Improved prediction by enteric methane emission models in ruminant production systems by integrating climate classification

Autores
Akinropo, Tobi; Ricci, Patricia; Faverin, Claudia; Ciganda, Veronica; Muñoz, Camila; Ungerfeld, Emilio; Urrutia, Natalie; Rodriguez, Romina; Morgavi, Diego; Eugène, Maguy
Año de publicación
2025
Idioma
inglés
Tipo de recurso
artículo
Estado
versión publicada
Descripción
Several mathematical models predict enteric methane (CH4) production (g/d) from ruminants. These models were developed from data originated from different regions and production systems and are not always applicable elsewhere. This study evaluated the performance of selected existing models for predicting enteric CH4 emissions of ruminants raised in diverse production systems in Argentina, Brazil, Chile and Uruguay. Climate was classified using the Köppen climate classification, while diets were classified by composition, such as high- or low-NDF, ether extract (EE), starch content and NDF digestibility. These classifications were applied to the diets fed to cattle (dairy, beef) and sheep. Models were evaluated and ranked by the lowest root mean square prediction error (RMSPE) and the ratio of RMSPE to SD of observed values (RSR). Models from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and those developed with Latin American data were used as reference. In temperate, no dry season, hot summer climates, all models performed poorly (RSR > 1) for dairy cattle. By diet composition, four models performed well (RSR < 1) for high-NDF diets. For beef cattle, the model by Yan et al. (2009) developed for forage-fed beef cattle performed best (RSR = 0.85) as all diets had high NDF. For sheep, the model by Congio et al. (2022a), which incorporates DM intake (DMI) and feeding level, performed best (RSR = 0.63); however, for highNDF diets, the model from Belanche et al. (2023) performed best. In temperate, no dry season, warm summer (Cfb) climates, models by Mills et al. (2003), which included DMI, performed best for dairy cattle (RSR = 0.78), including when assessed by diet composition. For low-EE diets, CH4 production (g/d) was best predicted using models with NDF intake (NDFI) and EE. For beef cattle, van Lingen et al. (2019), which included DMI, had the lowest RSR (0.91). By diet composition, models integrating fatty acids (FA), DMI, and NDFI performed best for low-NDF diets, while FA- and DMI-based models were most accurate for high-NDF diets. For sheep in Cfb climate, all models performed poorly. In tropical savanna, dry winter climates, all models performed poorly for beef cattle; similarly, poor performance was obtained when assessed by diet compositions. In conclusion, to improve CH4 emission prediction, model development should consider the potential effect of climate zones, together with ruminant category, feed intake, dietary composition (including potential of mitigation strategies), and feed digestibility parameters.
EEA Balcarce
Fil: Akinropo, Tobi. Institut National de Recherche pour l’Agriculture, l’Alimentation et l’Environnement (INRAE). Unité Mixte de Recherche sur les Herbivores; Francia
Fil: Akinropo, Tobi. Université Clermont; Francia
Fil: Akinropo, Tobi. VetAgroSup; Francia
Fil: Ricci, Patricia. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Estación Experimental Agropecuaria Balcarce; Argentina
Fil: Faverin, Claudia. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Estación Experimental Agropecuaria Balcarce; Argentina
Fil: Ciganda, Veronica. Instituto Nacional de Investigación Agropecuaria (INIA). Estación Experimental La Estanzuela; Uruguay
Fil: Muñoz, Camila. Instituto de Investigaciones Agropecuarias (INIA). Centro Regional de Investigación Remehue; Chile
Fil: Ungerfeld, Emilio. Instituto de Investigaciones Agropecuarias (INIA). Centro Regional de Investigación Carillanca; Chile
Fil: Urrutia, Natalie. Instituto de Investigaciones Agropecuarias (INIA). Centro Regional de Investigación Remehue; Chile
Fil: Rodriguez, Romina. Instituto de Investigaciones Agropecuarias (INIA). Centro Regional de Investigación Remehue; Chile
