Simulating the effects of grassland management and grass ensiling on methane emission from lactating cows
Bibliographic record
Abstract
SUMMARY A dynamic, mechanistic model of enteric fermentation was used to investigate the effect of type and quality of grass forage, dry matter intake (DMI) and proportion of concentrates in dietary dry matter (DM) on variation in methane (CH4) emission from enteric fermentation in dairy cows. The model represents substrate degradation and microbial fermentation processes in rumen and hindgut and, in particular, the effects of type of substrate fermented and of pH on the production of individual volatile fatty acids and CH4as end-products of fermentation. Effects of type and quality of fresh and ensiled grass were evaluated by distinguishing two N fertilization rates of grassland and two stages of grass maturity. Simulation results indicated a strong impact of the amount and type of grass consumed on CH4emission, with a maximum difference (across all forage types and all levels of DMI) of 49 and 77% in g CH4/kg fat and protein corrected milk (FCM) for diets with a proportion of concentrates in dietary DM of 0·1 and 0·4, respectively (values ranging from 10·2 to 19·5 g CH4/kg FCM). The lowest emission was established for early cut, high fertilized grass silage (GS) and high fertilized grass herbage (GH). The highest emission was found for late cut, low-fertilized GS. The N fertilization rate had the largest impact, followed by stage of grass maturity at harvesting and by the distinction between GH and GS. Emission expressed in g CH4/kg FCM declined on average 14% with an increase of DMI from 14 to 18 kg/day for grass forage diets with a proportion of concentrates of 0·1, and on average 29% with an increase of DMI from 14 to 23 kg/day for diets with a proportion of concentrates of 0·4. Simulation results indicated that a high proportion of concentrates in dietary DM may lead to a further reduction of CH4emission per kg FCM mainly as a result of a higher DMI and milk yield, in comparison to low concentrate diets. Simulation results were evaluated against independent data obtained at three different laboratories in indirect calorimetry trials with cows consuming GH mainly. The model predicted the average of observed values reasonably, but systematic deviations remained between individual laboratories and root mean squared prediction error was a proportion of 0·12 of the observed mean. Both observed and predicted emission expressed in g CH4/kg DM intake decreased upon an increase in dietary N:organic matter (OM) ratio. The model reproduced reasonably well the variation in measured CH4emission in cattle sheds on Dutch dairy farms and indicated that on average a fraction of 0·28 of the total emissions must have originated from manure under these circumstances.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".