Methane production and estimation from livestock husbandry: A mechanistic understanding and emerging mitigation options

doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.136135

Science of The Total Environment

Volume 709, 20 March 2020, 136135

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.136135 Get rights and content

Highlights

•
Dietary management is the immediate CH₄ emission mitigation option at farm level
•
Breeding and livestock management is effective for long run
•
Simulation based CH₄ emissions modeling is efficient and yield better result
•
Mixed crop-livestock farming serve as an important CH₄ mitigation measures
•
Cap-and-Trade programme, Green Live Stock Fund require more policy support to mitigate CH₄ from livestock sector

Abstract

Globally, livestock is an important contributor to methane (CH₄) emissions. This paper reviewed the various CH₄ measurement and estimation techniques and mitigation approaches for the livestock sector. Two approaches for enteric livestock CH₄ emission estimation are the top-down and bottom-up. The combination of both could further improve our understanding of enteric CH₄ emission and possible mitigation measures. We discuss three mitigation approaches: reducing emissions, avoiding emissions, and enhancing the removal of emissions from livestock. Dietary management, livestock management, and breeding management are viable reducing emissions pathways. Dietary manipulation is easily applicable and can bring an immediate response. Economic incentive policies can help the livestock farmers to opt for diet, breeding, and livestock management mitigation approaches. Carbon pricing creates a better option to achieve reduction targets in a given period. A combination of carbon pricing, feeding management, breeding management, and livestock management is more feasible and sustainable CH₄ emissions mitigation strategy rather than a single approach.

Graphical abstract

Introduction

The ruminant husbandry or livestock sector is experiencing rapid changes structurally and functionally with the increasing rate of human population and demands for livestock products. Globally, the per capita consumption of livestock products has become doubled in the past few decades (Herrero et al., 2016). In the last decades, milk supply and demand has increased by 26% and 2.4% annually and will rise by 25% in the coming years (Matthews et al., 2019). Livestock contributed about $1.4 trillion to the global asset (Thronton, 2010), equal to 50% of the total economy of the agricultural sector (Herrero et al., 2016).

Livestock contributed about 7.1 gigatonnes CO₂e y⁻¹ to the global anthropogenic GHGs emissions, equivalent to 14.5% of total GHGs emissions (Gerber et al., 2013). Approximately 44% of global livestock emissions occur in the form of methane (CH₄) (Matthews et al., 2019). China, India, Brazil, USA, and Pakistan are the top five livestock farming countries, and together, they contribute 46% of global livestock-mediated anthropogenic GHGs emissions (FAO, 2012). The periodic trend of livestock CH₄ emissions from 1961 to 2017 for the top five emitters is shown in Fig. 1. The enteric CH₄ emission showed increasing trends for all the countries but started declining in the USA after 1975, and in China after 1980. The CH₄ emission from the manure management also showed an increasing trend for all the countries except the USA. The global distribution of total GHGs (N₂O and CH₄) emissions from livestock is represented in. Fig. S1.

CH₄ is the second most important anthropogenic GHGs in terms of global warming potential (GWP) with an estimated increase of 0.3% in 2016 to a total of 9.2 Gt CO₂ eq (Olivier et al., 2017). Normally, CH₄ is produced by the methanogens, in the rumens of an animal during the fermentation of feeds (Swamy and Bhattacharya, 2006; Kumari et al., 2014; McAuliffe et al., 2015). CH₄ is also produced and emitted from the animal manures (McAuliffe et al., 2015). These two processes contributed about 100 and 9.9 Tg y⁻¹ to global CH₄ emissions, respectively (FAOSTAT, 2019). The enteric fermentation process contributes >90% CH₄ emissions from livestock (FAO, 2012; Singh et al., 2012; Havlik et al., 2011).

The scientific community is confronted with the challenge of developing sustainable technical approaches to reduce CH₄ emissions without compromising the demand for livestock products and its economic benefits. It will require a complete understanding of the enteric CH₄ production, emission, measurement techniques, and mitigation measures. We reviewed the available literature related to various CH₄ measurement techniques and mitigation approaches for the livestock sector.

