Hristov Alexander N, Bannink André, Battelli Marco, Belanche Alejandro, Cajarville Sanz M Cecilia, Fernandez-Turren Gonzalo, Garcia Florencia, Jonker Arjan, Kenny David A, Lind Vibeke, Meale Sarah J, Meo Zilio David, Muñoz Camila, Pacheco David, Peiren Nico, Ramin Mohammad, Rapetti Luca, Schwarm Angela, Stergiadis Sokratis, Theodoridou Katerina, Ungerfeld Emilio M, van Gastelen Sanne, Yáñez-Ruiz David R, Waters Sinead M, Lund Peter
Department of Animal Science, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA 16802.
Wageningen Livestock Research, Wageningen University & Research, 6700 AH Wageningen, the Netherlands.
J Dairy Sci. 2025 Jan;108(1):322-355. doi: 10.3168/jds.2024-25050.
There is a need for rigorous and scientifically-based testing standards for existing and new enteric methane mitigation technologies, including antimethanogenic feed additives (AMFA). The current review provides guidelines for conducting and analyzing data from experiments with ruminants intended to test the antimethanogenic and production effects of feed additives. Recommendations include study design and statistical analysis of the data, dietary effects, associative effect of AMFA with other mitigation strategies, appropriate methods for measuring methane emissions, production and physiological responses to AMFA, and their effects on animal health and product quality. Animal experiments should be planned based on clear hypotheses, and experimental designs must be chosen to best answer the scientific questions asked, with pre-experimental power analysis and robust post-experimental statistical analyses being important requisites. Long-term studies for evaluating AMFA are currently lacking and are highly needed. Experimental conditions should be representative of the production system of interest, so results and conclusions are applicable and practical. Methane-mitigating effects of AMFA may be combined with other mitigation strategies to explore additivity and synergism, as well as trade-offs, including relevant manure emissions, and these need to be studied in appropriately designed experiments. Methane emissions can be successfully measured, and efficacy of AMFA determined, using respiration chambers, the sulfur hexafluoride method, and the GreenFeed system. Other techniques, such as hood and face masks, can also be used in short-term studies, ensuring they do not significantly affect feed intake, feeding behavior, and animal production. For the success of an AMFA, it is critically important that representative animal production data are collected, analyzed, and reported. In addition, evaluating the effects of AMFA on nutrient digestibility, animal physiology, animal health and reproduction, product quality, and how AMFA interact with nutrient composition of the diet is necessary and should be conducted at various stages of the evaluation process. The authors emphasize that enteric methane mitigation claims should not be made until the efficacy of AMFA is confirmed in animal studies designed and conducted considering the guidelines provided herein.
对于现有的和新的肠道甲烷减排技术，包括抗产甲烷饲料添加剂（AMFA），需要严格且基于科学的测试标准。本综述提供了有关进行和分析反刍动物实验数据的指南，这些实验旨在测试饲料添加剂的抗产甲烷和生产效果。建议包括数据的研究设计和统计分析、日粮效应、AMFA与其他减排策略的联合效应、测量甲烷排放的合适方法、对AMFA的生产和生理反应，以及它们对动物健康和产品质量的影响。动物实验应基于明确的假设进行规划，必须选择能够最好地回答所提出科学问题的实验设计，实验前的功效分析和有力的实验后统计分析是重要的必备条件。目前缺乏评估AMFA的长期研究，而这非常必要。实验条件应代表所关注的生产系统，以便结果和结论具有适用性和实用性。AMFA的甲烷减排效果可与其他减排策略相结合，以探索相加性和协同作用，以及权衡因素，包括相关的粪便排放，这些都需要在设计适当的实验中进行研究。使用呼吸室、六氟化硫法和GreenFeed系统可以成功测量甲烷排放并确定AMFA的功效。其他技术，如通风橱和面罩，也可用于短期研究，确保它们不会显著影响采食量、采食行为和动物生产。对于AMFA的成功而言，收集、分析和报告具有代表性的动物生产数据至关重要。此外，评估AMFA对养分消化率、动物生理、动物健康和繁殖、产品质量的影响，以及AMFA如何与日粮的养分组成相互作用是必要的，并且应该在评估过程的各个阶段进行。作者强调，在按照本文提供的指南设计和开展的动物研究中确认AMFA的功效之前，不应提出肠道甲烷减排的主张。
