CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 324Ruminant Nutrition and Digestive PhysiologyAgriculture Sustainability and Environmental ImpactAnaerobic Digestion and Biogas Production

Invited review: current enteric methane mitigation options

Open access
Beauchemin, Karen A., Ungerfeld, Emilio M., Abdalla, Adibe L., Alvarez, Clementina, Arndt, Claudia, Becquet, Philippe, Benchaar, Chaouki, Berndt, Alexandre +12 more·2022·Journal of Dairy Science
DOI 10.3168/jds.2022-22091
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

emissions. A holistic approach is required, and buy-in is needed at all levels of the supply chain.

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 · 10.3168/jds.2022-22091

Cites

14 of 14 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

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

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?

  • Because of the need for controlled feeding, most existing options are designed for confined, non-grazing systems.

    “Because of the need for controlled feeding, most existing options are designed for confined, non-grazing systems (Beauchemin et al., 2022).”

    From Impact of 10 years of adaptive multi-paddock grazing on soil carbon and beef's greenhouse gas footprint in the US Upper Midwest (2026) · cites this paper as Beauchemin et al., 2022

    The Summary of Mitigation Strategies says feed-based strategies require a way to deliver supplements and that substantially less research is available for partial grazing than for confined systems. But it also says these strategies can be used in partial grazing systems with supplementation, so the claim’s restriction to non-grazing systems is too narrow. The provided passages give no page number. (LLM, conf=0.83)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Even the most effective additives-such as 3-nitrooxypropanol or red seaweed (Asparagopsis taxiformis), which can reduce CH4 by 30-80% in feedlot diets-have limited influence on cow-calf-to-finish emissions.

    “As a result, even the most effective additives—such as 3-nitrooxypropanol or red seaweed (Asparagopsis taxiformis), which can reduce CH 4 by 30-80% in feedlot diets (Beauchemin et al., 2022;Roque et al., 2021)—have limited influence on cow-calf-to-finish emissions.”

    From Impact of 10 years of adaptive multi-paddock grazing on soil carbon and beef's greenhouse gas footprint in the US Upper Midwest (2026) · cites this paper as Beauchemin et al., 2022

  • Several alternative mitigation tools are technically available-mostly targeting enteric CH4-but substantial barriers still limit their scalability, including costs, regulatory approval, limited farm-scale testing, and low suitability in grazing settings.

    “Several alternative mitigation tools are technically available—mostly targeting enteric CH 4 —but substantial barriers still limit their scalability, including costs, regulatory approval, limited farm-scale testing, and low suitability in grazing settings (Beauchemin et al., 2022).”

    From Impact of 10 years of adaptive multi-paddock grazing on soil carbon and beef's greenhouse gas footprint in the US Upper Midwest (2026) · cites this paper as Beauchemin et al., 2022

  • Tools intended for grazing cattle generally remain early in development; CH4 vaccines show minimal or inconsistent in vivo effects, and red seaweed additives have so far produced only short-term reductions in small grazing trials.

    “Tools intended for grazing cattle generally remain early in development; for example, CH 4 vaccines show minimal or inconsistent in vivo effects (Beauchemin et al., 2022), and red seaweed additives have so far produced only short-term reductions in small grazing trials (Meo-Filho et al., 2024)”

    From Impact of 10 years of adaptive multi-paddock grazing on soil carbon and beef's greenhouse gas footprint in the US Upper Midwest (2026) · cites this paper as Beauchemin et al., 2022

