ArticleJournal of animal science2025
Nutrient use and methane emissions in growing beef fed different protein sources and a pasture-based diet.
Article in Journal of animal science, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study investigated the effects of different protein sources on feed intake, nutrient, and energy utilization, growth performance, and enteric methane (CH4) emissions in growing beef cattle, also evaluated against a pasture-based diet. Thirty-two Holstein × Angus growing beef were allocated to four dietary treatments: a total mixed ration (TMR) including solvent-extracted soybean meal as the main protein source (n = 8), TMR with local brewers' spent grains (n = 8), TMR with local field beans (n = 8), and a diet consisting solely of fresh-cut Italian ryegrass (GRA; n = 8). Every 4 wk, animals were moved to digestibility stalls within respiration chambers to measure nutrient intakes, energy and nitrogen (N) utilization, and enteric CH4 emissions. Feed intake (Calan gates), nutrient intakes, and CH4 emissions (GreenFeed) were also measured when animals were group-housed. In respiratory chambers, enteric CH4 yield per kg of dry matter intake (DMI), per kg of organic matter intake (OMI), and per kg body weight were lower (P < 0.05) for GRA. Feces and urine energy outputs were higher (P = 0.007 and P < 0.001, respectively) for GRA steers than concentrate-fed steers. Urinary nitrogen output (UNO, P = 0.026), manure (feces + urine) nitrogen output (MNO, P = 0.034), UNO/nitrogen intake (P = 0.002), and MNO/nitrogen intake (P = 0.006) were higher for GRA. During group-housing periods, CH4 emissions, measured by GreenFeed, were similar to those measured in chambers. Similar CH4 yield between treatments, expressed per kg digestible DMI and digestible OMI, may indicate that the lower diet digestibility was likely the reason for the reduced enteric CH4 emissions in pasture-based diets. The higher energy output and nitrogen losses, and the reduced nitrogen utilization for steers fed the fresh-cut ryegrass diet indicate less efficient energy and nitrogen utilization, which can be considered environmentally undesirable. The lower growth rates in the pasture-based system should also be accounted for when this is adopted for reducing production costs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.