Fil: Morgavi, Diego. Institut National de Recherche pour l’Agriculture, l’Alimentation et l’Environnement (INRAE). Unité Mixte de Recherche sur les Herbivores; Francia
Fil: Morgavi, Diego. Université Clermont; Francia
Fil: Morgavi, Diego. VetAgroSup; Francia
Fil: Eugène, Maguy. Institut National de Recherche pour l’Agriculture, l’Alimentation et l’Environnement (INRAE). Unité Mixte de Recherche sur les Herbivores; Francia
Fil: Eugène, Maguy. Université Clermont; Francia
Fil: Eugène, Maguy. VetAgroSup; Francia
Fil: Eugène, Maguy. Institut National de Recherche pour l’Agriculture, l’Alimentation et l’Environnement (INRAE). Centre Antilles-Guyane. Unité de recherches en Agroécologie, Génétique et Systèmes d’Élevage Tropicaux (ASSET); Francia
Fuente
Animal 19 (11) : 101665. (November 2025)
Materia
Metano Entérico
Emisión de Metano
Rumiante
Clima
Sistemas de Producción
Enteric Methane
Methane Emission
Ruminants
Climate
Production Systems
Nivel de accesibilidad
acceso abierto
Condiciones de uso
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/
Repositorio
INTA Digital (INTA)
Institución
Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria
OAI Identificador
oai:localhost:20.500.12123/25010

id INTADig_460919cd29949d1cc0baddfc9f6a6a0d
oai_identifier_str oai:localhost:20.500.12123/25010
network_acronym_str INTADig
repository_id_str l
network_name_str INTA Digital (INTA)
spelling Improved prediction by enteric methane emission models in ruminant production systems by integrating climate classificationAkinropo, TobiRicci, PatriciaFaverin, ClaudiaCiganda, VeronicaMuñoz, CamilaUngerfeld, EmilioUrrutia, NatalieRodriguez, RominaMorgavi, DiegoEugène, MaguyMetano EntéricoEmisión de MetanoRumianteClimaSistemas de ProducciónEnteric MethaneMethane EmissionRuminantsClimateProduction SystemsSeveral mathematical models predict enteric methane (CH4) production (g/d) from ruminants. These models were developed from data originated from different regions and production systems and are not always applicable elsewhere. This study evaluated the performance of selected existing models for predicting enteric CH4 emissions of ruminants raised in diverse production systems in Argentina, Brazil, Chile and Uruguay. Climate was classified using the Köppen climate classification, while diets were classified by composition, such as high- or low-NDF, ether extract (EE), starch content and NDF digestibility. These classifications were applied to the diets fed to cattle (dairy, beef) and sheep. Models were evaluated and ranked by the lowest root mean square prediction error (RMSPE) and the ratio of RMSPE to SD of observed values (RSR). Models from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and those developed with Latin American data were used as reference. In temperate, no dry season, hot summer climates, all models performed poorly (RSR > 1) for dairy cattle. By diet composition, four models performed well (RSR < 1) for high-NDF diets. For beef cattle, the model by Yan et al. (2009) developed for forage-fed beef cattle performed best (RSR = 0.85) as all diets had high NDF. For sheep, the model by Congio et al. (2022a), which incorporates DM intake (DMI) and feeding level, performed best (RSR = 0.63); however, for highNDF diets, the model from Belanche et al. (2023) performed best. In temperate, no dry season, warm summer (Cfb) climates, models by Mills et al. (2003), which included DMI, performed best for dairy cattle (RSR = 0.78), including when assessed by diet composition. For low-EE diets, CH4 production (g/d) was best predicted using models with NDF intake (NDFI) and EE. For beef cattle, van Lingen et al. (2019), which included DMI, had the lowest RSR (0.91). By diet composition, models integrating fatty acids (FA), DMI, and NDFI performed best for low-NDF diets, while FA- and DMI-based models were most accurate for high-NDF diets. For sheep in Cfb climate, all models performed poorly. In tropical savanna, dry winter climates, all models performed poorly for beef