Comparison of different residual carbon dioxide formulations as a means to select feed−efficient dairy cows

IF 4 2区 农林科学 Q1 AGRICULTURE, DAIRY & ANIMAL SCIENCE
A. Chegini, E. Negussie, A.R. Bayat, T. Stefański, M.H. Lidauer
{"title":"Comparison of different residual carbon dioxide formulations as a means to select feed−efficient dairy cows","authors":"A. Chegini,&nbsp;E. Negussie,&nbsp;A.R. Bayat,&nbsp;T. Stefański,&nbsp;M.H. Lidauer","doi":"10.1016/j.animal.2025.101450","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Improving feed utilisation efficiency and environmental sustainability by the selection of superior animals are amongst the widely studied topics during the last decade. For the evaluation of individual’s feed utilisation efficiency, residual feed intake (<strong>RFI</strong>) has become the common metric and is defined as the difference between actual and expected feed intake. Lately, a new metric for carbon dioxide (<strong>CO<sub>2</sub></strong>) called residual CO<sub>2</sub> (<strong>RCO<sub>2</sub></strong>) is being developed and similarly defined as RFI. However, the partial regression coefficients for expected feed intake obtained by regressing DM intake (<strong>DMI</strong>) on energy sinks may not be biologically plausible and this could also be the case for CO<sub>2</sub>. The objective of this study was to compare RCO<sub>2</sub> and RFI formulations calculated using different partial regression coefficients of energy sinks obtained either from regression on energy sinks or from different energy requirement formulations used nationally or internationally. The correlations between these different formulations as well as production, efficiency, and BW measurements were also calculated. Repeated daily measurements of CO<sub>2</sub> production (n = 51 977) using two GreenFeed Emissions Monitoring system and records of DMI from 83 primiparous Nordic Red dairy cows were used. Three types of RCO<sub>2</sub> and RFI formulations were calculated. The first was by fitting a multiple linear regression (RCO<sub>2MLR</sub> and RFI<sub>MLR</sub>) whereas the second and third were based on the Finnish energy requirement formulation (RCO<sub>2FIN</sub> and RFI<sub>FIN</sub>) and National Research Council 2021 (NRC, 2021; RCO<sub>2NRC</sub> and RFI<sub>NRC</sub>), respectively. Correlations between different RCO<sub>2</sub> and RFI formulations were lower (from 0.37 to 0.44) than the correlation between CO<sub>2</sub> production and DMI (0.58) implying that selection based on different RFI formulations may lead to selection of different sets of animals. Selection based on RCO<sub>2</sub> formulations would lead to improvement in energy conversion efficiency (<strong>ECE</strong>) albeit with a slightly lower rate compared to selection based on RFI formulations. However, the decline in the trend of CO<sub>2</sub> production would be enhanced when selection is based on RCO<sub>2</sub> rather than RFI. Of all the residual formulations studied in Finnish dairy cows, the use of RCO<sub>2FIN</sub> is preferred because it had higher favourable correlations with ECE, CO<sub>2</sub> and methane emission per unit of energy-corrected milk. Due to its high correlation with DMI, the conventional RFI could favour cows with lower DMI, regardless of their milk production. More data are needed to further verify the correlation between CO<sub>2</sub> production and feed intake.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":50789,"journal":{"name":"Animal","volume":"19 4","pages":"Article 101450"},"PeriodicalIF":4.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Animal","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1751731125000333","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"AGRICULTURE, DAIRY & ANIMAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Improving feed utilisation efficiency and environmental sustainability by the selection of superior animals are amongst the widely studied topics during the last decade. For the evaluation of individual’s feed utilisation efficiency, residual feed intake (RFI) has become the common metric and is defined as the difference between actual and expected feed intake. Lately, a new metric for carbon dioxide (CO2) called residual CO2 (RCO2) is being developed and similarly defined as RFI. However, the partial regression coefficients for expected feed intake obtained by regressing DM intake (DMI) on energy sinks may not be biologically plausible and this could also be the case for CO2. The objective of this study was to compare RCO2 and RFI formulations calculated using different partial regression coefficients of energy sinks obtained either from regression on energy sinks or from different energy requirement formulations used nationally or internationally. The correlations between these different formulations as well as production, efficiency, and BW measurements were also calculated. Repeated daily measurements of CO2 production (n = 51 977) using two GreenFeed Emissions Monitoring system and records of DMI from 83 primiparous Nordic Red dairy cows were used. Three types of RCO2 and RFI formulations were calculated. The first was by fitting a multiple linear regression (RCO2MLR and RFIMLR) whereas the second and third were based on the Finnish energy requirement formulation (RCO2FIN and RFIFIN) and National Research Council 2021 (NRC, 2021; RCO2NRC and RFINRC), respectively. Correlations between different RCO2 and RFI formulations were lower (from 0.37 to 0.44) than the correlation between CO2 production and DMI (0.58) implying that selection based on different RFI formulations may lead to selection of different sets of animals. Selection based on RCO2 formulations would lead to improvement in energy conversion efficiency (ECE) albeit with a slightly lower rate compared to selection based on RFI formulations. However, the decline in the trend of CO2 production would be enhanced when selection is based on RCO2 rather than RFI. Of all the residual formulations studied in Finnish dairy cows, the use of RCO2FIN is preferred because it had higher favourable correlations with ECE, CO2 and methane emission per unit of energy-corrected milk. Due to its high correlation with DMI, the conventional RFI could favour cows with lower DMI, regardless of their milk production. More data are needed to further verify the correlation between CO2 production and feed intake.
