Cited by 82Ruminant Nutrition and Digestive PhysiologyAnaerobic Digestion and Biogas ProductionGut microbiota and health

Identification, comparison, and validation of robust rumen microbial biomarkers for methane emissions using diverse Bos taurus breeds and basal diets

Open access
Auffret, Marc D., Stewart, Robert, Dewhurst, Richard J., Duthie, Carol-Anne, Rooke, John A., Wallace, Robert J., Freeman, Tom C., Snelling, Timothy J. +2 more·2018·Frontiers in Microbiology

Abstract

Previous shotgun metagenomic analyses of ruminal digesta identified some microbial information that might be useful as biomarkers to select cattle that emit less methane (CH4), which is a potent greenhouse gas. It is known that methane production (g/kgDMI) and to an extent the microbial community is heritable and therefore biomarkers can offer a method of selecting cattle for low methane emitting phenotypes. In this study a wider range of Bos Taurus cattle, varying in breed and diet, was investigated to determine microbial communities and genetic markers associated with high/low CH4 emissions. Digesta samples were taken from 50 beef cattle, comprising four cattle breeds, receiving two basal diets containing different proportions of concentrate and also including feed additives (nitrate or lipid), that may influence methane emissions. A combination of partial least square analysis and network analysis enabled the identification of the most significant and robust biomarkers of CH4 emissions (VIP>0.8) across diets and breeds when comparing all potential biomarkers together. Genes associated with the hydrogenotrophic methanogenesis pathway converting carbon dioxide to methane, provided the dominant biomarkers of CH4 emissions and methanogens were the microbial populations most closely correlated with CH4 emissions and identified by metagenomics. Moreover, these genes grouped together as confirmed by network analysis for each independent experiment and when combined. Finally, the genes involved in the methane synthesis pathway explained a higher proportion of variation in CH4 emissions by PLS analysis compared to phylogenetic parameters or functional genes. These results confirmed the reproducibility of the analysis and the advantage to use these genes as robust biomarkers of CH4 emissions. Volatile fatty acid concentrations and ratios were significantly correlated with CH4, but these factors were not identified as robust enough for predictive purposes. Moreover, the methanotrophic Methylomonas genus was found to be negatively correlated with CH4. Finally, this study confirmed the importance of using robust and applicable biomarkers from the microbiome as a proxy of CH4 emissions across diverse production systems and environments.

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 · 10.3389/fmicb.2017.02642

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.

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?

  • Shotgun metagenomics can identify rumen microbial communities and genetic markers associated with CH4 emissions, allowing selection of cattle with less CH4 emissions.

    “Shotgun metagenomics provides a platform to identify rumen microbial communities and genetic markers associated with CH4 emissions, allowing the selection of cattle with less CH4 emissions.135, 136, 137”

    From Technologies and perspectives for achieving carbon neutrality (2021) · cites this paper as [135]

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 70 · Cited by 82

Authors
Auffret, M. D., Stewart, R., Dewhurst, R. J., Duthie, C.-A., Rooke, J. A., Wallace, R. J., Freeman, T. C., Snelling, T. J., Watson, M., & Roehe, R.
Affiliations
  • Scotland's Rural College (GB)
  • Roslin Institute (GB)
  • University of Aberdeen (GB)
Corresponding author
Auffret, Marc D.
Venue
Frontiers in Microbiology
Published
2018-01-09
Volume
8
Pages
2642-2642
ISSN
1664-302X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2783429427
Cited by
82
References
70
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 15 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 4
FWCI
16.05
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Frontiers in Microbiology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Aberdeen University Research Archive (Aberdeen University) (submittedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • Edinburgh Research Explorer (University of Edinburgh) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council (BB/N01720X/1, BB/N016742/1)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Agronomy and Crop Science › Ruminant Nutrition and Digestive Physiology
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Building and Construction › Anaerobic Digestion and Biogas Production
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Gut microbiota and health
Keywords
methane emissions, beef cattle, rumen microbiome, hydrogenotrophic methanogenesis, methanogenic archaea, Methylomonas, volatile fatty acids, feed additives, nitrate, lipid supplementation, concentrate diet, greenhouse gas emissions reduction, cattle selection, partial least squares, network analysis

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