Self-check

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

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 190

  1. Abbott, D. W., I. M. Aasen, K. A. Beauchemin, F. Grondahl, R. Gruninger, M. Hayes, S. Huws, D. A. Kenny, S. J. Krizsan, S. Kirwan, V. Lind, U. Meyer, M. Ramin, K. Theodoridou, D. von Soosten, P. Walsh, S. Waters, and X. Xing. 2020. Seaweed and sea- weed bioactives for mitigation of enteric methane: Challenges and opportunities. Animals (Basel) 10:2432. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .3390/ ani10122432. · DOI
  2. Abdalla Filho, A. L., P. S. Corrêa, L. N. Lemos, D. Dineshkumar, J. Issakowicz, E. H. Ieda, P. M. T. Lima, M. Barreal, C. McManus, T. S. Mui, A. L. Abdalla, and H. Louvandini. 2017. Diets based on plants from Brazilian Caatinga altering ruminal parameters, mi- crobial community and meat fatty acids of Santa Inês lambs. Small Rumin. Res. 154:70-77. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .1016/ j .smallrumres .2017 .07 .005. · DOI
  3. Abecia, L., A. I. Martín-García, G. Martínez, C. J. Newbold, and D. R. Yáñez-Ruiz. 2013. Nutritional intervention in early life to ma- nipulate rumen microbial colonization and methane output by kid goats postweaning. J. Anim. Sci. 91:4832-4840. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .2527/ jas .2012 -6142. · DOI
  4. Adegbeye, M. J., M. M. Elghandour, J. C. Monroy, T. O. Abegunde, A. Z. Salem, A. Barbabosa-Pliego, and T. O. Faniyi. 2019. Po- tential influence of Yucca extract as feed additive on greenhouse gases emission for a cleaner livestock and aquaculture farming - A review. J. Clean. Prod. 239:118074. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .1016/ j .jclepro .2019 .118074. · DOI
  5. Alazzeh, A. Y., H. Sultana, K. A. Beauchemin, Y. Wang, H. Holo, O. M. Harstad, and T. A. McAllister. 2012. Using strains of Pro- pionibacteria to mitigate methane emissions in vitro. Acta Ag- ric. Scand. A Anim. Sci. 62:263-272. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .1080/ 09064702 .2013 .773056. · DOI
  6. Alemu, A. W., H. Janzen, S. Little, X. Hao, D. J. Thompson, V. Baron, A. Iwaasa, K. A. Beauchemin, and R. Kröbel. 2017. Assess- ment of grazing management on farm greenhouse gas intensity of beef production systems in the Canadian Prairies using life cycle assessment. Agric. Syst. 158:1-13. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .1016/ j .agsy .2017 .08 .003. · DOI · Paper page
  7. Altermann, E., L. R. Schofield, R. S. Ronimus, A. K. Beattie, and K. Reilly. 2018. Inhibition of rumen methanogens by a novel archaeal lytic enzyme displayed on tailored bionanoparticles. Front. Micro- biol. 9:2378. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .3389/ fmicb .2018 .02378. · DOI
  8. Amagase, H. 2006. Clarifying the real bioactive constituents of garlic. J. Nutr. 136:716S-725S. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .1093/ jn/ 136 . · DOI · Paper page
  9. 716S. Appuhamy, J. A. D. R. N., A. B. Strathe, S. Jayasundara, C. Wagner- Riddle, J. Dijkstra, J. France, and E. Kebreab. 2013. Antimeth- anogenic effects of monensin in dairy and beef cattle: A meta- analysis. J. Dairy Sci. 96:5161-5173. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .3168/ jds .2012 -5923. · DOI
  10. Archimède, H., M. Eugène, C. M. Magdeleine, M. Boval, C. Martin, D. P. Morgavi, P. Lecomte, and M. Doreau. 2011. Comparison of methane production between C3 and C4 grasses and legumes. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 166-167:59-64. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .1016/ j .anifeedsci .2011 .04 .003. · DOI
  11. Arikan, O. A., W. Mulbry, C. Rice, and S. Lansing. 2018. The fate and effect of monensin during anaerobic digestion of dairy manure under mesophilic conditions. PLoS One 13:e0192080. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .1371/ journal .pone .0192080. · DOI
  12. Arndt, C., A. N. Hristov, W. J. Price, S. C. McClelland, A. M. Pelaez, S. F. Cueva, J. Oh, J. Dijkstra, A. Bannink, A. R. Bayat, L. A. Crompton, M. A. Eugène, D. Enahoro, E. Kebreab, M. Kreuzer, M. McGee, C. Martin, C. J. Newbold, C. K. Reynolds, A. Schwarm, K. J. Shingfield, J. B. Veneman, D. R. Yáñez-Ruiz, and Z. Yu. 2022. Full adoption of the most effective strategies to mitigate methane emissions by ruminants can help meet the 1.5°C target by 2030 but not 2050. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 119:e2111294119. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .1073/ pnas .2111294119. · DOI
  13. Arndt, C., J. M. Powell, M. J. Aguerre, P. M. Crump, and M. A. Wat- tiaux. 2015. Feed conversion efficiency in dairy cows: Repeatabil- ity, variation in digestion and metabolism of energy and nitrogen, and ruminal methanogens. J. Dairy Sci. 98:3938-3950. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .3168/ jds .2014 -8449. · DOI
  14. Baca-González, V., P. Asensio-Calavia, S. Gonzalez-Acosta, J. M. Perez de la Lastra, and A. Morales de la Nuez. 2020. Are vac- cines the solution for methane emissions from ruminants? A sys- tematic review. Vaccines (Basel) 8:460. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .3390/ vaccines8030460. · DOI
  15. Bayat, A. R., L. Ventto, P. Kairenius, T. Stefański, H. Leskinen, I. Tapio, E. Negussie, J. Vilkki, and K. J. Shingfield. 2017. Dietary forage to concentrate ratio and sunflower oil supplement alter ru- men fermentation, ruminal methane emissions, and nutrient utili- zation in lactating cows. Transl. Anim. Sci. 1:277-286. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .2527/ tas2017 .0032. · DOI · Paper page
  16. Beauchemin, K., M. O. Kreuzer, F. O'Mara, and T. Mcallister. 2008. Nutritional management for enteric methane abatement: A review. Aust. J. Exp. Agric. 48:21-27. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .1071/ EA07199. · DOI
  17. Beauchemin, K. A., and S. M. McGinn. 2005. Methane emissions from feedlot cattle fed barley or corn diets. J. Anim. Sci. 83:653-661. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .2527/ 2005 .833653x. · DOI
  18. Beauchemin, K. A., S. McGinn, C. Benchaar, and L. Holtshausen. 2009. Crushed sunflower, flax, or canola seeds in lactating dairy cow diets: Effects on methane production, rumen fermentation, and milk production. J. Dairy Sci. 92:2118-2127. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .3168/ jds .2008 -1903. · DOI
  19. Beauchemin, K. A., E. M. Ungerfeld, R. J. Eckard, and M. Wang. 2020. Fifty years of research on rumen methanogenesis: Lessons learned and future challenges for mitigation. Animal 14(Suppl. 1):s2-s16. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .1017/ S1751731119003100. · DOI · Paper page
  20. Benchaar, C., and H. Greathead. 2011. Essential oils and opportuni- ties to mitigate enteric methane emissions from ruminants. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 166-167:338-355. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .1016/ j .anifeedsci .2011 .04 .024. · DOI
  21. Benchaar, C., A. N. Hristov, and H. Greathead. 2009. Essential oils as feed additives in animal nutrition. Pages 111-146 in Phytogenics in Animal Nutrition. T. Steiner, ed. Nottingham University Press, Nottingham, UK.
  22. Bolkenov, B., T. Duarte, L. Yang, F. Yang, B. Roque, E. Kebreab, and X. Yang. 2021. Effects of red macroalgae Asparagopsis tax- iformis supplementation on the shelf life of fresh whole muscle beef. Transl. Anim. Sci. 5:txab056. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .1093/ tas/ txab056. · DOI
  23. Bougouin, A., C. Martin, M. Doreau, and A. Ferlay. 2019. Effects of starch-rich or lipid-supplemented diets that induce milk fat depres- sion on rumen biohydrogenation of fatty acids and methanogenesis in lactating dairy cows. Animal 13:1421-1431. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .1017/ S1751731118003154. · DOI
  24. Beauchemin et al.: INVITED REVIEW: ENTERIC METHANE MITIGATION Journal of Dairy Science Vol. 105 No. 12, 2022
  25. Breider, I. S., E. Wall, and P. C. Garnsworthy. 2019. Short communi- cation: Heritability of methane production and genetic correlations with milk yield and body weight in Holstein-Friesian dairy cows. J. Dairy Sci. 102:7277-7281. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .3168/ jds .2018 -15909. · DOI
  26. Budan, A., Y. Roman Garcia, P. Piantoni, D. Humphries, and Y. Sun. 2022. Potential of ZELP to improve the Cargill holistic approach to mitigate enteric methane emissions. Page 36 in Proc. 8th Int. Greenhouse Gas and Anim. Agric. Conf., Orlando, FL. University of Florida.
  27. Callaghan, M. J., N. W. Tomkins, I. Benu, and A. J. Parker. 2014. How feasible is it to replace urea with nitrates to mitigate green- house gases emissions from extensively managed beef cattle? Anim. Prod. Sci. 54:1300-1304. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .1071/ AN14270. · DOI
  28. Callaghan, M. J., N. W. Tomkins, G. Hepworth, and A. J. Parker. 2021. The effect of molasses nitrate lick blocks on supplement intake, bodyweight, condition score, blood methaemoglobin con- centration and herd scale methane emissions in Bos indicus cows grazing poor quality forage. Anim. Prod. Sci. 61:445-458. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .1071/ AN20389. · DOI
