Top Institute Food and Nutrition, PO Box 557, 6700 AN Wageningen, the Netherlands; Animal Nutrition Group, Wageningen University & Research, PO Box 338, 6700 AH Wageningen, the Netherlands.
Qlip B.V., PO Box 119, 7200 AC Zutphen, the Netherlands.
J Dairy Sci. 2018 Jun;101(6):5582-5598. doi: 10.3168/jds.2017-13052. Epub 2018 Mar 15.
The objective of the present study was to compare the prediction potential of milk Fourier-transform infrared spectroscopy (FTIR) for CH emissions of dairy cows with that of gas chromatography (GC)-based milk fatty acids (MFA). Data from 9 experiments with lactating Holstein-Friesian cows, with a total of 30 dietary treatments and 218 observations, were used. Methane emissions were measured for 3 consecutive days in climate respiration chambers and expressed as production (g/d), yield (g/kg of dry matter intake; DMI), and intensity (g/kg of fat- and protein-corrected milk; FPCM). Dry matter intake was 16.3 ± 2.18 kg/d (mean ± standard deviation), FPCM yield was 25.9 ± 5.06 kg/d, CH production was 366 ± 53.9 g/d, CH yield was 22.5 ± 2.10 g/kg of DMI, and CH intensity was 14.4 ± 2.58 g/kg of FPCM. Milk was sampled during the same days and analyzed by GC and by FTIR. Multivariate GC-determined MFA-based and FTIR-based CH prediction models were developed, and subsequently, the final CH prediction models were evaluated with root mean squared error of prediction and concordance correlation coefficient analysis. Further, we performed a random 10-fold cross validation to calculate the performance parameters of the models (e.g., the coefficient of determination of cross validation). The final GC-determined MFA-based CH prediction models estimate CH production, yield, and intensity with a root mean squared error of prediction of 35.7 g/d, 1.6 g/kg of DMI, and 1.6 g/kg of FPCM and with a concordance correlation coefficient of 0.72, 0.59, and 0.77, respectively. The final FTIR-based CH prediction models estimate CH production, yield, and intensity with a root mean squared error of prediction of 43.2 g/d, 1.9 g/kg of DMI, and 1.7 g/kg of FPCM and with a concordance correlation coefficient of 0.52, 0.40, and 0.72, respectively. The GC-determined MFA-based prediction models described a greater part of the observed variation in CH emission than did the FTIR-based models. The cross validation results indicate that all CH prediction models (both GC-determined MFA-based and FTIR-based models) are robust; the difference between the coefficient of determination and the coefficient of determination of cross validation ranged from 0.01 to 0.07. The results indicate that GC-determined MFA have a greater potential than FTIR spectra to estimate CH production, yield, and intensity. Both techniques hold potential but may not yet be ready to predict CH emission of dairy cows in practice. Additional CH measurements are needed to improve the accuracy and robustness of GC-determined MFA and FTIR spectra for CH prediction.
本研究的目的是比较牛奶傅里叶变换红外光谱(FTIR)预测奶牛 CH 排放的能力与基于气相色谱(GC)的牛奶脂肪酸(MFA)的预测能力。使用了 9 项荷斯坦-弗里生奶牛泌乳试验的数据,共 30 种饲粮处理和 218 个观测值。在气候呼吸室中连续 3 天测量甲烷排放量,并表示为产奶量(g/d)、产奶量(g/kg 干物质采食量;DMI)和强度(g/kg 校正乳脂肪和蛋白质;FPCM)。干物质采食量为 16.3 ± 2.18 kg/d(平均值±标准偏差),FPCM 产量为 25.9 ± 5.06 kg/d,CH 产量为 366 ± 53.9 g/d,CH 产量为 22.5 ± 2.10 g/kg DMI,CH 强度为 14.4 ± 2.58 g/kg FPCM。在相同的日子里采集牛奶并通过 GC 和 FTIR 进行分析。建立了多元 GC 测定的 MFA 基础和 FTIR 基础的 CH 预测模型,随后,用预测均方根误差和一致性相关系数分析来评估最终的 CH 预测模型。此外,我们进行了随机 10 折交叉验证,以计算模型的性能参数(例如,交叉验证的决定系数)。最终的 GC 测定的 MFA 基础的 CH 预测模型估计 CH 产量、产奶量和产奶强度的预测均方根误差分别为 35.7 g/d、1.6 g/kg DMI 和 1.6 g/kg FPCM,一致性相关系数分别为 0.72、0.59 和 0.77。最终的基于 FTIR 的 CH 预测模型估计 CH 产量、产奶量和产奶强度的预测均方根误差分别为 43.2 g/d、1.9 g/kg DMI 和 1.7 g/kg FPCM,一致性相关系数分别为 0.52、0.40 和 0.72。GC 测定的 MFA 基础的预测模型描述了 CH 排放观测变异的更大部分,而基于 FTIR 的模型则描述了更小部分。交叉验证结果表明,所有 CH 预测模型(基于 GC 测定的 MFA 和基于 FTIR 的模型)都具有稳健性;决定系数和交叉验证的决定系数之间的差异在 0.01 到 0.07 之间。结果表明,GC 测定的 MFA 比 FTIR 光谱更有潜力来估计 CH 产量、产奶量和产奶强度。这两种技术都有潜力,但可能还没有准备好实际预测奶牛的 CH 排放。需要进行更多的 CH 测量,以提高 GC 测定的 MFA 和 FTIR 光谱预测 CH 的准确性和稳健性。