Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.5187/jast.2021.e11

Entomological approach to the impact of ionophore-feed additives on greenhouse gas emissions from pasture land in cattle  

Takahashi, Junichi (School of Animal and Food Hygiene, Obihiro University of Agriculture and Veterinary Medicine)
Iwasa, Mitsuhiro (Laboratory of Entomology, Obihiro University of Agriculture and Veterinary Medicine)
Publication Information
Journal of Animal Science and Technology / v.63, no.1, 2021 , pp. 16-24 More about this Journal
Abstract
The suppressive effect of monensin as an ionophore-feed additive on enteric methane (CH4) emission and renewable methanogenesis were evaluated. To clarify the suppressive effect of monensin a respiratory trial with head cage was performed using Holstein-Friesian steers. Steers were offered high concentrate diets (80% concentrate and 20% hay) ad libitum with or without monensin, galacto-oligosaccharides (GOS) or L-cysteine. Steers that received monensin containing diet had significantly (p < 0.01) lower enteric CH4 emissions as well as those that received GOS containing diet (p < 0.05) compared to steers fed control diets. Thermophilic digesters at 55℃ that received manure from steers fed on monensin diets had a delay in the initial CH4 production. Monensin is a strong inhibitor of enteric methanogenesis, but has a negative impact on biogas energy production at short retention times. Effects of the activity of coprophagous insects on CH4 and nitrous oxide (N2O) emissions from cattle dung pats were assessed in anaerobic in vitro continuous gas quantification system modified to aerobic quantification device. The CH4 emission from dungs with adults of Caccobius jessoensis Harold (dung beetle) and the larvae of the fly Neomyia cornicina (Fabricius) were compared with that from control dung without insect. The cumulative CH4 emission rate from dung with dung insects decreased at 42.2% in dung beetles and 77.8% in fly larvae compared to that from control dung without insects. However, the cumulative N2O emission rate increased 23.4% in dung beetles even though it reduced 88.6% in fly larvae compared to dung without coprophagous insects. It was suggested that the antibacterial efficacy of ionophores supplemented as a growth promoter still continued even in the digested slurry, consequently, possible environmental contamination with the antibiotics might be active to put the negative impact to land ecosystem involved in greenhouse gas mitigation when the digested slurry was applied to the fields as liquid manure.
Keywords
Methane; Nitrous oxide; Monensin; Cattle dung; Pasture; Coprophagous insects;
Citations & Related Records
연도 인용수 순위
  • Reference
1 Mwenya B, Sar C, Pen B, Morikawa R, Takaura K, Kogawa S, et al. Effect of feed additives on ruminal methanogenesis and anaerobic fermentation of manure in cows and steers. Int Cong Ser 2006;1293:209-12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ics.2006.03.027   DOI
2 Papp L. Ecological and production biological data on the significance of flies breeding in cattle droppings. Acta Zool Budapest. Acad Sci Hung. 1971;17:91-105.
3 Wuebbles DJ, Hayhoe K. Atmospheric methane and global change. Earth-Sci Rev. 2002;57:177-210. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0012-8252(01)00062-9   DOI
4 Solomon S, Qin D, Manning M, Chen Z, Marquis M, Averyt KB, et al. Climate Change 2007: the physical science basis. Contribution of working group I to the fourth assessment report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press; 2007. p. 542.
5 Chynoweth DP. Environmental impact of biomethanogenesis. Environ Monit Assess. 1996;42:3-18. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00394039   DOI
6 Bergen WG, Bates DB. Ionophores: their effect on production efficiency and mode of action. J Anim Sci. 1984; 58:1465-83. https://doi.org/10.2527/jas1984.5861465x   DOI
7 Russell JB, Houlihan AJ. Ionophore resistance of ruminal bacteria and its potential impact on human health. FEMS Microbiol Rev. 2003;27:65-74. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0168-6445(03)00019-6   DOI
8 Holter P. Effect of dung-beetles (Aphodius spp.) and earthworms on the disappearance of cattle dung. Oikos. 1979;32:393-402. https://doi.org/10.2307/3544751   DOI
9 Yokoyama K, Miyauchi N. A preliminary study on cow dung decomposition by Onthophagus lenzii Harold (Coleoptera: Scarabaedidae): Physical breakdown of organic matter. Edaphologia (Japan). 1990;43:51-4.