Section snippets

Ruminants and CH₄ production

CH₄ is mainly produced in the rumen (multi-chambered stomach) of the ruminants (cattle, deer, camels) during the microbial fermentation of the animal feeds, particularly complex carbohydrate, i.e. polysaccharides (McSweeney and Mackie, 2012; Albrao et al., 2014). The ruminant stomach is composed of four pregastric fermentation chambers (rumen, reticulum, omasum, and abomasum). Various portions of the digestive tract, molecule received, enzymes released, and molecule produced are mentioned in

Microbial ruminant ecosystem and microbial diversity

Microbial ruminant ecosystem (MRE) has an anaerobic environment with high microbial population density (Lozano et al., 2017). Environmental conditions such as pH (5.5–7), temperature (38–42 °C), redox potential (250 to 450 mV) controlled by buffer present in saliva of ruminant and osmolarity (260–340 mOsm) are well suited to the growth of different microbial population to digest the plant materials in livestock rumen (Valente et al., 2016). The composition of the microbial populations

Methane emissions estimation techniques

To reduce GHGs emissions from livestock, reliable CH₄ estimation and mitigation techniques are required (Hyland et al., 2016). GHGs emissions estimation can be done either through top-down or bottom-up approaches (Table 1). The bottom-up approach is based on emission inventories, while the top-down approach is based on inverse modeling (Schneising et al., 2014). Inverse modeling techniques are based on independent information from atmospheric measurements, i.e. satellite data with the

CH₄ emissions mitigation strategies

The opportunities of CH₄ emissions mitigation from livestock fall into three categories (i) reducing emission that involves the detailed understanding of their effect on factors such as production costs, competitiveness and risks incurred by stakeholders along the supply chain (Gerber et al., 2013), (ii) enhancing removals and (iii) avoiding emission. Reducing CH₄ emission strategies targeted on emission reduction by the following ways (i) dietary manipulation, (ii) breeding management, and

Conclusion and recommendations

Livestock farming or ruminant husbandry is a significant source of livelihood and economy. It is also a major component of the diet in human food. Livestock farming is responsible for a major amount of GHGs emissions. Livestock farming should be practiced with minimal GHG emissions without reducing productivity. We discussed various mitigation options namely dietary management, breeding and other livestock management, which has the potential to mitigate CH₄ emissions. The adoption of these

Acknowledgment

Dr. S. Kumari is thankful to the University Grants Commission, Government of India for Senior Research Fellowship (18-12/2011(ii)EUV/202236).

References (209)

D.T. Allen
Methane emissions from natural gas production and use: reconciling bottom-up and top-down measurements
Curr. Opin. Chem. Eng.
(2014)
L. Alstrup et al.
Effect of fat supplementation and stage of lactation on methane production in dairy cows
Animal Feed Sci. Tech.
(2015)
S. Anand et al.
Application of a system dynamics approach for assessment and mitigation of CO₂ emissions from the cement industry
J. Environ. Manag.
(2006)
G. Animut et al.
Methane emission by goats consuming diets with different levels of condensed tannins from lespedeza
Anim. Feed Sci. Technol.
(2008)
A.R. Bayat et al.
Effect of camelina oil or live yeasts (Saccharomyces cerevisiae) on ruminal methane production, rumen fermentation, and milk fatty acid composition in lactating cows fed grass silage diets
J. Dairy Sci.
(2015)
C. Benchaar et al.
A review of plant-derived essential oils in ruminant nutrition and production
Anim. Feed Sci. Technol.
(2008)
P.C. Beukes et al.
Improving production efficiency as a strategy to mitigate greenhouse gas emissions on pastoral dairy farms in New Zealand
Agric. Ecosyst. Environ.
(2010)
M. Brask et al.
Enteric methane production, digestibility and rumen fermentation in dairy cows fed different forages with and without rapeseed fat supplementation
Anim. Feed Sci. Technol.
(2013)
W. Britz et al.
Modelling of land cover and agricultural change in Europe: combining the CLUE and CAPRI-Spat approaches
Agric. Ecosyst. Environ.
(2011)
B.M. Buddle et al.
Strategies to reduce methane emissions from farmed ruminants grazing on pasture
Veterinary J
(2011)

S. Calsamiglia et al.

Invited review: essential oils as modifiers of rumen microbial fermentation

J. Dairy Sci.

(2007)

M.P.L. Calus et al.

Predicted accuracy of and response to genomic selection for new traits in dairy cattle

Animal

(2013)

P. Crosson et al.

A review of whole farm systems models of greenhouse gas emissions from beef and dairy cattle production systems

Anim. Feed Sci. Technol.

(2011)

I.J.M. De Boer et al.

Greenhouse gas mitigation in animal production: towards an integrated life cycle sustainability assessment

Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain.