cattle; similarly, poor performance was obtained when assessed by diet compositions. In conclusion, to improve CH4 emission prediction, model development should consider the potential effect of climate zones, together with ruminant category, feed intake, dietary composition (including potential of mitigation strategies), and feed digestibility parameters.EEA BalcarceFil: Akinropo, Tobi. Institut National de Recherche pour l’Agriculture, l’Alimentation et l’Environnement (INRAE). Unité Mixte de Recherche sur les Herbivores; FranciaFil: Akinropo, Tobi. Université Clermont; FranciaFil: Akinropo, Tobi. VetAgroSup; FranciaFil: Ricci, Patricia. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Estación Experimental Agropecuaria Balcarce; ArgentinaFil: Faverin, Claudia. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Estación Experimental Agropecuaria Balcarce; ArgentinaFil: Ciganda, Veronica. Instituto Nacional de Investigación Agropecuaria (INIA). Estación Experimental La Estanzuela; UruguayFil: Muñoz, Camila. Instituto de Investigaciones Agropecuarias (INIA). Centro Regional de Investigación Remehue; ChileFil: Ungerfeld, Emilio. Instituto de Investigaciones Agropecuarias (INIA). Centro Regional de Investigación Carillanca; ChileFil: Urrutia, Natalie. Instituto de Investigaciones Agropecuarias (INIA). Centro Regional de Investigación Remehue; ChileFil: Rodriguez, Romina. Instituto de Investigaciones Agropecuarias (INIA). Centro Regional de Investigación Remehue; ChileFil: Morgavi, Diego. Institut National de Recherche pour l’Agriculture, l’Alimentation et l’Environnement (INRAE). Unité Mixte de Recherche sur les Herbivores; FranciaFil: Morgavi, Diego. Université Clermont; FranciaFil: Morgavi, Diego. VetAgroSup; FranciaFil: Eugène, Maguy. Institut National de Recherche pour l’Agriculture, l’Alimentation et l’Environnement (INRAE). Unité Mixte de Recherche sur les Herbivores; FranciaFil: Eugène, Maguy. Université Clermont; FranciaFil: Eugène, Maguy. VetAgroSup; FranciaFil: Eugène, Maguy. Institut National de Recherche pour l’Agriculture, l’Alimentation et l’Environnement (INRAE). Centre Antilles-Guyane. Unité de recherches en Agroécologie, Génétique et Systèmes d’Élevage Tropicaux (ASSET); FranciaElsevier2026-01-20T17:15:40Z2026-01-20T17:15:40Z2025-11info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionhttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501info:ar-repo/semantics/articuloapplication/pdfhttp://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12123/25010https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S17517311250024841751-7311https://doi.org/10.1016/j.animal.2025.101665Animal 19 (11) : 101665. (November 2025)reponame:INTA Digital (INTA)instname:Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuariaenginfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccesshttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0)2026-02-26T11:47:41Zoai:localhost:20.500.12123/25010instacron:INTAInstitucionalhttp://repositorio.inta.gob.ar/Organismo científico-tecnológicoNo correspondehttp://repositorio.inta.gob.ar/oai/requesttripaldi.nicolas@inta.gob.arArgentinaNo correspondeNo correspondeNo correspondeopendoar:l2026-02-26 11:47:41.462INTA Digital (INTA) - Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuariafalse
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Improved prediction by enteric methane emission models in ruminant production systems by integrating climate classification
title Improved prediction by enteric methane emission models in ruminant production systems by integrating climate classification
spellingShingle Improved prediction by enteric methane emission models in ruminant production systems by integrating climate classification
Akinropo, Tobi
Metano Entérico
Emisión de Metano
Rumiante
Clima
Sistemas de Producción
Enteric Methane
Methane Emission
Ruminants
Climate
Production Systems
title_short Improved prediction by enteric methane emission models in ruminant production systems by integrating climate classification