10 Yokoyama K, Miyauchi N. Decomposition of organic matter in cow dung colonized by Onthophagus lenzii Harold (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae). Edaphologia (Japan). 1991;47:33-9.
11 Nakamura Y. Decomposition of organic materials and soil fauna in pasture. II. disapearance of cow dung. Pedobiologia (Jena). 1975;15:129-32.
12 Kazuhira Y, Hdeaki K, Takuro K, Toshiharu A. Nitrogen mineralization and microbial populations in cow dung, dung balls and underlying soil affected by paracoprid dung beetles. Soil Biol Biochem. 1991;23:649-53. https://doi.org/10.1016/0038-0717(91)90078-X   DOI
13 Brown J, Scholtz CH, Janeau JL, Grellier S, Podwojewski P. Dung beetles (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae) can improve soil hydrological properties. Appl Soil Ecol. 2010;46:9-16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apsoil.2010.05.010   DOI
14 Bornemissza GF, Williams CH. An effect of dung beetle activity on plant yield. Pedobiologia. 1970;10:1-7.
15 Bang HS, Lee JH, Kwon OS, Na YE, Jang YS, Kim WH. Effects of paracoprid dung beetles (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae) on the growth of pasture herbage and on the underlying soil. Appl Soil Ecol. 2005;29:165-71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apsoil.2004.11.001   DOI
16 Nichols E, Spector S, Louzada J, Larsen T, Amezquita S, Favila ME, et al. Ecological functions and ecosystem services provided by Scarabaeinae dung beetles. Biol Conserv. 2008;141:1461-74. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2008.04.011   DOI
17 Macqueen A, Beirne BP. Influence of some dipterous larvae on nitrogen loss from cattle dung. Environ Entomol. 1975;4:868-70. https://doi.org/10.1093/ee/4.6.868   DOI
18 Holter P. Sampling air from dung pats by silicone rubber diffusion chambers. Soil Biol Biochem. 1990;22:995-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/0038-0717(90)90143-N   DOI
19 Jarvis SC, Lovell RD, Panayides R. Patterns of methane emission from excreta of grazing animals. Soil Biol Biochem. 1995;27:1581-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/0038-0717(95)00092-S   DOI
20 Holter P. Methane emissions from Danish cattle dung pats in the field. Soil Biol Biochem. 1997;29:31-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0038-0717(96)00267-2   DOI
21 Gillard P. Coprophagous beetles in pasture ecosystems. J Aust Inst Agric Sci. 1967;33:30-4.
22 Yokoyama K, Kai H, Tsuchiyama H. Paracoprid dung beetles and gaseous loss of nitrogen from cow dung. Soil Biol Biochem. 1991;23:643-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/0038-0717(91)90077-W   DOI
23 Penttila A, Slade EM, Simojoki A, Riutta T, Minkkinen K, Roslin T. Quantifying beetle-mediated effects on gas fluxes from dung pats. PLoS One. 2013;8:1-7. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0071454   DOI
24 Iwasa M, Moki Y, Takahashi J. Effects of the activity of coprophagous insects on greenhouse gas emissions from cattle dung pats and changes in amounts of nitrogen, carbon, and energy. Environ Entomol. 2015;44:106-13. https://doi.org/10.1093/ee/nvu023   DOI
25 Mwenya B, Sar C, Santoso B, Kobayashi T, Morikawa R, Takaura K, et al. Comparing the effects of β1-4 galacto-oligosaccharides and L-cysteine to monensin on energy and nitrogen utilization in steers fed a very high concentrate diet. Anim Feed Sci Tech. 2005;118:19-30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anifeedsci.2004.10.014   DOI
26 Takahashi J, Chaudhry AS, Beneke RG, Young BA. An open-circuit hood system for gaseous exchange measurements in small ruminants. Small Rumin Res. 1999;32:31-6. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0921-4488(98)00163-1   DOI
27 Takahashi J, Mwenya B, Santoso B, Sar C, Umetsu K, Kishimoto T, et al. Mitigation of methane emission and energy recycling in animal agricultural systems. Asian-Australas J Anim Sci. 2005;18:1199-208. https://doi.org/10.5713/ajas.2005.1199   DOI
28 O'Brien M, Hashimoto T, Senda A, Nishida T, Takahashi J. The impact of Lactobacillus plantarum TUA1490L supernatant on in vitro rumen methanogenesis and fermentation. Anaerobe. 2013;22:137-40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anaerobe.2013.003   DOI