(2011)

Y. De Haas et al.

Genetic parameters for predicted methane production and potential for reducing enteric emissions through genomic selection

J. Dairy Sci.

(2011)

M.H. Deighton et al.

A modified sulphur hexafluoride tracer technique enables accurate determination of enteric methane emissions from ruminants

Anim. Feed Sci. Technol.

(2014)

M. Dutreuil et al.

Feeding strategies and manure management for cost-effective mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions from dairy farms in Wisconsin

J. Dairy Sci.

(2014)

A. Elgersma et al.

Quick changes in milk fat composition from cows after transition from fresh grass to a silage diet

Anim. Feed Sci. Technol.

(2004)

C. Fernandez et al.

Description and function of a mobile open-circuit respirometry system to measure gas exchange in small ruminants

Anim. Feed Sci. Technol.

(2012)

Z. Gao et al.

Assessment of the backward Lagrangian Stochastic dispersion technique for continuous measurements of CH4 emissions

Agr. For. Metrol.

(2009)

P. Garnsworthy

The environmental impact of fertility in dairy cows: a modelling approach to predict methane and ammonia emissions

Anim. Feed Sci. Technol.

(2004)

G. Getachew et al.

Use of an in vitro rumen gas production technique to evaluate microbial fermentation of ruminant feeds and its impact on fermentation products

Anim. Feed Sci. Technol.

(2005)

M. Gill et al.

Mitigating climate change; the role of domestic livestock

Animal

(2010)

J.P. Goopy et al.

Validation of a short- term methane measurement using portable static chambers to estimate daily methane production in sheep

Anim. Feed Sci. Technol.

(2011)

C. Grainger et al.

Methane emissions from dairy cows measured using sulfur hexafluoride (SF₆) and chamber techniques

J. Dairy Sci.

(2007)

M.D. Hanigan et al.

Revised digestive parameter estimates for the Molly cow model

J. Dairy Sci.

(2013)

P. Havlik et al.

Global land-use implications of first and second generation biofuel targets

Energ Policy

(2011)

R.S. Hegarty

Applicability of short-term emission measurements for on-farm quantification of enteric methane

Animal

(2013)

M. Herrero et al.

Systems dynamics and the spatial distribution of methane emissions from African domestic ruminants to 2030

Agric. Ecosyst. Environ.

(2008)

P. Huhtanen et al.

Enteric methane emission can be reliably measured by the GreenFeed monitoring unit

Livest. Sci.

(2019)

J.J. Hyland et al.

Improving livestock production efficiencies presents a major opportunity to reduce sectoral greenhouse gas emissions

Agric. Syst.

(2016)

A. Jones et al.

The carbon footprint of lamb: sources of variation and opportunities for mitigation

Agric. Syst.

(2014)

K.J. Kaiyala et al.

Direct animal calorimetry, the underused gold standard for quantifying the fire of life

Comp. Biochem. Phys. A.

(2011)

D.N. Kamra et al.

Inhibition of ruminal methanogenesis by tropical plants containing secondary compounds

Int. Congr. Ser.

(2006)

S. Karami et al.

System dynamic simulation: a new method in social impact assessment (SIA)

Environ. Impact Assess. Rev.

(2017)

AAFC

Reducing Methane Emission from Livestock - Agriculture and Agri-food Canada

(2015)

M.T. Abberton et al.

The Genetic Improvement of Forage Grasses and Legumes to Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions

(2007)

F.O. Albrao et al.

Characterization of fungi from the ruminal fluid of beef cattle with different ages and raised in tropical lignified pastures

Curr. Microbiol.

(2014)

J.E. Aldy et al.

The promise and problems of pricing carbon: theory and experience

J. Environ. Develop.

(2012)

J.E. Aldy et al.

Using the market to address climate change: insights from theory & experience

Daedalus

(2012)

J.E. Aldy et al.

A tax–based approach to slowing global climate change

National Tax J

(2008)

M. Alexe et al.

Inverse modelling of CH₄ emissions for 2010–2011 using different satellite retrieval products from GOSAT and SCIAMACHY

Atmos. Chem. Phys.

(2015)

A.R. Alford et al.

The impact of breeding to reduce residual feed intake on enteric methane emissions from the Australian beef industry

Aust. J. Exp. Agric.

(2006)

T. Aluwong et al.

Livestock-environment interactions: methane emissions from ruminants

Afr. J. Biotechnol.

(2011)

J. Antle

Parsimonious multi-dimensional impact assessment

Am. J. Agric. Econ.

(2011)

J.M. Antle et al.