  29. Capper, J. L., R. A. Cady, and D. E. Bauman. 2009. The environmen- tal impact of dairy production: 1944 compared with 2007. J. Anim. Sci. 87:2160-2167. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .2527/ jas .2009 -1781. · DOI
  30. Carro, M. D., and E. M. Ungerfeld. 2015. Utilization of organic acids to manipulate ruminal fermentation and improve ruminant pro- ductivity. Pages 177-197 in Rumen Microbiology: From Evolution to Revolution. A. K. Puniya, R. Singh, and D. N. Kamra, ed. Springer. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .1007/ 978 -81 -322 -2401 -3. · DOI
  31. Chao, S. C., D. G. Young, and C. J. Oberg. 2000. Screening for in- hibitory activity of essential oils on selected bacteria, fungi and viruses. J. Essent. Oil Res. 12:639-649. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .1080/ 10412905 .2000 .9712177. · DOI
  32. Chen, S., A.-E. Rotaru, P. M. Shrestha, N. S. Malvankar, F. Liu, W. Fan, K. P. Nevin, and D. R. Lovley. 2014. Promoting interspecies electron transfer with biochar. Sci. Rep. 4:5019. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .1038/ srep05019. · DOI · Paper page
  33. Congio, G. F. S., C. D. A. Batalha, M. B. Chiavegato, A. Berndt, P. P. A. Oliveira, R. T. S. Frighetto, T. M. R. Maxwell, P. Gregorini, and S. C. Da Silva. 2018. Strategic grazing management towards sustainable intensification at tropical pasture-based dairy sys- tems. Sci. Total Environ. 636:872-880. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .1016/ j .scitotenv .2018 .04 .301. · DOI
  34. Cook, S. R., P. K. Maiti, A. V. Chaves, C. Benchaar, K. A. Beauche- min, and T. A. McAllister. 2008. Avian (Yg) anti-methanogen antibodies for reducing ruminal methane production: In vitro as- sessment of their effects. Aust. J. Exp. Agric. 48:260-264. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .1071/ EA07249. · DOI
  35. Cristobal-Carballo, O., S. McCoard, A. L. Cookson, S. Ganesh, K. Lowe, R. A. Laven, and S. Muetzel. 2021. Effect of methane inhibi- tors on ruminal microbiota during early life and its relationship with ruminal metabolism and growth in calves. Front. Microbiol. 12:710914. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .3389/ fmicb .2021 .710914. · DOI
  36. de Haas, Y., M. Pszczola, H. Soyeurt, E. Wall, and J. Lassen. 2017. Invited review: Phenotypes to genetically reduce greenhouse gas emissions in dairying. J. Dairy Sci. 100:855-870. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .3168/ jds .2016 -11246. · DOI
  37. de Haas, Y., R. F. Veerkamp, G. de Jong, and M. N. Aldridge. 2021. Selective breeding as a mitigation tool for methane emissions from dairy cattle. Animal 15:100294. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .1016/ j .animal .2021 .100294. · DOI
  38. de Raphélis-Soissan, V., L. Li, I. R. Godwin, M. C. Barnett, H. B. Per- dok, and R. S. Hegarty. 2014. Use of nitrate and Propionibacteri- um acidipropionici to reduce methane emissions and increase wool growth of Merino sheep. Anim. Prod. Sci. 54:1860-1866. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .1071/ AN14329. · DOI
  39. Debruyne, S., A. Ruiz-González, E. Artiles-Ortega, B. Ampe, W. Van Den Broeck, E. De Keyser, L. Vandaele, K. Goossens, and V. Fievez. 2018. Supplementing goat kids with coconut medium chain fatty acids in early life influences growth and rumen papillae de- velopment until 4 months after supplementation but effects on in vitro methane emissions and the rumen microbiota are transient. J. Anim. Sci. 96:1978-1995. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .1093/ jas/ sky070. · DOI
  40. Difford, G. F., D. W. Olijhoek, A. L. F. Hellwing, P. Lund, M. A. Bjerring, Y. de Haas, J. Lassen, and P. Løvendahl. 2019. Ranking cows' methane emissions under commercial conditions with sniff- ers versus respiration chambers. Acta Agric. Scand. A Anim. Sci. 68:25-32. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .1080/ 09064702 .2019 .1572784. · DOI
  41. Dijkstra, J., A. Bannink, J. France, E. Kebreab, and S. van Gastelen. 2018. Short communication: Antimethanogenic effects of 3-nitro- oxypropanol depend on supplementation dose, dietary fiber con- tent, and cattle type. J. Dairy Sci. 101:9041-9047. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .3168/ jds .2018 -14456. · DOI
  42. Doreau, M., M. Arbre, M. Popova, Y. Rochette, and C. Martin. 2018. Linseed plus nitrate in the diet for fattening bulls: Effects on meth- ane emission, animal health and residues in offal. Animal 12:501- 507. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .1017/ S1751731117002014. · DOI
  43. Dorman, H. J. D., and S. G. Deans. 2000. Antimicrobial agents from plants: Antibacterial activity of plant volatile oils. J. Appl. Micro- biol. 88:308-316. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .1046/ j .1365 -2672 .2000 .00969 .x. · DOI · Paper page
  44. Drewnoski, M. E., D. J. Pogge, and S. L. Hansen. 2014. High-sulfur in beef cattle diets: A review. J. Anim. Sci. 92:3763-3780. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .2527/ jas .2013 -7242. · DOI
  45. Duarte, C. M., J. Wu, X. Xiao, A. Bruhn, and D. Krause-Jensen. 2017. Can seaweed farming play a role in climate change mitigation and adaptation? Front. Mar. Sci. 4:100. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .3389/ fmars .2017 .00100. · DOI · Paper page
  46. Duffield, T. F., A. R. Rabiee, and I. J. Lean. 2008a. A meta-analysis of the impacts of monensin in lactating dairy cattle. Part 1: Meta- bolic effects. J. Dairy Sci. 91:1334-1346. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .3168/ jds .2007 -0607. · DOI
  47. Duffield, T. F., A. R. Rabiee, and I. J. Lean. 2008b. A meta-analysis of the impacts of monensin in lactating dairy cattle. Part 2: Produc- tion effects. J. Dairy Sci. 91:1347-1360. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .3168/ jds .2007 -0608. · DOI
  48. Ellis, J. L., J. Dijkstra, J. France, A. J. Parsons, G. R. Edwards, S. Rasmussen, E. Kebreab, and A. Bannink. 2012. Effect of high-sug- ar grasses on methane emissions simulated using a dynamic model. J. Dairy Sci. 95:272-285. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .3168/ jds .2011 -4385. · DOI
  49. Evans, B. 2018. The role ensiled forage has on methane production in the rumen. Anim. Husb. Dairy Vet. Sci. 2:1-4. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .15761/ AHDVS .1000143. FAO. 2022. FAOSTAT Database. Accessed Jan 26, 2022. https: / / www .fao .org/ faostat/ en/ #search/ grassland. · DOI
  50. Feng, X., and E. Kebreab. 2020. Net reductions in greenhouse gas emissions from feed additive use in California dairy cattle. PLoS One 15:e0234289. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .1371/ journal .pone .0234289. · DOI
  51. Feng, X. Y., J. Dijkstra, A. Bannink, S. van Gastelen, J. France, and E. Kebreab. 2020. Antimethanogenic effects of nitrate supplemen- tation in cattle: A meta-analysis. J. Dairy Sci. 103:11375-11385. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .3168/ jds .2020 -18541. · DOI
  52. Fischer, A., N. Edouard, and P. Faverdin. 2020. Precision feed restric- tion improves feed and milk efficiencies and reduces methane emis- Beauchemin et al.: INVITED REVIEW: ENTERIC METHANE MITIGATION Journal of Dairy Science Vol. 105 No. 12, 2022 sions of less efficient lactating Holstein cows without impairing their performance. J. Dairy Sci. 103:4408-4422. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .3168/ jds .2019 -17654. · DOI
  53. Fitzsimons, C., D. A. Kenny, M. H. Deighton, A. G. Fahey, and M. McGee. 2013. Methane emissions, body composition and rumen fermentation traits of beef heifers differing in residual feed intake. J. Anim. Sci. 91:5789-5800. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .2527/ jas .2013 -6956. · DOI
  54. Flay, H. E., B. Kuhn-Sherlock, K. A. Macdonald, M. Camara, N. Lopez-Villalobos, D. J. Donaghy, and J. R. Roche. 2019. Hot top- ic: Selecting cattle for residual feed intake did not affect daily methane production but increased methane yield. J. Dairy Sci. 102:2708-2713. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .3168/ jds .2018 -15234. · DOI
  55. Foskolos, A., and J. Moorby. 2017. The use of high sugar grasses as a strategy to improve nitrogen utilization efficiency: A me- ta-analysis. Adv. Anim. Biosci. 8:72. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .1017/ S2040470017001479. · DOI
  56. Freetly, H. C., and T. M. Brown-Brandl. 2013. Enteric methane pro- duction from beef cattle that vary in feed efficiency. J. Anim. Sci. 91:4826-4831. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .2527/ jas .2011 -4781. · DOI
  57. García-Chávez, I., E. Meraz-Romero, O. Castelán-Ortega, J. Zara- goza-Esparza, J. Osorio-Avalos, L. E. Robles-Jiménez, and M. González-Ronquillo. 2020. Corn silage, meta-analysis of the quality and yield of different regions in the world. Preprints 2020100094. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .20944/ preprints202010 .0094 .v1. · DOI