29 Van Nevel CJ, Demeyer DI. Effect of monensin on rumen metabolism in vitro. Appl Environ Microbiol. 1977;34:251-7.   DOI
30 Newbold CJ, Lassalas B, Jouany JP. The importance of methanogens associated with ciliate protozoa in ruminal methane production in vitro. Lett Appl Microbiol. 1995;21:230-4. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1472- 765X.1995.tb01048.x   DOI
31 Melchior EA, Hales KE, Lindholm-Perry AK, Freetly HC, JWells JE, Hemphill CN, et al. The effects of feeding monensin on rumen microbial communities and methanogenesis in bred heifers fed in a drylot. Livestock Sci. 2018;212:131-6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.livsci.2018.03.019   DOI
32 Bergen WG, Bates DB. Ionophores: their effect on production efficiency and mode of action. J Anim Sci. 1984;58:1465-83. https://doi.org/10.2527/jas1984.5861465x   DOI
33 Russell JB, Houlihan AJ. Ionophore resistance of ruminal bacteria and its potential impact on human health. FEMS Microbiol Rev. 2003;27:65-74. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0168-6445(03)00019-6   DOI
34 Pen B, Sar C, Mwenya B, Kuwaki K, Morikawa R, Takahashi J. Effects of Yucca schidigera and Quillaja saponaria extracts on in vitro ruminal fermentation and methane emission. Anim Feed Sci Technol. 2006;129:175-86. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anifeedsci.2006.01.002   DOI
35 Petersen SO, Sommer SG, Aaes O, Soegaard K. Ammonia losses from urine and dung of grazing cattle: effect of N intake. Atmos Environ. 1998;32:295-300. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1352-2310(97)00043-5   DOI
36 Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations [FAO]. FAOSTAT database [Internet]. 2016 [cited 2020 Aug 4]. http://www.fao.org/faostat/en/#data/EL
37 MacDiarmid BN, Watkin BR. The cattle dung patch: 2. effect of a dung patch on the chemical status of the soil, and ammonia nitrogen losses from the patch. Grass Forage Sci. 1972;27:43-8. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2494.1972.tb00684.x   DOI
38 Holter P. Concentration of oxygen, carbon dioxide and methane in the air within dung pats. Pedobiologia (Jena). 1991;35:381-6.
39 van Groenigen JW, Velthof GL, van der Bolt FJ, Vos A, Kuikman PJ. Seasonal variation in N2O emissions from urine patches: effects of urine concentration, soil compaction and dung. Plant Soil. 2005;273:15-27. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11104-004-6261-2   DOI
40 Saggar S, Bolan NS, Bhandral R, Hedley CB, Luo J. A review of emissions of methane, ammonia, and nitrous oxide from animal excreta deposition and farm effluent application in grazed pastures. N Z J Agric Res. 2004;47:513-44. https://doi.org/10.1080/00288233.2004.9513618   DOI
41 Bellarby J, Tirado R, Leip A, Weiss F, Lesschen JP, Smith P. Livestock greenhouse gas emissions and mitigation potential in Europe. Glob Chang Biol. 2013;19:3-18. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2486.2012.02786.x   DOI
42 Masse DI, Croteau F, Patni NK, Masse L. Methane emission from dairy cow and swine manure slurries stored at 10℃ and 15℃. In: Takahashi J, Young BA, editors. Greenhouse gases and animal agriculture. Amsterdam, Nederland: Elsevier; 2002. p. 307-11.
43 Shiraishi M, Wakimoto N, Takimoto E, Kobayashi H, Osada T. Measurement and regulation of environmentally hazardous gas emissions from beef cattle manure composting. Int Congr Ser. 2006;1293:303-6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ics.2006.02.039   DOI
44 Kreuzer M, Dohme F, Kulling DR, Sutter F, Lischer P, Menzi H. Animal and manure-derived methane emissions as affected by dietary fatty acids and manure storage system. In: Takahashi J, Young BA, editors. Greenhouse gases and animal agriculture. Amsterdam, Nederland: Elsevier; 2002. p. 145-9.
45 Kreuzer M, Hindrichsen IK. Methane mitigation in ruminants by dietary means: the role of their methane emission from manure. Int Cong Ser. 2006;1293:199-208. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ics.2006.01.015   DOI