TOA-MD 5.0: trade-off analysis model for multi dimensional impact assessment

J.P.F. Arthur et al.

Residual feed intake in beef cattle

R. Bras. Zootec.

(2008)

M. Bai et al.

Correlations of methane and carbon dioxide concentrations from feedlot cattle as a predictor of methane emissions

Anim. Prod. Sci.

(2016)

S.A. Barwick et al.

Methods and consequences of including reduction in greenhouse gas emission in beef cattle multiple-trait selection

Genet. Sel. Evol.

(2019)

R.H. Beach et al.

Mitigation potential and costs for global agricultural greenhouse gas emissions

Agric. Econ.

(2008)

Cited by (40)

Advances in methane emissions from agricultural sources: Part I. Accounting and mitigation
2024, Journal of Environmental Sciences (China)
Methane is one of the major greenhouse gases (GHGs) and agriculture is recognized as its primary emitter. Methane accounting is a prerequisite for developing effective agriculture mitigation strategies. In this review, methane accounting methods and research status for various agricultural emission source including rice fields, animal enteric fermentation and livestock and poultry manure management were overview, and the influencing factors of each emission source were analyzed and discussed. At the same time, it analyzes the different research efforts involving agricultural methane accounting and makes recommendations based on the actual situation. Finally, mitigation strategies based on accounting results and actual situation are proposed. This review aims to provide basic data and reference for agriculture-oriented countries and regions to actively participate in climate action and carry out effective methane emission mitigation.
The greenhouse gas emissions from meat sheep production contribute double of household consumption in a Eurasian meadow steppe
2024, Science of the Total Environment
With the rapid development of the economy, household activities have emerged as an important source of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, making them a crucial focal point for research in the pursuit of sustainable development and carbon emission reduction. Hulunber, as a typical steppe region in eastern Eurasia, is representative of studying the GHG emissions from household ranches, which are the basic production units in this region. In this paper, based on survey data of 2018 and 2019, we quantified and assessed GHG emissions from household ranches by combining life cycle assessment (LCA) and structural equation modeling (SEM) approaches, with LCA to define household ranches system boundary and SEM to determine the key driving factors of emissions. The results showed that GHG emissions of meat sheep live weight was 23.54 kg CO₂-eq/kg. The major contributor to household GHG emissions was enteric methane (55.23 %), followed by coal use (20.80 %) and manure management systems (9.16 %), and other contributing factors (14.81 %). The SEM results indicated that the GHG emissions from household ranches were derived primarily by economic level, while the economic level was significantly affected by income. This study also found a significant positive and linear correlation between household GHG emissions and the number of meat sheep (R² = 0.89, P < 0.001). The GHG emissions from meat sheep production (67.52 %) were double times greater than household livelihood consumption (32.48 %). These findings emphasized the importance of reducing emissions from meat sheep production and adjusting the energy mix of household livelihood, contributing to the establishment of a low-carbon household livelihood operation.
Effects of environmental and housing system factors on ammonia and greenhouse gas emissions from cattle barns: A meta-analysis of a global data collation
2023, Waste Management
This study provides a meta-analysis on the relationships between cattle barn CH₄, NH₃ and N₂O emission rates and their key drivers (i.e., housing type, floor type, environmental conditions). Understanding these relationships is essential to reduce uncertainties in emission inventories and suggest targeted mitigation measures. The total number of daily emission rates included in the analysis was 139 for CH₄, 293 for NH₃ and 100 for N₂O emissions. Emission rates in the database showed a large variation with 45–803.5 g/LU d⁻¹ for CH₄, 0.036–146.7 gN LU⁻¹ d⁻¹ for NH₃, and 0.002–18 gN LU⁻¹ d⁻¹ for N₂O emissions. Despite the high emission variability, significant effects were identified·NH₃ showed positive correlation with air temperature; NH₃ emissions differed between housing types but not between floor types·NH₃ emissions from tied stalls were lower than the ones from cubicle housing regardless of the floor type. Additionally, NH₃ emissions from loose housings were lower than the ones from cubicle housing·NH₃ and N₂O emission rates from temperate wet zones were lower than the ones from temperate dry zones. CH₄ emission rates were affected by environmental factors only and not by housing and floor type, showing negative correlation with air temperature and humidity. The factors investigated can be suggested as ancillary variables and descriptors when cattle barn emissions are measured, in order to make best use of emission data. Country-specific data of these key drivers can be included into national inventories to adapt them to different agroecosystems and support targeted policies.
Cooperation between specialized cropping and livestock farms at local level reduces carbon footprint of agricultural system: A case study of recoupling maize-cow system in South China
2023, Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment
