Searching the Resource Information Network

Our searching services are busy right now. Please try again later

  • Register
X
Forgot Password

If you have forgotten your password you can enter your email here and get a temporary password sent to your email.

X

Leaving Community

Are you sure you want to leave this community? Leaving the community will revoke any permissions you have been granted in this community.

No
Yes

Effect of Encapsulated Nitrate and Microencapsulated Blend of Essential Oils on Growth Performance and Methane Emissions from Beef Steers Fed Backgrounding Diets.

Aklilu W Alemu | Atmir Romero-Pérez | Rafael C Araujo | Karen A Beauchemin
Animals : an open access journal from MDPI | 2019

A long-term study (112 days) was conducted to examine the effect of feeding encapsulated nitrate (NO₃-), microencapsulated blend of essential oils (EO), and their combination on growth performance, feeding behavior, and enteric methane (CH₄) emissions of beef cattle. A total of 88 crossbred steers were purchased and assigned to one of four treatments: (i) control, backgrounding high-forage diet supplemented with urea (1.17% in dietary DM); (ii) encapsulated NO₃- (EN), control diet supplemented with 2.5% encapsulated NO₃- as a replacement for urea (1.785% NO₃- in the dietary DM); (iii) microencapsulated blend of EO (MBEO), control diet supplemented with 150 mg/kg DM of microencapsulated blend of EO and pepper extract; and (iv) EN + MBEO, control diet supplemented with EN and MBEO. There was no interaction (p ≥ 0.080) between EN and MBEO on average dry matter intake (DMI), average daily gain (ADG), gain to feed ratio (G:F), feeding behavior, and CH₄ emission (using GreenFeed system), implying independent effects of feeding EN and MBEO. Feeding MBEO increased CH₄ production (165.0 versus 183.2 g/day; p = 0.005) and yield (18.9 versus 21.4 g/kg DMI; p = 0.0002) but had no effect (p ≥ 0.479) on average DMI, ADG, G:F, and feeding behavior. However, feeding EN had no effect on ADG and G:F (p ≥ 0.119) but reduced DMI (8.9 versus 8.4 kg/day; p = 0.003) and CH₄ yield (21.5 versus 18.7 g/kg DMI; p < 0.001). Feeding EN slowed (p = 0.001) the feeding rate (g of DM/min) and increased (p = 0.002) meal frequency (events/day). Our results demonstrate that supplementing diets with a blend of EO did not lower CH₄ emissions and there were no advantages of feeding MBEO with EN. Inclusion of EN as a replacement for urea reduced CH₄ emissions but had no positive impact on animal performance.

Pubmed ID: 30634606

Research resources used in this publication

None found

Additional research tools detected in this publication

Antibodies used in this publication

None found

Associated grants

None

Publication data is provided by the National Library of Medicine ® and PubMed ®. Data is retrieved from PubMed ® on a weekly schedule. For terms and conditions see the National Library of Medicine Terms and Conditions.

This is a list of tools and resources that we have found mentioned in this publication.


Thermo Fisher Scientific (tool)

RRID:SCR_008452

Commercial vendor and service provider of laboratory reagents and antibodies. Supplier of scientific instrumentation, reagents and consumables, and software services.

View all literature mentions