Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34791305›Full record

ArticleJournal of animal science2021

Impact of forage diversity on forage productivity, nutritive value, beef cattle performance, and enteric methane emissions.

Logan R Thompson, Isabella C F Maciel, Patricia D R Rodrigues, Kim A Cassida, Jason E Rowntree

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of animal science, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 33% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Logan R ThompsonDepartment of Animal Science, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI 48824, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-0940-586X
Isabella C F MacielDepartment of Animal Science, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI 48824, USA.
Patricia D R RodriguesDepartment of Animal Science, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI 48824, USA.
Kim A CassidaDepartment of Plant, Soil and Microbial Sciences, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI 48824, USA.
Jason E RowntreeDepartment of Animal Science, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI 48824, USA.
Michigan State University · US

Funding

Michigan Alliance for Animal Agriculture AA-18027
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Greenhouse gas emissions from the beef industry are largely attributed to the grazing sector, specifically from beef cattle enteric methane emissions. Therefore, the study objective was to examine how forage diversity impacts forage productivity, nutritive value, animal performance, and enteric methane emissions. This study occurred over three consecutive grazing seasons (2018 to 2020) and compared two common Midwest grazing mixtures: 1) a simple, 50:50 alfalfa:orchardgrass mixture (SIMP) and 2) a botanically diverse, cool-season species mixture (COMP). Fifty-six steers and heifers were adapted to an Automated Head Chamber System (AHCS) each year (C-Lock Inc., Rapid City, SD) and stratified into treatment groups based on acclimation visitation. Each treatment consisted of four pastures, three 3.2-ha and one 1.6-ha, with eight and four animals each, respectively. Forage production was measured biweekly in pre- and postgrazed paddocks, and forage nutritive value was analyzed using near-infrared reflectance spectroscopy. Shrunk body weights were taken monthly to determine animal performance. Forage availability did not differ between treatments (P = 0.69) but tended lower in 2018 (P = 0.06; 2.40 t dry matter ha-1) than 2019 (2.92 t dry matter ha-1) and 2020 (P = 0.10; 2.81 t dry matter ha-1). Crude protein was significantly lower for COMP in 2018 compared with SIMP. Forage acid detergent fiber content was significantly lower for the COMP mixture (P = 0.02). The COMP treatment resulted higher dry matter digestibility (IVDMD48) in 2018 and 2019 compared with the SIMP treatment (P < 0.01). Animal performance did not differ between treatments (P > 0.50). There was a tendency for the COMP treatment to have lower enteric CH4 production on a g d-1 basis (P = 0.06), but no difference was observed on an emission intensity basis (g CH4 kg-1 gain; P = 0.56). These results would indicate that adoption of the complex forage mixture would not result in improved forage productivity, animal performance, or reduced emission intensity compared with the simple forage mixture.

Indexed as

Animal FeedMethaneAnimalsCattleDietDietary FiberFemaleNutritive ValueDietary FiberMethanebiodiversitycattleenteric methanegrazing

Identifiers

PMID34791305
PMCPMC8665682
OpenAlexW3212281767

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.