  58. Gerber, P. J., A. N. Hristov, B. Henderson, H. Makkar, J. Oh, C. Lee, R. Meinen, F. Montes, T. Ott, J. Firkins, A. Rotz, C. Dell, A. T. Adesogan, W. Z. Yang, J. M. Tricarico, E. Kebreab, G. Waghorn, J. Dijkstra, and S. Oosting. 2013. Technical options for the mitigation of direct methane and nitrous oxide emissions from livestock: A review. Animal 7:220-234. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .1017/ S1751731113000876. · DOI
  59. Gislon, G., S. Colombini, G. Borreani, G. M. Crovetto, A. Sandrucci, G. Galassi, E. Tabacco, and L. Rapetti. 2020. Milk production, methane emissions, nitrogen, and energy balance of cows fed diets based on different forage systems. J. Dairy Sci. 103:8048-8061. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .3168/ jds .2019 -18134. · DOI
  60. Glasson, C. R. K., R. D. Kinley, R. de Nys, N. King, S. L. Adams, M. A. Packer, J. Svenson, C. T. Eason, and M. Magnusson. 2022. Benefits and risks of including the bromoform containing seaweed Asparagopsis in feed for the reduction of methane production from ruminants. Algal Res. 64:102673. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .1016/ j .algal .2022 .102673. · DOI
  61. Grainger, C., and K. A. Beauchemin. 2011. Can enteric methane emis- sions from ruminants be lowered without lowering their produc- tion? Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 166-167:308-320. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .1016/ j .anifeedsci .2011 .04 .021. · DOI
  62. Grainger, C., R. Williams, T. Clarke, A.-D. Wright, and R. Eckard. 2010. Supplementation with whole cottonseed causes long-term re- duction of methane emissions from lactating dairy cows offered a forage and cereal grain diet. J. Dairy Sci. 93:2612-2619. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .3168/ jds .2009 -2888. · DOI
  63. Granja-Salcedo, Y. T., R. M. Fernandes, R. C. Araujo, L. T. Kishi, T. T. Berchielli, F. D. Resende, A. Berndt, and G. R. Siqueira. 2019. Long-term encapsulated nitrate supplementation modulates ru- men microbial diversity and rumen fermentation to reduce meth- ane emission in grazing steers. Front. Microbiol. 10:614. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .3389/ fmicb .2019 .00614. · DOI
  64. Guyader, J., M. Eugène, B. Meunier, M. Doreau, D. P. Morgavi, M. Silberberg, Y. Rochette, C. Gerard, C. Loncke, and C. Martin. 2015. Additive methane-mitigating effect between linseed oil and nitrate fed to cattle. J. Anim. Sci. 93:3564-3577. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .2527/ jas .2014 -8196. · DOI
  65. Guyader, J., H. H. Janzen, R. Kroebel, and K. A. Beauchemin. 2016. Forage use to improve environmental sustainability of ruminant production. J. Anim. Sci. 94:3147-3158. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .2527/ jas .2015 -0141. · DOI
  66. Hales, K. E., N. Cole, and J. MacDonald. 2012. Effects of corn pro- cessing method and dietary inclusion of wet distillers grains with solubles on energy metabolism, carbon-nitrogen balance, and methane emissions of cattle. J. Anim. Sci. 90:3174-3185. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .2527/ jas .2011 -4441. · DOI
  67. Hammond, K. J., J. L. Burke, J. P. Koolaard, S. Muetzel, C. S. Pin- ares-Patiño, and G. C. Waghorn. 2013. Effects of feed intake on enteric methane of sheep fed fresh white clover (Trifolium repens) and perennial ryegrass (Lolium perenne) forages. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 179:121-132. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .1016/ j .anifeedsci .2012 .11 .004. · DOI
  68. Hammond, K. J., S. O. Hoskin, J. L. Burke, G. C. Waghorn, J. P. Koolaard, and S. Muetzel. 2011. Effects of feeding fresh white clover (Trifolium repens) or perennial ryegrass (Lolium perenne) on enteric methane emissions from sheep. Anim. Feed Sci. Tech- nol. 166-167:398-404. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .1016/ j .anifeedsci .2011 .04 .028. · DOI
  69. Hammond, K. J., D. Pacheco, J. L. Burke, J. P. Koolaard, S. Muet- zel, and G. C. Waghorn. 2014. The effects of fresh forages and feed intake level on digesta kinetics and enteric methane emissions from sheep. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 193:32-43. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .1016/ j .anifeedsci .2014 .04 .005. · DOI
  70. Hassanat, F., and C. Benchaar. 2019. Methane emissions of manure from dairy cows fed red clover-or corn silage-based diets supple- mented with linseed oil. J. Dairy Sci. 102:11766-11776. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .3168/ jds .2018 -16014. · DOI
  71. Hassanat, F., R. Gervais, C. Julien, D. I. Masse, A. Lettat, P. Y. Chouinard, H. V. Petit, and C. Benchaar. 2013. Replacing alfalfa silage with corn silage in dairy cow diets: Effects on enteric meth- ane production, ruminal fermentation, digestion, N balance, and milk production. J. Dairy Sci. 96:4553-4567. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .3168/ jds .2012 -6480. · DOI
  72. Hegarty, R. S., R. A. Cortez Passetti, K. M. Dittmer, Y. Wang, S. Shelton, J. Emmet-Booth, E. Wollenberg, T. McAllister, S. Leahy, K. Beauchemin, and N. Gurwick. 2021. An evaluation of emerging feed additives to reduce methane emissions from livestock. Edition
  73. Helander, I. M., H.-L. Alakomi, K. Latva-Kala, T. Mattila-Sandholm, L. Pol, E. J. Smid, L. G. M. Gorris, and A. von Wright. 1998. Characterization of the action of selected essential oil components on Gram-negative bacteria. J. Agric. Food Chem. 46:3590-3595. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .1021/ jf980154m. · DOI · Paper page
  74. Herd, R. M., V. H. Oddy, and E. C. Richardson. 2004. Biological basis for variation in residual feed intake in beef cattle. 1. Review of potential mechanisms. Aust. J. Exp. Agric. 44:423-430. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .1071/ EA02220. · DOI
  75. Hironaka, R., G. W. Mathison, B. K. Kerrigan, and I. Vlach. 1996. The effect of pelleting of alfalfa hay on methane production and digestibility by steers. Sci. Total Environ. 180:221-227. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .1016/ 0048 -9697(95)04948 -7. · DOI
  76. Hristov, A. N., A. Melgar, D. Wasson, and C. Arndt. 2022. Symposium review: Effective nutritional strategies to mitigate enteric methane in dairy cattle. J. Dairy Sci. 105:8543-8557. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .3168/ jds .2021 -21398 (article in press). · DOI
  77. Hristov, A. N., J. Oh, J. L. Firkins, J. Dijkstra, E. Kebreab, G. Wag- horn, H. P. Makkar, A. T. Adesogan, W. Yang, C. Lee, P. J. Gerber, B. Henderson, and J. M. Tricarico. 2013a. Mitigation of methane and nitrous oxide emissions from animal operations: I. A review of enteric methane mitigation options. J. Anim. Sci. 91:5045-5069. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .2527/ jas .2013 -6583. · DOI
  78. Beauchemin et al.: INVITED REVIEW: ENTERIC METHANE MITIGATION Journal of Dairy Science Vol. 105 No. 12, 2022
  79. Hristov, A. N., T. Ott, J. Tricarico, A. Rotz, G. Waghorn, A. Ad- esogan, J. Dijkstra, F. Montes, J. Oh, E. Kebreab, S. J. Oosting, P. J. Gerber, B. Henderson, H. P. S. Makkar, and J. L. Firkins. 2013b. Special Topics-Mitigation of methane and nitrous oxide emissions from animal operations: III. A review of animal manage- ment mitigation options. J. Anim. Sci. 91:5095-5113. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .2527/ jas .2013 -6585. · DOI
  80. Illius, A., and M. Allen. 1994. Assessing forage quality using integrated models of intake and digestion by ruminants. Pages 869-890 in Forage Quality, Evaluation, and Utilization. G. C. Fahey, M. Col- lins Jr., D. R. Mertens, and L. E. Moser, ed. American Society of Agronomy, Crop Science Society of America, Soil Science Society of America. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .2134/ 1994 .foragequality .c21. · DOI
  81. Janssen, P. H. 2010. Influence of hydrogen on rumen methane forma- tion and fermentation balances through microbial growth kinet- ics and fermentation thermodynamics. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 160:1-22. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .1016/ j .anifeedsci .2010 .07 .002. · DOI
  82. Jayanegara, A., F. Leiber, and M. Kreuzer. 2012. Meta-analysis of the relationship between dietary tannin level and methane forma- tion in ruminants from in vivo and in vitro experiments. J. Anim. Physiol. Anim. Nutr. (Berl.) 96:365-375. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .1111/ j .1439 -0396 .2011 .01172 .x. · DOI
  83. Jayanegara, A., K. A. Sarwono, M. Kondo, H. Matsui, M. Ridla, E. B. Laconi, and Nahrowi. 2018. Use of 3-nitrooxypropanol as feed additive for mitigating enteric methane emissions from ruminants: A meta-analysis. Ital. J. Anim. Sci. 17:650-656. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .1080/ 1828051X .2017 .1404945. · DOI · Paper page