title_full Improved prediction by enteric methane emission models in ruminant production systems by integrating climate classification
title_fullStr Improved prediction by enteric methane emission models in ruminant production systems by integrating climate classification
title_full_unstemmed Improved prediction by enteric methane emission models in ruminant production systems by integrating climate classification
title_sort Improved prediction by enteric methane emission models in ruminant production systems by integrating climate classification
dc.creator.none.fl_str_mv Akinropo, Tobi
Ricci, Patricia
Faverin, Claudia
Ciganda, Veronica
Muñoz, Camila
Ungerfeld, Emilio
Urrutia, Natalie
Rodriguez, Romina
Morgavi, Diego
Eugène, Maguy
author Akinropo, Tobi
author_facet Akinropo, Tobi
Ricci, Patricia
Faverin, Claudia
Ciganda, Veronica
Muñoz, Camila
Ungerfeld, Emilio
Urrutia, Natalie
Rodriguez, Romina
Morgavi, Diego
Eugène, Maguy
author_role author
author2 Ricci, Patricia
Faverin, Claudia
Ciganda, Veronica
Muñoz, Camila
Ungerfeld, Emilio
Urrutia, Natalie
Rodriguez, Romina
Morgavi, Diego
Eugène, Maguy
author2_role author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
dc.subject.none.fl_str_mv Metano Entérico
Emisión de Metano
Rumiante
Clima
Sistemas de Producción
Enteric Methane
Methane Emission
Ruminants
Climate
Production Systems
topic Metano Entérico
Emisión de Metano
Rumiante
Clima
Sistemas de Producción
Enteric Methane
Methane Emission
Ruminants
Climate
Production Systems
dc.description.none.fl_txt_mv Several mathematical models predict enteric methane (CH4) production (g/d) from ruminants. These models were developed from data originated from different regions and production systems and are not always applicable elsewhere. This study evaluated the performance of selected existing models for predicting enteric CH4 emissions of ruminants raised in diverse production systems in Argentina, Brazil, Chile and Uruguay. Climate was classified using the Köppen climate classification, while diets were classified by composition, such as high- or low-NDF, ether extract (EE), starch content and NDF digestibility. These classifications were applied to the diets fed to cattle (dairy, beef) and sheep. Models were evaluated and ranked by the lowest root mean square prediction error (RMSPE) and the ratio of RMSPE to SD of observed values (RSR). Models from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and those developed with Latin American data were used as reference. In temperate, no dry season, hot summer climates, all models performed poorly (RSR > 1) for dairy cattle. By diet composition, four models performed well (RSR < 1) for high-NDF diets. For beef cattle, the model by Yan et al. (2009) developed for forage-fed beef cattle performed best (RSR = 0.85) as all diets had high NDF. For sheep, the model by Congio et al. (2022a), which incorporates DM intake (DMI) and feeding level, performed best (RSR = 0.63); however, for highNDF diets, the model from Belanche et al. (2023) performed best. In temperate, no dry season, warm summer (Cfb) climates, models by Mills et al. (2003), which included DMI, performed best for dairy cattle (RSR = 0.78), including when assessed by diet composition. For low-EE diets, CH4 production (g/d) was best predicted using models with NDF intake (NDFI) and EE. For beef cattle, van Lingen et al. (2019), which included DMI, had the lowest RSR (0.91). By diet composition, models integrating fatty acids (FA), DMI, and NDFI performed best for low-NDF diets, while FA- and DMI-based models were most accurate for high-NDF diets. For sheep in Cfb climate, all models performed poorly. In tropical savanna, dry winter climates, all models performed poorly for beef cattle; similarly, poor performance was obtained when assessed by diet compositions. In conclusion, to improve CH4 emission prediction, model development should consider the potential effect of climate zones, together with ruminant category, feed intake, dietary composition (including potential of mitigation strategies), and feed digestibility parameters.