Decoupling of crop and livestock production has become increasingly common in the world during to past decades. The cooperation between specialized crop and livestock farms have been paid more attention for the development of sustainable agriculture. This study assumed that rebuilding the linkage between specialized crop and livestock farms through cooperation at the local level would decrease agricultural GHG emissions. Therefore, we designed a cooperative crop-livestock farming model (CCLS) in South China by recoupling the cow farm with the sweet maize cultivation farms around it to demonstrate the hypothesis based on carbon footprint (CF) method. The CFs under two cooperative scenarios (CCLS₂₀ and CCLS₅₀) were compared with the corresponding decoupling models (DCLS₂₀ and DCLS₅₀). Results showed that CCLS significantly reduced GHG emissions from cropping systems in comparison to DCLS primarily by increasing the soil organic carbon storage while decreasing accumulative N₂O emissions. In specific, the CFs of CCLS₂₀ and CCLS₅₀ were 48.78% and 623.34% lower than DCLS₂₀ and DCLS₅₀, respectively. The yield-based CFs of CCLS₂₀ and CCLS₅₀ were 66.30% and 165.99% lower than DCLS₂₀ and DCLS₅₀, respectively. Meanwhile, the CF of the cow farm in CCLS₂₀ and CCLS₅₀ were 8.80% and 8.22% lower than that in DCLS_20/50 by lowering relative GHG emissions of straw supply in roughage forage and shortening manure storage time in the manure management process. Finally, the yield-based CF in CCLS₂₀ and CCLS₅₀ were 67.68% and 168.51% lower than the DCLS₂₀ and DCLS₅₀, respectively, demonstrating that the cooperation between specialized planting and livestock farms at local level reduced the CF of the agricultural production chain by the synergistic reduction effects of GHG emissions in cropland, livestock rearing and transportation processes. The results would provide a quantitative understanding of the net GHG emission of cooperative crop-livestock system at the local level in China and valuable information for the development of sustainable farming system in the world.
Genetic and metabolic engineering of Methanococcus spp
2023, Current Research in Biotechnology
Citation Excerpt :
Methane mitigation has also proven to be a major area of biotechnological research. Most mitigation strategies have focused on reducing methanogenic activities from anthropogenic sources such as rice cultivation, ruminant animal husbandry, composting fermentation and other agricultural practices that contribute to the global biological methane emissions (Kumari et al. 2020). Better agricultural practices, such as use of biofertilizers, cultivar selection, and water management, have been recognized as promising approaches to reducing methane emissions from rice cultivation (Singh and Strong 2016, Zhang et al. 2016).
Methanococcus is a genus of well-characterized mesophilic and hydrogenotrophic methanogens with a robust genetic system. Commonly found in tidal marshes, they compete with sulfate- and iron-reducing bacteria for hydrogen gas (H₂) and formate, their two major energy sources. They are characterized by rapid growth in mineral medium and requirements for marine levels of salts for optimal growth. Genetic tools developed over the last twenty years include improvements in shuttle vectors for production of recombinant proteins and CRISPR systems for mutagenesis as well as a variety of marker proteins for studies of gene expression. These tools have enabled functional characterization of the genome, including regulation of the transcriptome and proteome, mapping of transcription start and termination sites, and identification of essential genes. Metabolic and gene regulatory network models have been created. This foundation in the basic biology of Methanococcus provides an opportunity for development of biotechnological applications of these hydrogenotrophic methanogens.
Agronomy in the temperate zone and threats or mitigation from climate change: A review
2022, Catena
Citation Excerpt :
This publication primarily discusses the problems of climate change in relation to crop production in the temperate zone. Livestock production contributes to emissions of approximately 7.1 Gt of CO2 eq yr−1, which are responsible for 9–11% of the total anthropogenic GHG emissions on a global scale, of which approximately 44% are CH4 emissions from livestock (Matthews et al., 2019; Kumari et al., 2020). In natural processes, CH4 is emitted: from wetlands and termite activity, and in anthropogenic processes: from rice cultivation, livestock (enteric emission from ruminants), landfills, and production and use of fossil fuels.
Agronomy has significant impacts on climate stability due to the emission of large amounts of greenhouse gases and C sequestration in soil and plants and can influence on reducing the negative impact of agronomy on climate does not need to result in a reduction in yield. Nevertheless, satisfying both goals require the implementation of new methods. The present assessment was based on over 190 scientific publications. Forecasts from the beginning of the 21st century showed that the increase in temperature and CO₂ concentration would improve the productivity of crops by extending the growing season and allow for the cultivation of new species. However, this beneficial effect may be limited by the increasing intensity of the extreme weather phenomena such as: rainstorm, droughts, early frosts, storms etc. Here, we review more recent studies which indicate, however, that this beneficial effect of climate change will not be permanent and, consequently, will significantly reduce crop yields. Climate change is forcing the agronomy sector to implement adaptive methods for minimizing possible crop losses consisting, inter alia, (i) using crop species/varieties that are less sensitive; (ii) optimizing water management; (III) improving pest, disease and weed control efficiency. The pressure on the agriculture sector to increase food production due to the increase in the human population and the present hunger in specific regions run counter to the need to reduce the adverse climate impacts of agriculture. The current state of knowledge indicates that despite the implementation of new technologies, agricultural measures will not be able to significantly reduce climate change. Indeed, these approaches will not replace the need to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in other sectors. However, without the participation of agronomy in reducing GHG emissions by increasing carbon sequestration, the goals of the 2015 UN Climate Change Conference in Paris will not be achieved.