  84. Jayanegara, A., E. Wina, and J. Takahashi. 2014. Meta-analysis on methane mitigating properties of saponin-rich sources in the ru- men: Influence of addition levels and plant sources. Asian-Aus- tralas. J. Anim. Sci. 27:1426-1435. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .5713/ ajas .2014 .14086. · DOI · Paper page
  85. Jia, Y., B. Quack, R. D. Kinley, I. Pisso, and S. Tegtmeier. 2022. Potential environmental impact of bromoform from Asparagopsis farming in Australia. Atmos. Chem. Phys. 22:7631-7646. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .5194/ acp -22 -7631 -2022. · DOI
  86. Jiao, H. P., A. J. Dale, A. F. Carson, S. Murray, A. W. Gordon, and C. P. Ferris. 2014. Effect of concentrate feed level on methane emis- sions from grazing dairy cows. J. Dairy Sci. 97:7043-7053. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .3168/ jds .2014 -7979. · DOI
  87. Johansen, M., P. Lund, and M. R. Weisbjerg. 2018. Feed intake and milk production in dairy cows fed different grass and legume spe- cies: A meta-analysis. Animal 12:66-75. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .1017/ S1751731117001215. · DOI
  88. Jordan, E., D. Lovett, F. Monahan, J. Callan, B. Flynn, and F. O'Mara. 2006. Effect of refined coconut oil or copra meal on meth- ane output and on intake and performance of beef heifers. J. Anim. Sci. 84:162-170. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .2527/ 2006 .841162x. · DOI
  89. Kennedy, P. M., and E. Charmley. 2012. Methane yields from Brah- man cattle fed tropical grasses and legumes. Anim. Prod. Sci. 52:225-239. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .1071/ AN11103. · DOI
  90. Kim, H., H. Lee, Y. Baek, S. Lee, and J. Seo. 2020. The effects of dietary supplementation with 3-nitrooxypropanol on enteric meth- ane emissions, rumen fermentation, and production performance in ruminants: A meta-analysis. J. Anim. Sci. Technol. 62:31-42. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .5187/ jast .2020 .62 .1 . · DOI
  91. Kim, S. H., L. L. Mamuad, D. W. Kim, S. K. Kim, and S. S. Lee. 2016. Fumarate reductase-producing enterococci reduce methane pro- duction in in vitro rumen fermentation. J. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 26:558-566. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .4014/ jmb .1512 .12008. · DOI
  92. Kinley, R. D., G. Martinez-Fernandez, M. K. Matthews, R. de Nys, M. Magnusson, and N. W. Tomkins. 2020. Mitigating the carbon foot- print and improving productivity of ruminant livestock agriculture using a red seaweed. J. Clean. Prod. 259:120836. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .1016/ j .jclepro .2020 .120836. · DOI · Paper page
  93. Knapp, J. R., G. L. Laur, P. A. Vadas, W. P. Weiss, and J. M. Tri- carico. 2014. Invited review: Enteric methane in dairy cattle pro- duction: Quantifying the opportunities and impact of reducing emissions. J. Dairy Sci. 97:3231-3261. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .3168/ jds .2013 -7234. · DOI · Paper page
  94. Kolling, G. J., S. C. B. Stivanin, A. M. Gabbi, F. S. Machado, A. L. Ferreira, M. M. Campos, T. R. Tomich, C. S. Cunha, S. W. Dill, L. G. R. Pereira, and V. Fischer. 2018. Performance and methane emissions in dairy cows fed oregano and green tea extracts as feed additives. J. Dairy Sci. 101:4221-4234. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .3168/ jds .2017 -13841. · DOI
  95. Kozłowska, M., A. Cieślak, A. Jóźwik, M. El-Sherbiny, A. Stochmal, W. Oleszek, M. Kowalczyk, W. Filipiak, and M. Szumacher-Stra- bel. 2020. The effect of total and individual alfalfa saponins on rumen methane production. J. Sci. Food Agric. 100:1922-1930. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .1002/ jsfa .10204. · DOI
  96. Lassen, J., and P. Løvendahl. 2016. Heritability estimates for enteric methane emissions from Holstein cattle measured using nonin- vasive methods. J. Dairy Sci. 99:1959-1967. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .3168/ jds .2015 -10012. · DOI
  97. Lean, I. J., H. M. Golder, T. M. D. Grant, and P. J. Moate. 2021. A meta-analysis of effects of dietary seaweed on beef and dairy cattle performance and methane yield. PLoS One 16:e0249053. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .1371/ journal .pone .0249053. · DOI
  98. Lee, C., and K. A. Beauchemin. 2014. A review of feeding supplemen- tary nitrate to ruminant animals: Nitrate toxicity, methane emis- sions, and production performance. Can. J. Anim. Sci. 94:557-570. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .4141/ cjas -2014 -069. · DOI
  99. Li, X., H. C. Norman, R. D. Kinley, M. Laurence, M. Wilmott, H. Bender, R. de Nys, and N. Tomkins. 2018. Asparagopsis taxiformis decreases enteric methane production from sheep. Anim. Prod. Sci. 58:681-688. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .1071/ AN15883. · DOI
  100. Lima, P. R., T. Apdini, A. S. Freire, A. S. Santana, L. M. L. Mou- ra, J. C. S. Nascimento, R. T. S. Rodrigues, J. Dijkstra, A. F. Garcez Neto, M. A. Á. Queiroz, and D. R. Menezes. 2019. Dietary supplementation with tannin and soybean oil on intake, digest- ibility, feeding behavior, ruminal protozoa and methane emission in sheep. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 249:10-17. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .1016/ j .anifeedsci .2019 .01 .017. · DOI
  101. Little, S. M., C. Benchaar, H. H. Janzen, R. Kröbel, E. J. McGeough, and K. A. Beauchemin. 2017. Demonstrating the effect of forage source on the carbon footprint of a Canadian dairy farm using whole-systems analysis and the Holos model: Alfalfa silage vs. corn silage. Climate (Basel) 5:87. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .3390/ cli5040087. · DOI
  102. Løvendahl, P., G. F. Difford, B. Li, M. G. G. Chagunda, P. Huhtanen, M. H. Lidauer, J. Lassen, and P. Lund. 2018. Review: Select- ing for improved feed efficiency and reduced methane emissions in dairy cattle. Animal 12:s336-s349. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .1017/ S1751731118002276. · DOI
  103. Lovett, D. K., D. McGilloway, A. Bortolozzo, M. Hawkins, J. Callan, B. Flynn, and F. P. O'Mara. 2006. In vitro fermentation patterns and methane production as influenced by cultivar and season of harvest of Lolium perenne. Grass Forage Sci. 61:9-21. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .1111/ j .1365 -2494 .2006 .00500 .x. · DOI
  104. MacAdam, J. W., and J. J. Villalba. 2015. Review: Beneficial effects of temperate forage legumes that contain condensed tannins. Ag- riculture 5:475-491. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .3390/ agriculture5030475. · DOI
  105. Beauchemin et al.: INVITED REVIEW: ENTERIC METHANE MITIGATION Journal of Dairy Science Vol. 105 No. 12, 2022
  106. Machado, L., M. Magnusson, N. A. Paul, R. Kinley, R. de Nys, and N. Tomkins. 2016. Identification of bioactives from the red seaweed Asparagopsis taxiformis that promote antimethanogenic activity in vitro. J. Appl. Phycol. 28:3117-3126. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .1007/ s10811 -016 -0830 -7. · DOI
  107. Macome, F. M., W. F. Pellikaan, W. H. Hendriks, D. Warner, J. T. Schonewille, and J. W. Cone. 2018. In vitro gas and methane pro- duction in rumen fluid from dairy cows fed grass silages differing in plant maturity, compared to in vivo data. J. Anim. Physiol. Anim. Nutr. (Berl.) 102:843-852. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .1111/ jpn .12898. · DOI
  108. Manzanilla-Pech, C. I. V., P. Løvendahl, D. Mansan Gordo, G. F. Gifford, G. E. Pryce, F. Schenkel, S. Wegmann, F. Miglior, T. C. Chud, P. J. Moate, S. R. O. Williams, C. M. Richardson, P. Sto- thard, and J. Lassen. 2021. Breeding for reduced methane emission and fee-efficient Holstein cows: An international response. J. Dairy Sci. 104:8983-9001. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .3168/ jds .2020 -19889. · DOI
  109. Mao, H. L., J. K. Wang, Y. Y. Zhou, and J. X. Liu. 2010. Effects of addition of tea saponins and soybean oil on methane production, fermentation and microbial population in the rumen of growing lambs. Livest. Sci. 129:56-62. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .1016/ j .livsci .2009 .12 .011. · DOI
  110. Martin, C., D. P. Morgavi, and M. Doreau. 2010. Methane mitigation in ruminants: From microbe to the farm scale. Animal 4:351-365. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .1017/ S1751731109990620. · DOI
  111. Massé, D. I., G. Jarret, F. Hassanat, C. Benchaar, and N. M. Cata Saady. 2016. Effect of increasing levels of corn silage in an al- falfa-based dairy cow diet and of manure management practices on manure fugitive methane emissions. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 221:109-114. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .1016/ j .agee .2016 .01 .018. · DOI · Paper page
  112. Mauricio, R. M., R. S. Ribeiro, D. S. C. Paciullo, M. A. Cangussú, E. Murgueitio, and J. Chará. M. X., and F. Estrada. 2019. Silvo- pastoral systems in Latin America for biodiversity, environmental, and socioeconomic improvements. Pages 287-297 in Agroecosys- tem Diversity: Reconciling Contemporary Agriculture and Envi- ronmental Quality. G. Lemaire, P. Carvalho, S. Kronberg, and S. Recous, ed. Elsevier/Academic Press.