EEA Balcarce
Fil: Akinropo, Tobi. Institut National de Recherche pour l’Agriculture, l’Alimentation et l’Environnement (INRAE). Unité Mixte de Recherche sur les Herbivores; Francia
Fil: Akinropo, Tobi. Université Clermont; Francia
Fil: Akinropo, Tobi. VetAgroSup; Francia
Fil: Ricci, Patricia. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Estación Experimental Agropecuaria Balcarce; Argentina
Fil: Faverin, Claudia. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Estación Experimental Agropecuaria Balcarce; Argentina
Fil: Ciganda, Veronica. Instituto Nacional de Investigación Agropecuaria (INIA). Estación Experimental La Estanzuela; Uruguay
Fil: Muñoz, Camila. Instituto de Investigaciones Agropecuarias (INIA). Centro Regional de Investigación Remehue; Chile
Fil: Ungerfeld, Emilio. Instituto de Investigaciones Agropecuarias (INIA). Centro Regional de Investigación Carillanca; Chile
Fil: Urrutia, Natalie. Instituto de Investigaciones Agropecuarias (INIA). Centro Regional de Investigación Remehue; Chile
Fil: Rodriguez, Romina. Instituto de Investigaciones Agropecuarias (INIA). Centro Regional de Investigación Remehue; Chile
Fil: Morgavi, Diego. Institut National de Recherche pour l’Agriculture, l’Alimentation et l’Environnement (INRAE). Unité Mixte de Recherche sur les Herbivores; Francia
Fil: Morgavi, Diego. Université Clermont; Francia
Fil: Morgavi, Diego. VetAgroSup; Francia
Fil: Eugène, Maguy. Institut National de Recherche pour l’Agriculture, l’Alimentation et l’Environnement (INRAE). Unité Mixte de Recherche sur les Herbivores; Francia
Fil: Eugène, Maguy. Université Clermont; Francia
Fil: Eugène, Maguy. VetAgroSup; Francia
Fil: Eugène, Maguy. Institut National de Recherche pour l’Agriculture, l’Alimentation et l’Environnement (INRAE). Centre Antilles-Guyane. Unité de recherches en Agroécologie, Génétique et Systèmes d’Élevage Tropicaux (ASSET); Francia
description Several mathematical models predict enteric methane (CH4) production (g/d) from ruminants. These models were developed from data originated from different regions and production systems and are not always applicable elsewhere. This study evaluated the performance of selected existing models for predicting enteric CH4 emissions of ruminants raised in diverse production systems in Argentina, Brazil, Chile and Uruguay. Climate was classified using the Köppen climate classification, while diets were classified by composition, such as high- or low-NDF, ether extract (EE), starch content and NDF digestibility. These classifications were applied to the diets fed to cattle (dairy, beef) and sheep. Models were evaluated and ranked by the lowest root mean square prediction error (RMSPE) and the ratio of RMSPE to SD of observed values (RSR). Models from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and those developed with Latin American data were used as reference. In temperate, no dry season, hot summer climates, all models performed poorly (RSR > 1) for dairy cattle. By diet composition, four models performed well (RSR < 1) for high-NDF diets. For beef cattle, the model by Yan et al. (2009) developed for forage-fed beef cattle performed best (RSR = 0.85) as all diets had high NDF. For sheep, the model by Congio et al. (2022a), which incorporates DM intake (DMI) and feeding level, performed best (RSR = 0.63); however, for highNDF diets, the model from Belanche et al. (2023) performed best. In temperate, no dry season, warm summer (Cfb) climates, models by Mills et al. (2003), which included DMI, performed best for dairy cattle (RSR = 0.78), including when assessed by diet composition. For low-EE diets, CH4 production (g/d) was best predicted using models with NDF intake (NDFI) and EE. For beef cattle, van Lingen et al. (2019), which included DMI, had the lowest RSR (0.91). By diet composition, models integrating fatty acids (FA), DMI, and NDFI performed best for low-NDF diets, while FA- and DMI-based models were most accurate for high-NDF diets. For sheep in Cfb climate, all models performed poorly. In tropical savanna, dry winter climates, all models performed poorly for beef cattle; similarly, poor performance was obtained when assessed by diet compositions. In conclusion, to improve CH4 emission prediction, model development should consider the potential effect of climate zones, together with ruminant category, feed intake, dietary composition (including potential of mitigation strategies), and feed digestibility parameters.
publishDate 2025
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2025-11
2026-01-20T17:15:40Z
2026-01-20T17:15:40Z
dc.type.none.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501
info:ar-repo/semantics/articulo
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.none.fl_str_mv http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12123/25010
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1751731125002484
1751-7311
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.animal.2025.101665
url http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12123/25010
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1751731125002484
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.animal.2025.101665
identifier_str_mv 1751-7311
dc.language.none.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.rights.none.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/
Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0)
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
rights_invalid_str_mv http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/
Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0)
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Elsevier
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Elsevier
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Animal 19 (11) : 101665. (November 2025)
reponame:INTA Digital (INTA)
instname:Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria
reponame_str INTA Digital (INTA)
collection INTA Digital (INTA)
instname_str Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria
repository.name.fl_str_mv INTA Digital (INTA) - Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria
repository.mail.fl_str_mv tripaldi.nicolas@inta.gob.ar
_version_ 1858207933362339840
score 13.176822