total gas production by 5% at the highest dose. Second, a 2-period crossover design experiment was carried out with 8 lactating dairy cows fed a basal diet (54% corn silage, 6% hay, and 40% pelleted concentrates on a dry matter basis) without (control) or with 0.52% tea saponin (TSP). Each experimental period lasted 5 wk. Animals were fed ad libitum during the first 3 wk of the period (wk 1, 2, and 3) and restricted (95% of ad libitum intake) during the last 2 wk (wk 4 and 5). Intake and milk production were recorded daily. Methane emissions were quantified using open chambers (2 d, wk 4). Total-tract digestibility and nitrogen balance were determined from total feces and urine collected separately (5 d, wk 5). Rumen fermentation parameters and protozoa concentration were analyzed from samples taken after morning feeding (1 d, wk 5). Milk production, dry matter intake, and feed efficiency were reduced with TSP (−18, −12, and −8%, respectively). As daily methane production (g/d) was not affected, methane emissions (g/kg of dry matter intake) increased by 14% with TSP. Total-tract digestibility and nitrogen balance were similar between diets, except for acid detergent fiber digestibility, which tended to be improved with TSP (+4 percentage units). Rumen fermentation parameters and protozoa concentration were relatively unchanged by diets. Under the conditions of this experiment, tea saponin is not efficient to reduce methane emissions from dairy cows.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
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.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Despite a decline in methanogenesis through direct decrease in protozoa populations under in vitro conditions, tea saponin at 0.52% on DM basis failed to reduce daily CH4 production in lactating dairy cows.
“Despite the decline observed in methanogenesis through a direct decrease in protozoa populations under in vitro conditions, the same plant extract (0.52% on DM basis) failed to reduce daily CH4 production in lactating dairy cows (162).”
From Phytogenic Additives Can Modulate Rumen Microbiome to Mediate Fermentation Kinetics and Methanogenesis Through Exploiting Diet–Microbe Interaction (2020) · cites this paper as [162]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 44 · Cited by 59
Research works printed but not linked: 1
- Pinares-Patiño, C. S., C. Hunt, R. Martin, J. West, P. Lovejoy, and G. Waghorn. 2012. Chapter 1: New Zealand ruminant methane mea- surement centre, AgResearch, Palmerston North. Pages 9-28 in Technical Manual on Respiration Chamber Designs. C. S. Pinares- Patiño and G. Waghorn, ed. Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry, Wellington, New Zealand.
- Authors
- Guyader, J., Eugène, M., Doreau, M., Morgavi, D. P., Gérard, C., & Martin, C.
- Affiliations
- Université de Lyon (FR)
- Corresponding author
- Martin, C.
- Venue
- Journal of Dairy Science
- Publisher
- American Dairy Science Association
- Published
- 2017-03
- Volume
- 100
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 1845-1855
- ISSN
- 0022-0302 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2573028430
- Cited by
- 59
- References
- 44
- Citations by year
- 2026: 6 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 2
- FWCI
- 6.17
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Journal of Dairy Science (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- HAL (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Agronomy and Crop Science › Ruminant Nutrition and Digestive Physiology
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Animal Science and Zoology › Animal Nutrition and Physiology
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Building and Construction › Anaerobic Digestion and Biogas Production
- Keywords
- tea saponin, methanogenesis, methane emissions, dairy cattle, rumen fermentation, rumen protozoa, total tract digestibility, nitrogen balance, milk production, feed efficiency, dietary supplementation, volatile fatty acids, acid detergent fiber digestibility, ruminant methane mitigation, lactation performance, feed restriction, in vitro batch culture
- MeSH terms
- Animals, Cattle, Diet, Digestion, Female, Fermentation, Lactation, Methane, Milk, Rumen, Saponins, Tea
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