  113. McDonnell, R. P., K. J. Hart, T. M. Boland, A. K. Kelly, M. McGee, and D. A. Kenny. 2016. Effect of divergence in phenotypical re- sidual feed intake on methane emissions, ruminal fermentation, and apparent whole-tract digestibility of beef heifers across three contrasting diets. J. Anim. Sci. 94:1179-1193. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .2527/ jas .2015 -0080. · DOI
  114. McSweeney, C., B. Palmer, D. McNeill, and D. Krause. 2001. Micro- bial interactions with tannins: Nutritional consequences for ru- minants. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 91:83-93. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .1016/ S0377 -8401(01)00232 -2. · DOI · Paper page
  115. Meale, S. J., M. Popova, C. Saro, C. Martin, A. Bernard, M. Lagree, D. R. Yáñez-Ruiz, H. Boudra, S. Duval, and D. P. Morgavi. 2021. Early life intervention in dairy calves results in a long-term reduc- tion in methane emissions. Sci. Rep. 11:3003. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .1038/ s41598 -021 -82084 -9. · DOI
  116. Moate, P., S. Williams, M. Deighton, M. Hannah, B. Ribaux, G. Mor- ris, J. Jacobs, J. Hill, and W. Wales. 2019. Effects of feeding wheat or corn and of rumen fistulation on milk production and methane emissions of dairy cows. Anim. Prod. Sci. 59:891-905. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .1071/ AN17433. · DOI
  117. Moate, P., S. Williams, J. Jacobs, M. Hannah, K. Beauchemin, R. Eckard, and W. Wales. 2017. Wheat is more potent than corn or barley for dietary mitigation of enteric methane emissions from dairy cows. J. Dairy Sci. 100:7139-7153. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .3168/ jds .2016 -12482. · DOI
  118. Morgavi, D. P., E. Forano, C. Martin, and C. J. Newbold. 2010. Micro- bial ecosystem and methanogenesis in ruminants. Animal 4:1024- 1036. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .1017/ S1751731110000546. · DOI · Paper page
  119. Muizelaar, W., M. Groot, G. Van Duinkerken, R. Peters, and J. Di- jkstra. 2021. Safety and transfer study: Transfer of bromoform present in Asparagopsis taxiformis to milk and urine of lactating dairy cows. Foods 10:584. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .3390/ foods10030584. · DOI
  120. Muñoz, C., P. A. Letelier, E. M. Ungerfeld, J. M. Morales, S. Hube, and L. A. Pérez-Prieto. 2016. Effects of pre grazing herbage mass in late spring on enteric methane emissions, dry matter intake, and milk production of dairy cows. J. Dairy Sci. 99:7945-7955. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .3168/ jds .2016 -10919. · DOI
  121. Muñoz, C., R. Villalobos, A. M. T. Peralta, M. Morales, N. L. Ur- rutia, and E. M. Ungerfeld. 2021. Long-term and carryover effects of whole oilseeds on methane emission, milk production, and milk fatty acid profile of grazing dairy cows. Animals (Basel) 11:2978. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .3390/ ani11102978. · DOI
  122. Nguyen, S. H., M. C. Barnett, and R. S. Hegarty. 2016. Use of dietary nitrate to increase productivity and reduce methane production of faunated and defaunated lambs consuming protein-deficient chaff. Anim. Prod. Sci. 56:290-297. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .1071/ AN15525. · DOI
  123. Nkemka, V. N., K. A. Beauchemin, and X. Hao. 2019. Treatment of feces from beef cattle fed the enteric methane inhibitor 3-nitro- oxypropanol. Water Sci. Technol. 80:437-447. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .2166/ wst .2019 .302. · DOI
  124. Nollet, L., D. I. Demeyer, and W. Verstraete. 1997. Effect of 2-bromo- ethanesulfonic acid and Peptostreptococcus productus ATCC 35244 addition on stimulation of reductive acetogenesis in the ruminal ecosystem by selective inhibition of methanogenesis. Appl. Envi- ron. Microbiol. 63:194-200. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .1128/ aem .63 .1 .194 -200 .1997. · DOI
  125. Olijhoek, D. W., P. Løvendahl, J. Lassen, A. L. F. Hellwing, J. K. Höglund, M. R. Weisbjerg, S. J. Noel, F. McLean, O. Højberg, and P. Lund. 2018. Methane production, rumen fermentation, and diet digestibility of Holstein and Jersey dairy cows being divergent in residual feed intake and fed at 2 forage-to-concentrate ratios. J. Dairy Sci. 101:9926-9940. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .3168/ jds .2017 -14278. · DOI
  126. Osborne, V. R., S. Radhakrishnan, N. Odongo, A. Hill, and B. Mc- Bride. 2008. Effects of supplementing fish oil in the drinking wa- ter of dairy cows on production performance and milk fatty acid composition. J. Anim. Sci. 86:720-729. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .2527/ jas .2007 -0342. · DOI
  127. Owens, F. N., and A. L. Goetsch. 1988. Ruminal fermentation. Pages 145-171 in The Ruminant Animal: Digestive Physiology and Nu- trition. D. C. Church, ed. Waveland Press Inc.
  128. Owens, J. L., B. W. Thomas, J. L. Stoeckli, K. A. Beauchemin, T. A. McAllister, F. J. Larney, and X. Hao. 2020. Greenhouse gas and ammonia emissions from stored manure from beef cattle supple- mented 3-nitrooxypropanol and monensin to reduce enteric meth- ane emissions. Sci. Rep. 10:19310. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .1038/ s41598 -020 -75236 -w. · DOI
  129. Patra, A. K. 2013. The effect of dietary fats on methane emissions, and its other effects on digestibility, rumen fermentation and lactation performance in cattle: A meta-analysis. Livest. Sci. 155:244-254. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .1016/ j .livsci .2013 .05 .023. · DOI
  130. Patra, A. K. 2014. A meta-analysis of the effect of dietary fat on enteric methane production, digestibility and rumen fermentation in sheep, and a comparison of these responses between cattle and sheep. Livest. Sci. 162:97-103. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .1016/ j .livsci .2014 .01 .007. · DOI
  131. Patra, A. K., and J. Saxena. 2011. Exploitation of dietary tannins to improve rumen metabolism and ruminant nutrition. J. Sci. Food Agric. 91:24-37. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .1002/ jsfa .4152. · DOI
  132. Petersen, S. O., A. L. F. Hellwing, M. Brask, O. Højberg, M. Poulsen, Z. Zhu, K. R. Baral, and P. Lund. 2015. Dietary nitrate for meth- ane mitigation leads to nitrous oxide emissions from dairy cows. J. Environ. Qual. 44:1063-1070. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .2134/ jeq2015 .02 .0107. · DOI
  133. Renand, G., A. Vinet, V. Decruyenaere, D. Maupetit, and D. Dozias. 2019. Methane and carbon dioxide emission of beef heifers in re- lation with growth and feed efficiency. Animals (Basel) 9:1136. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .3390/ ani9121136. · DOI
  134. Richardson, E. C., and R. M. Herd. 2004. Biological basis for variation in residual feed intake in cattle. 2. Synthesis of results following Beauchemin et al.: INVITED REVIEW: ENTERIC METHANE MITIGATION Journal of Dairy Science Vol. 105 No. 12, 2022 divergent selection. Aust. J. Exp. Agric. 44:431-440. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .1071/ EA02221. · DOI
  135. Ridoutt, B., S. A. Lehnert, S. Denman, E. Charmley, R. Kinley, and S. Dominik. 2022. Potential GHG emission benefits of Asparagop- sis taxiformis feed supplement in Australian beef cattle feedlots. J. Clean. Prod. 337:130499. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .1016/ j .jclepro .2022 .130499. · DOI
  136. Rivero, M. J., J. P. Keim, O. A. Balocchi, and M. R. F. Lee. 2020. In vitro fermentation patterns and methane output of perennial ryegrass differing in water-soluble carbohydrate and nitrogen con- centrations. Animals (Basel) 10:1076. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .3390/ ani10061076. · DOI
  137. Romero, P., A. Belanche, R. Hueso, E. Ramos-Morales, J. K. Salwen, E. Kebreab, and D. R. Yañez-Ruiz. 2022. In vitro rumen microbial degradation of bromoform and the impact on rumen fermentation. Page 253 in Proceedings of the 8th International Greenhouse Gas & Animal Agriculture Conference, Orlando, FL.
  138. Roque, B. M., J. K. Salwen, R. Kinley, and E. Kebreab. 2019a. In- clusion of Asparagopsis armata in lactating dairy cows' diet re- duces enteric methane emission by over 50 percent. J. Clean. Prod. 234:132-138. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .1016/ j .jclepro .2019 .06 .193. · DOI
  139. Roque, B. M., H. J. Van Lingen, H. Vrancken, and E. Kebreab. 2019b. Effect of Mootral-a garlic-and citrus-extract-based feed addi- tive-on enteric methane emissions in feedlot cattle. Transl. Anim. Sci. 3:1383-1388. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .1093/ tas/ txz133. · DOI
  140. Roque, B. M., M. Venegas, R. D. Kinley, R. de Nys, T. L. Duarte, X. Yang, and E. Kebreab. 2021. Red seaweed (Asparagopsis taxifor- mis) supplementation reduces enteric methane by over 80 percent in beef steers. PLoS One 16:e0247820. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .1371/ journal .pone .0247820. · DOI · Paper page