View all citing articles on Scopus

View full text

ReviewMethane production and estimation from livestock husbandry: A mechanistic understanding and emerging mitigation options

Highlights

Abstract

Graphical abstract

Introduction

Section snippets

Ruminants and CH4 production

Microbial ruminant ecosystem and microbial diversity

Methane emissions estimation techniques

CH4 emissions mitigation strategies

Conclusion and recommendations

Acknowledgment

Curr. Opin. Chem. Eng.

Animal Feed Sci. Tech.

J. Environ. Manag.

Anim. Feed Sci. Technol.

J. Dairy Sci.

Anim. Feed Sci. Technol.

Agric. Ecosyst. Environ.

Anim. Feed Sci. Technol.

Agric. Ecosyst. Environ.

Veterinary J

J. Dairy Sci.

Animal

Anim. Feed Sci. Technol.

Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain.

J. Dairy Sci.

Anim. Feed Sci. Technol.

J. Dairy Sci.

Anim. Feed Sci. Technol.

Anim. Feed Sci. Technol.

Agr. For. Metrol.

Anim. Feed Sci. Technol.

Anim. Feed Sci. Technol.

Animal

Anim. Feed Sci. Technol.

J. Dairy Sci.

J. Dairy Sci.

Energ Policy

Animal

Agric. Ecosyst. Environ.

Livest. Sci.

Agric. Syst.

Agric. Syst.

Comp. Biochem. Phys. A.

Int. Congr. Ser.

Environ. Impact Assess. Rev.

Reducing Methane Emission from Livestock - Agriculture and Agri-food Canada

The Genetic Improvement of Forage Grasses and Legumes to Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions

Characterization of fungi from the ruminal fluid of beef cattle with different ages and raised in tropical lignified pastures

Curr. Microbiol.

The promise and problems of pricing carbon: theory and experience

J. Environ. Develop.

Using the market to address climate change: insights from theory & experience

Daedalus

A tax–based approach to slowing global climate change

National Tax J

Inverse modelling of CH4 emissions for 2010–2011 using different satellite retrieval products from GOSAT and SCIAMACHY

Atmos. Chem. Phys.

The impact of breeding to reduce residual feed intake on enteric methane emissions from the Australian beef industry

Aust. J. Exp. Agric.

Livestock-environment interactions: methane emissions from ruminants

Afr. J. Biotechnol.

Parsimonious multi-dimensional impact assessment

Am. J. Agric. Econ.

TOA-MD 5.0: trade-off analysis model for multi dimensional impact assessment

Residual feed intake in beef cattle

R. Bras. Zootec.

Correlations of methane and carbon dioxide concentrations from feedlot cattle as a predictor of methane emissions

Anim. Prod. Sci.

Methods and consequences of including reduction in greenhouse gas emission in beef cattle multiple-trait selection

Genet. Sel. Evol.

Mitigation potential and costs for global agricultural greenhouse gas emissions

Agric. Econ.

Review
Methane production and estimation from livestock husbandry: A mechanistic understanding and emerging mitigation options

Ruminants and CH₄ production

CH₄ emissions mitigation strategies

Inverse modelling of CH₄ emissions for 2010–2011 using different satellite retrieval products from GOSAT and SCIAMACHY