Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41127811›Full record

ArticleMethodsX2025

Experimental and experiential recommendations for using the GreenFeed systems to measure gas flux in grazing and confined cattle.

E A French, M R Beck, K F Kalscheur, D M Jaramillo, J D Derner, C A Moffet, B W Neville, K J Soder, R C O'Connor, J A Koziel and 4 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in MethodsX, 2025. 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
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

  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

14 authors.

E A FrenchUSDA Agricultural Research Service, U.S. Dairy Research Forage Research Center, Madison, WI, United States.
M R BeckTexas A&M University Department of Animal Science, College Station, TX, United States.
K F KalscheurUSDA Agricultural Research Service, U.S. Dairy Research Forage Research Center, Madison, WI, United States.
D M JaramilloUSDA Agricultural Research Service, U.S. Dairy Research Forage Research Center, Madison, WI, United States.
J D DernerUSDA Agricultural Research Service, Center for Agricultural Resources Research, Rangeland Resources & Systems Research Unit, Fort Collins, CO, United States.
C A MoffetUSDA Agricultural Research Service, Oklahoma and Central Plains Agricultural Research Center, El Reno, OK, United States.
B W NevilleUSDA Agricultural Research Service, U.S. Meat Animal Research Center, Clay Center, NE, United States.
K J SoderUSDA Agricultural Research Service, Pasture Systems and Watershed Management Research Unit, University Park, PA, United States.
R C O'ConnorUSDA Agricultural Research Service, Range and Meadow Management Research, Burns, OR, United States.
J A KozielUSDA Agricultural Research Service, Livestock Nutrient Management Research, Bushland, TX, United States.
P VadasUSDA Agricultural Research Service, Natural Resources and Sustainable Agricultural Systems, Beltsville, MD, United States.
S MoellerUSDA Agricultural Research Service, Animal Production and Protection, Beltsville, MD, United States.
S A GunterUSDA Agricultural Research Service, Oklahoma and Central Plains Agricultural Research Center, El Reno, OK, United States.
USDA-Agricultural Research Service, Enteric Methane Intervention Team (EMIT) Working Group

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Improving ruminant production efficiency is contingent on accurately measuring gas fluxes from individual animals in grazing and confined feeding environments The GreenFeed system (GFS) has been increasingly utilized by researchers to measure gas flux of ruminants in their production environment. However, there are wide inconsistencies in methodologies from laboratory-to-laboratory. The objective of this manuscript is to provide standardized recommendations for measuring individual animal gas fluxes of methane, carbon dioxide, oxygen, and hydrogen by the GFS, which are based on experiential and experimental evidence. The method includes:•GFS management: Setup, maintenance, and calibration of sensors•Animal Recommendations: Number of animals to sample, training on use of the system, and bait feeds - including type, composition, and mass. Further, we address operational considerations of using the GFS in extensive grazing environments and confined feeding operations.•Data recommendations: pre-processing data, data cleaning, handling outliers, approaches for estimating individual animal gas fluxes, and uses of application performance interfaces in conjunction with R for statistical analyses.Increasing standardization in GFS management across experiments and laboratory groups is greatly needed. We hope that these recommendations based on our collective experience and experimental evidence will aid in the standardization of GFS methodologies.

Indexed as

Animal efficiencyAnimal nutritionAutomatic head respiration chamberEnteric methaneLivestock productionRuminant

Identifiers

PMID41127811
PMCPMC12538903

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.