  141. Rotz, C. A., F. Montes, and D. S. Chianese. 2010. The carbon foot- print of dairy production systems through partial life cycle as- sessment. J. Dairy Sci. 93:1266-1282. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .3168/ jds .2009 -2162. · DOI
  142. Rowe, S. J., S. M. Hickey, A. Jonker, M. K. Hess, P. Janssen, T. Johnson, B. Bryson, K. Knowler, C. Pinares-Patino, W. Bain, S. Elmes, E. Young, J. Wing, E. Waller, N. Pickering, and J. C. McE- wan. 2019. Selection for divergent methane yield in New Zealand sheep -a ten-year perspective. Proc. Assoc. Advmt. Anim. Breed. Genet. 23:306-309.
  143. Saro, C., U. M. Hohenester, M. Bernard, M. Lagrée, C. Martin, M. Doreau, H. Boudra, M. Popova, and D. P. Morgavi. 2018. Effec- tiveness of interventions to modulate the rumen microbiota com- position and function in pre-ruminant and ruminant lambs. Front. Microbiol. 9:1273. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .3389/ fmicb .2018 .01273. · DOI
  144. Savian, J. V., R. M. T. Schons, D. E. Marchi, T. S. Freitas, G. F. da Silva Neto, J. C. Mezzalira, A. Berndt, C. Bayer, and P. C. F. Carvalho. 2018. Rotatinuous stocking: A grazing management innovation that has high potential to mitigate methane emissions by sheep. J. Clean. Prod. 186:602-608. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .1016/ j .jclepro .2018 .03 .162. · DOI
  145. Schilde, M., D. von Soosten, L. Hüther, U. Meyer, A. Zeyner, and S. Dänicke. 2021. Effects of 3-nitrooxypropanol and varying concen- trate feed proportions in the ration on methane emission, rumen fermentation and performance of periparturient dairy cows. Arch. Anim. Nutr. 75:79-104. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .1080/ 1745039X .2021 .1877986. · DOI
  146. Schultze-Kraft, R., I. Rao, M. Peters, R. Clements, C. Bai, and G. Liu. 2018. Tropical forage legumes for environmental benefits: An overview. Trop. Grassl. Forrajes Trop. 6:1-14. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .17138/ TGFT(6)1 -14. · DOI
  147. Soltan, Y., A. Abdalla Filho, A. Abdalla, B. Berenchtein, P. Schia- vinatto, and C. Costa. 2021. Replacing maize with low tannin sorghum grains: Lamb growth performance, microbial protein syn- thesis and enteric methane production. Anim. Prod. Sci. 61:1348- 1355. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .1071/ AN20605. · DOI
  148. Soteriades, A. D., A. M. Gonzalez-Mejia, D. Styles, A. Foskolos, J. M. Moorby, and J. M. Gibbons. 2018. Effects of high-sugar grasses and improved manure management on the environmental footprint of milk production at the farm level. J. Clean. Prod. 202:1241e1252. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .1016/ j .jclepro .2018 .08 .206. · DOI
  149. Sperber, J. L., B. Troyer, M. Norman, L. J. McPhillips, A. K. Watson, and G. E. Erickson. 2021. Effect of biochar supplementation in beef cattle finishing diets on greenhouse gas emissions and carcass performance. J. Anim. Sci. 99(Suppl. 1):33-34. (Abstr.) https: / / doi .org/ 10 .1093/ jas/ skab054 .058. · DOI
  150. Staerfl, S. M., S. L. Amelchanka, T. Kalber, C. R. Soliva, M. Kreuzer, and J. O. Zeitz. 2012. Effect of feeding dried high-sugar ryegrass ('AberMagic') on methane and urinary nitrogen emissions of pri- miparous cows. Livest. Sci. 150:293-301. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .1016/ j .livsci .2012 .09 .019. · DOI
  151. Stefenoni, H. A., S. E. Räisänen, S. F. Cueva, D. E. Wasson, C. F. A. Lage, A. Melgar, M. E. Fetter, P. Smith, M. Hennessy, B. Vec- chiarelli, J. Bender, D. Pitta, C. L. Cantrell, C. Yarish, and A. N. Hristov. 2021. Effects of the macroalga Asparagopsis taxiformis and oregano leaves on methane emission, rumen fermentation, and lactational performance of dairy cows. J. Dairy Sci. 104:4157-4173. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .3168/ jds .2020 -19686. · DOI
  152. Subharat, S., D. Shu, T. Zheng, B. M. Buddle, P. H. Janssen, D. Luo, and D. N. Wedlock. 2015. Vaccination of cattle with a methanogen protein produces specific antibodies in the saliva which are stable in the rumen. Vet. Immunol. Immunopathol. 164:201-207. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .1016/ j .vetimm .2015 .02 .008. · DOI
  153. Sun, Y., M. S. Allen, and A. L. Lock. 2019. Culture pH interacts with corn oil concentration to affect biohydrogenation of unsaturated fatty acids and disappearance of neutral detergent fiber in batch culture. J. Dairy Sci. 102:9870-9882. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .3168/ jds .2019 -16581. · DOI
  154. Tedeschi, L. O., C. A. Ramírez-Restrepo, and J. P. Muir. 2014. De- veloping a conceptual model of possible benefits of tannins for ru- minant production. Animal 8:1095-1105. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .1017/ S1751731114000974. · DOI
  155. Terry, S. A., G. O. Ribeiro, R. J. Gruninger, A. V. Chaves, K. A. Beauchemin, E. Okine, and T. A. McAllister. 2019. A pine en- hanced biochar does not decrease enteric CH 4 emissions, but alters the rumen microbiota. Front. Vet. Sci. 6:308. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .3389/ fvets .2019 .00308. · DOI
  156. Thiel, A., R. Rümbeli, P. Mair, H. Yeman, and P. Beilstein. 2019a. 3-NOP: ADME studies in rats and ruminating animals. Food Chem. Toxicol. 125:528-539. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .1016/ j .fct .2019 .02 .002. · DOI
  157. Thiel, A., A. C. M. Schoenmakers, I. A. J. Verbaan, E. Chenal, S. Etheve, and P. Beilstein. 2019b. 3-NOP: Mutagenicity and geno- toxicity assessment. Food Chem. Toxicol. 123:566-573. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .1016/ j .fct .2018 .11 .010. · DOI
  158. Tricarico, J. M., Y. de Haas, A. N. Hristov, E. Kebreab, T. Kurt, F. Mitloehner, and D. Pitta. 2022. Symposium review: Development of a funding program to support research on enteric methane miti- gation from ruminants. J. Dairy Sci. 105:8535-8542. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .3168/ jds .2021 -21397. · DOI
  159. Tricarico, J. M., E. Kebreab, and M. A. Wattiaux. 2020. MILK Sym- posium review: Sustainability of dairy production and consump- tion in low-income countries with emphasis on productivity and environmental impact. J. Dairy Sci. 103:9791-9802. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .3168/ jds .2020 -18269. · DOI
  160. Uddin, M. E., H. A. Aguirre-Villegas, R. A. Larson, and M. A. Wat- tiaux. 2021. Carbon footprint of milk from Holstein and Jersey cows fed low or high forage diet with alfalfa silage or corn silage as the main forage source. J. Clean. Prod. 298:126720. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .1016/ j .jclepro .2021 .126720. · DOI
  161. Ungerfeld, E. M. 2015. Shifts in metabolic hydrogen sinks in the meth- anogenesis-inhibited ruminal fermentation: Ameta-analysis. Front. Microbiol. 6:37. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .3389/ fmicb .2015 .00037. · DOI
  162. Ungerfeld, E. M. 2020. Metabolic hydrogen flows in rumen fermenta- tion: Principles and possibilities of intervention. Front. Microbiol. 11:589. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .3389/ fmicb .2020 .00589. · DOI · Paper page
  163. Beauchemin et al.: INVITED REVIEW: ENTERIC METHANE MITIGATION Journal of Dairy Science Vol. 105 No. 12, 2022
  164. Ungerfeld, E. M., K. A. Beauchemin, and C. Muñoz. 2022. Current perspectives on achieving pronounced enteric methane mitigation from ruminant production. Front. Anim. Sci. 2:795200. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .3389/ fanim .2021 .795200. · DOI
  165. van Lingen, H. J., M. Niu, E. Kebreab, S. C. Valadares Filho, J. A. Rooke, C.-A. Duthie, A. Schwarm, M. Kreuzer, P. I. Hynd, M. Caetano, M. Eugène, C. Martin, M. McGee, P. O'Kiely, M. Hüner- berg, T. A. McAllister, T. T. Berchielli, J. D. Messana, N. Peiren, A. V. Chaves, E. Charmley, N. A. Cole, K. E. Hales, S.-S. Lee, A. Berndt, C. K. Reynolds, L. A. Crompton, A.-R. Bayat, D. R. Yáñez-Ruiz, Z. Yu, A. Bannink, J. Dijkstra, D. P. Casper, and A. N. Hristov. 2019. Prediction of enteric methane production, yield and intensity of beef cattle using an intercontinental database. Ag- ric. Ecosyst. Environ. 283:106575. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .1016/ j .agee .2019 .106575. · DOI
  166. van Wyngaard, J. D. V., R. Meeske, and L. J. Erasmus. 2018. Effect of dietary nitrate on enteric methane emissions, production perfor- mance and rumen fermentation of dairy cows grazing kikuyu-dom- inant pasture during summer. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 244:76-87. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .1016/ j .anifeedsci .2018 .08 .005. · DOI
  167. van Wyngaard, J. D. V., R. Meeske, and L. J. Erasmus. 2019. Effect of dietary nitrate on enteric methane emissions, production per- formance and rumen fermentation of dairy cows grazing ryegrass pasture during spring. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 252:64-73. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .1016/ j .anifeedsci .2019 .04 .006. · DOI
  168. Vargas, J., E. Ungerfeld, C. Muñoz, and N. DiLorenzo. 2022. Feeding strategies to mitigate enteric methane emission from ruminants in grassland systems. Animals (Basel) 12:1132. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .3390/ ani12091132. · DOI
