![Open Access](https://i-scholar.in/lib/pkp/templates/images/icons/fulltextgreen.png)
![Restricted Access](https://i-scholar.in/lib/pkp/templates/images/icons/fulltextred.png)
![Open Access](https://i-scholar.in/lib/pkp/templates/images/icons/fulltextgreen.png)
![Open Access](https://i-scholar.in/lib/pkp/templates/images/icons/fulltext_open_medium.gif)
![Restricted Access](https://i-scholar.in/lib/pkp/templates/images/icons/fulltextred.png)
![Restricted Access](https://i-scholar.in/lib/pkp/templates/images/icons/fulltext_restricted_medium.gif)
Effect of Dietary Monensin Supplementation on Methane and Nitrous Oxide Emissions from Fresh Dung of Non Pregnant Non Lactating Dry Buffaloes
Subscribe/Renew Journal
The present study was conducted to evaluate the effect of dietary monensin supplementation on methane and nitrous oxide emissions from fresh dung of non pregnant non lactating dry buffaloes. Fourteen dry Murrah buffaloes were randomly divided into two groups of seven animals each based on body weight. Both groups were fed as per ICAR without and with monensin supplementation (350 mg/head/day) in control and treatment group, respectively for sixty days. The daily dry matter intake (kg/d) was similar (P>0.05) in both the groups. Methane emission (g/kg DM, g/kg OM and g/kg NDF) from anaerobic incubation of fresh dung (24 h at 39°C) was decreased in treatment group 0.36, 0.45, 0.58 as compared to control 0.45, 0.56, 0.73, but difference was not significant. N2O production (mg/kg DM, mg/kg OM and mg/kg N) from fresh dung were lower for treatment group 0.02, 0.11 and 4.99 than control 0.016, 0.13 and 5.56 but difference was not statistically significant. In conclusion, dietary monensin supplementation to non pregnant dry Murrah buffaloes decreased (P>0.05) methane and nitrous oxide emission from fresh dung which will reduce the contribution of buffaloes to nitrous oxide emissions and its negative impact on environment.
Keywords
Dung, Methane, Monensin, Nitrous Oxide.
User
Subscription
Login to verify subscription
Font Size
Information
- Boadi DA, Wittenberg KM, Scott SL, Burton D, Buckley K, Small JA, Ominski KH. Effect of low and high forage diet on enteric and manure pack green house gas emissions from a feedlot. Canadian J Anim Sci. 2004; 84:445–53. https://doi.org/10.4141/A03-079
- Brown HA, Wagner-Riddle C, Thurtell GW. Nitrous oxide flux from a solid manure pile measured using a micrometeorological mass balance method. Nutri Cycl Agroecosys. 2002; 62:53–60. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1015172816650
- Das LK, Kundu SS, Kumar D, Datt C. Assessment of energy content of some tropical concentrate feeds of ruminants using model of National Research Council – 2001. Indian J Sci Technol. 2014; 7(12):204–12.
- Erickson G, Klopfenstein T. Nutritional and management methods to decrease nitrogen losses from beef feedlots. J Anim Sci. 2010; 88:172–80. PMid: 20081072. https://doi.org/10.2527/jas.2009-2358
- Gupta PK, Jha AK, Koul S, Sharma P, Pradhan V, Gupta V, Sharma C, Singh N. Methane and nitrous oxide emission from bovine manure management practices in India. Environ Pollut. 2007; 146:219–24. PMid: 16935398. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2006.04.039
- Harrison MT, McSweeney C, Tomkins N, Eckard RJ. Improving greenhouse gas emissions intensities of subtropical and tropical beef farming systems using Leucaenaleucocephala. Agric Sys. 2015; 136:138–46. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agsy.2015.03.003
- INCCA. India: Greenhouse Gas Emissions 2007. Indian Network for Climate Change Assessment. Ministry of Environment and Forests Government of India; 2010. p. 63.
- International Panel on Climate Change. IPCC. Revised 1996 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories, Reference Manual (Revised); v.3. 1996.
- Kulling DR, Dohme F, Menzi H, Sutter F, Lischer P, Kreuzer M. Methane emissions of differently fed dairy cows and corresponding methane and nitrogen emissions from their manure during storage. Environ Monit Assess. 2001; 79:129–50. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1020248700255
- Leytem AB, Dungan RS, Bjorneberg DL, Koehn AC. Emissions of ammonia, methane, carbon dioxide and nitrous oxide from dairy cattle housing and manure management systems. J Environ Qual. 2011; 40:1383–94. PMid: 21869500. https://doi.org/10.2134/jeq2009.0515
- Moller HB, Sommer SG, Ahring BK. Methane productivity of manure, straw and solid fractions of manure. Biomass and Bioenergy. 2004; 26:485–95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biombioe.2003.08.008
- Nampoothiri VM. Influence of diet on total methane and nitrous oxide emissions from buffalo calves. [Ph.D. Thesis]. Karnal, Haryana: NDRI Deemed University; 2016.
- NATCOM. India’s initial national communication to the United Nations framework convention on climate change. Ministry of Environment and Forests. Government of India; 2004.
- Nielfa A, Cano R, Polanco MF. Theoretical methane production generated by the co-digestion of organic fraction municipal solid waste and biological sludge. Biotechnology Reports. 2015; 5:14–21. PMid: 28435805 PMCid: PMC5374264.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.btre.2014.10.005
- Prusty S. Metabolizable protein and energy requirements for buffalo calves fed on low methane producing rations. [Ph.D. thesis]. Karnal (Haryana), India: NDRI Deemed University; 2015.
- Rahman S, Borhan S, Swanson K. Greenhouse gas emissions from beef cattle pen surfaces in North Dakota. Environ Tech. 2013; 34:1239–46. PMid: 24191457. https://doi.org/10.1080/09593330.2012.743598
- Rajvaidya KS. Supplementation of Leucaena Leucocepha leaves to improve the nutrient utilization and methane mitigation of straw based diet. [M.V.Sc thesis]. Karnal (Haryana), India: NDRI Deemed University; 2016.
- Sharma N. Metabolic profiling and nutrient utilization in transition cows fed DCAD based diet supplemented with oil and polyherbal preparation. [M.V.Sc thesis]. Karnal (Haryana), India: NDRI Deemed University; 2017.
- Snedecor GW, Cochran WG. Statistical methods, 8th ed. New Delhi: Oxford and IBH Publishing Company; 1989.
- Steinfeld H, Gerber P, Wassenaar T, Castel V, Rosales M, de Haan C. Livestock’s long shadow - Environmental issues and options. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations; Rome, Italy. 2006.
- U. S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). Global anthropogenic non-CO2 greenhouse gas emissions: 1990–2020. USEPA; Washington, D.C. 2006.
![](https://i-scholar.in/public/site/images/abstractview.png)
Abstract Views: 322
![](https://i-scholar.in/public/site/images/pdfview.png)
PDF Views: 0