不同残留二氧化碳配方的比较,以选择饲料效率高的奶牛。
在过去十年中,通过选择优质动物来提高饲料利用效率和环境可持续性是广泛研究的主题之一。为了评价个体的饲料利用效率,剩余采食量(RFI)已成为常用的度量标准,它被定义为实际采食量与预期采食量之间的差值。最近,正在开发一种新的二氧化碳(CO2)度量标准,称为残余二氧化碳(RCO2),其定义与RFI类似。然而,通过在能量汇上回归DM采食量(DMI)获得的预期采食量的部分回归系数在生物学上可能不合理,对于CO2也是如此。本研究的目的是比较RCO2和RFI的计算公式,这些公式是使用不同的能量汇部分回归系数计算出来的,这些系数要么来自能量汇回归,要么来自国内或国际上使用的不同的能量需求公式。还计算了这些不同配方以及产量、效率和体重测量之间的相关性。使用两个绿色饲料排放监测系统重复测量每日二氧化碳产量(n = 51 977),并使用83头北欧红奶牛的DMI记录。计算了三种类型的RCO2和RFI配方。第一个是通过拟合多元线性回归(RCO2MLR和rfiimlr),而第二个和第三个是基于芬兰能源需求公式(RCO2FIN和RFIFIN)和国家研究委员会2021 (NRC, 2021;RCO2NRC和RFINRC)。不同RCO2与RFI配方之间的相关性(从0.37到0.44)低于CO2产量与DMI之间的相关性(0.58),这意味着基于不同RFI配方的选择可能导致不同动物组的选择。基于RCO2配方的选择将导致能量转换效率(ECE)的提高,尽管与基于RFI配方的选择相比,其比率略低。然而,当选择基于RCO2而不是RFI时,CO2产量趋势的下降将会增强。在芬兰奶牛研究的所有剩余配方中,RCO2FIN的使用是首选,因为它与单位能量校正牛奶的ECE、二氧化碳和甲烷排放量具有更高的有利相关性。由于其与DMI的高度相关,传统的RFI对DMI较低的奶牛有利,无论其产奶量如何。需要更多的数据来进一步验证CO2产量与采食量之间的相关性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Animal
Animal 农林科学-奶制品与动物科学
CiteScore
7.50
自引率
2.80%
发文量
246
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: Editorial board animal attracts the best research in animal biology and animal systems from across the spectrum of the agricultural, biomedical, and environmental sciences. It is the central element in an exciting collaboration between the British Society of Animal Science (BSAS), Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique (INRA) and the European Federation of Animal Science (EAAP) and represents a merging of three scientific journals: Animal Science; Animal Research; Reproduction, Nutrition, Development. animal publishes original cutting-edge research, ''hot'' topics and horizon-scanning reviews on animal-related aspects of the life sciences at the molecular, cellular, organ, whole animal and production system levels. The main subject areas include: breeding and genetics; nutrition; physiology and functional biology of systems; behaviour, health and welfare; farming systems, environmental impact and climate change; product quality, human health and well-being. Animal models and papers dealing with the integration of research between these topics and their impact on the environment and people are particularly welcome.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信