  169. Velazco, J. I., R. M. Herd, D. J. Cottle, and R. S. Hegarty. 2017. Daily methane emissions and emissions intensity of grazing beef cattle genetically divergent for residual feed intake. Anim. Prod. Sci. 57:627-635. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .1071/ AN15111. · DOI
  170. Vera, N., and E. M. Ungerfeld. 2022. Effect of water-soluble carbohy- drates content in Lolium perenne on enteric methane emissions: Meta-analysis. Page 241 in Proc. 8th Int. Greenhouse Gas and Anim. Agric. Conf. Orlando, FL. University of Florida.
  171. Vyas, D., A. Alazzeh, S. M. McGinn, T. A. McAllister, O. M. Harstad, H. Holo, and K. A. Beauchemin. 2016. Enteric methane emissions in response to ruminal inoculation of Propionibacterium strains in beef cattle fed a mixed diet. Anim. Prod. Sci. 56:1035-1040. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .1071/ AN14801. · DOI
  172. Vyas, D., E. J. McGeough, S. M. McGinn, T. A. McAllister, and K. A. Beauchemin. 2014a. Effect of Propionibacterium spp. on ruminal fermentation, nutrient digestibility, and methane emissions in beef heifers fed a high-forage diet. J. Anim. Sci. 92:2192-2201. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .2527/ jas .2013 -7492. · DOI
  173. Vyas, D., E. J. McGeough, R. Mohammed, S. M. McGinn, T. A. McAl- lister, and K. A. Beauchemin. 2014b. Effects of Propionibacterium strains on ruminal fermentation, nutrient digestibility and meth- ane emissions in beef cattle fed a corn grain finishing diet. Animal 8:1807-1815. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .1017/ S1751731114001657. · DOI
  174. Waghorn, G. 2008. Beneficial and detrimental effects of dietary con- densed tannins for sustainable sheep and goat production-Prog- ress and challenges. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 147:116-139. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .1016/ j .anifeedsci .2007 .09 .013. · DOI
  175. Waghorn, G. C., and R. S. Hegarty. 2011. Lowering ruminant meth- ane emissions through improved feed conversion efficiency. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 166-167:291-301. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .1016/ j .anifeedsci .2011 .04 .019. · DOI
  176. Warner, D., B. Hatew, S. C. Podesta, G. Klop, S. Van Gastelen, H. Van Laar, J. Dijkstra, and A. Bannink. 2016. Effects of nitrogen fertilisation rate and maturity of grass silage on methane emis- sion by lactating dairy cows. Animal 10:34-43. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .1017/ S1751731115001640. · DOI
  177. Warner, D., S. C. Podesta, B. Hatew, G. Klop, H. van Laar, A. Ban- nink, and J. Dijkstra. 2015. Effect of nitrogen fertilization rate and regrowth interval of grass herbage on methane emission of zero- grazing lactating dairy cows. J. Dairy Sci. 98:3383-3393. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .3168/ jds .2014 -9068. · DOI
  178. Weber, T. L., X. Hao, C. D. Gross, K. A. Beauchemin, and S. X. Chang. 2021. Effect of manure from cattle fed 3-nitrooxypro- panol on anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions depends on soil type. Agronomy (Basel) 11:371. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .3390/ agronomy11020371. · DOI
  179. Wedlock, D. N., G. Pedersen, M. Denis, D. Dey, P. H. Janssen, and B. M. Buddle. 2010. Development of a vaccine to mitigate greenhouse gas emissions in agriculture: Vaccination of sheep with methano- gen fractions induces antibodies that block methane production in vitro. N. Z. Vet. J. 58:29-36. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .1080/ 00480169 .2010 .65058. · DOI
  180. Williams, Y. J., S. Popovski, S. M. Rea, L. C. Skillman, A. F. Toovey, K. S. Northwood, and A. D. G. Wright. 2009. A vaccine against rumen methanogens can alter the composition of archaeal popula- tions. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 75:1860-1866. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .1128/ AEM .02453 -08. · DOI
  181. Winichayakul, S., R. Cookson, R. Scott, J. Zhou, X. Zou, M. Roldan, K. Richardson, and N. Roberts. 2008. Delivery of grasses with high levels of unsaturated, protected fatty acids. Proc. N. Z. Grassl. As- soc. 70:211-216. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .33584/ jnzg .2008 .70 .2721. · DOI
  182. Wood, J. M., F. S. Kennedy, and R. S. Wolfe. 1968. The reaction of multihalogenated hydrocarbons with free and bound reduced vitamin B 12 . Biochemistry 7:1707-1713. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .1021/ bi00845a013. · DOI
  183. Wright, A. D. G., P. Kennedy, C. J. O'Neill, A. F. Toovey, S. Popovski, S. M. Rea, C. L. Pimm, and L. Klein. 2004. Reducing methane emissions in sheep by immunization against rumen methanogens. Vaccine 22:3976-3985. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .1016/ j .vaccine .2004 .03 .053. · DOI
  184. Yang, C., J. A. Rooke, I. Cabeza, and R. J. Wallace. 2016. Nitrate and inhibition of ruminal methanogenesis: Microbial ecology, obstacles, and opportunities for lowering methane emissions from ruminant livestock. Front. Microbiol. 7:132. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .3389/ fmicb .2016 .00132. · DOI
  185. Yu, G., K. A. Beauchemin, and R. Dong. 2021. A review of 3-nitrooxy- propanol for enteric methane mitigation from ruminant livestock. Animals (Basel) 11:3540. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .3390/ ani11123540. · DOI
  186. Yurtseven, S., M. Avci, M. Cetin, I. Öztürk, and M. Boğa. 2018. Emissions of some greenhouse gases from the manure of ewes fed on pomegranate peel, yucca extract, and thyme oil. Appl. Ecol. Environ. Res. 16:4217-4228. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .15666/ aeer/ 1604 _42174228. · DOI
  187. Zhang, L., X. Huang, B. Xue, Q. Peng, Z. Wang, T. Yan, and L. Wang. 2015. Immunization against rumen methanogenesis by vaccination with a new recombinant protein. PLoS One 10:e0140086. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .1371/ journal .pone .0140086. · DOI
  188. Zhao, Y. G., N. E. O'Connell, and T. Yan. 2016. Prediction of enteric methane emissions from sheep offered fresh perennial ryegrass (Lo- lium perenne) using data measured in indirect open-circuit respi- ration chambers. J. Anim. Sci. 94:2425-2435. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .2527/ jas .2016 -0334. · DOI
  189. Zhou, X., J. Zeitz, L. Meile, M. Kreuzer, and A. Schwarm. 2015. Influ- ence of pH and the degree of protonation on the inhibitory effect of fatty acids in the ruminal methanogen Methanobrevibacter ru- Beauchemin et al.: INVITED REVIEW: ENTERIC METHANE MITIGATION Journal of Dairy Science Vol. 105 No. 12, 2022
  190. minantium strain M1. J. Appl. Microbiol. 119:1482-1493. https: / / doi .org/ 10 .1111/ jam .12955. · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Beauchemin, K. A., Ungerfeld, E. M., Abdalla, A. L., Alvarez, C., Arndt, C., Becquet, P., Benchaar, C., Berndt, A., Mauricio, R. M., McAllister, T. A., Oyhantçabal, W., Salami, S. A., Shalloo, L., Sun, Y., Tricarico, J., Uwizeye, A., De Camillis, C., Bernoux, M., Robinson, T., & Kebreab, E.
Affiliations
  • Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada (CA)
  • Instituto de Investigaciones Agropecuarias (CL)
  • Universidade de São Paulo (BR)
  • International Livestock Research Institute (KE)
  • Embrapa (BR)
  • Universidad de la República de Uruguay (UY)
  • Teagasc - The Irish Agriculture and Food Development Authority (IE)
  • Cargill (United States) (US)
  • Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (IT)
  • University of California, Davis (US)
Corresponding author
Ungerfeld, Emilio M.
ORCID
Venue
Journal of Dairy Science
Publisher
American Dairy Science Association
Published
2022-12
Volume
105
Issue
12
Pages
9297-9326
ISSN
0022-0302 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.3168/jds.2022-22091
OpenAlex
W4306774309
Cited by
324
References
14
Citations by year
2026: 84 · 2025: 103 · 2024: 80 · 2023: 48 · 2022: 9
FWCI
63.66
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Journal of Dairy Science (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • CGSPace A Repository of Agricultural Research Outputs (Consultative Group for International Agricultural Research) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • T-Stór (Teagasc) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
  • Greater South Information System
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Agronomy and Crop Science › Ruminant Nutrition and Digestive Physiology
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Agriculture Sustainability and Environmental Impact
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Building and Construction › Anaerobic Digestion and Biogas Production
Keywords
enteric methane, methane mitigation, dairy cattle, greenhouse gas emissions, supply chain, holistic approach
MeSH terms
Greenhouse Gases, Animals, Methane, Ruminants, Temperature, Biodiversity

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