Estimated enteric methane emissions and performance of crossbred dairy cows in two location-based feeding systems in northern Ethiopia
Résumé fourni par la source
This observational survey-based study provided a descriptive comparison of methane (CH 4 ) emissions and performance of crossbred dairy cows across two location-based feeding systems in northern Ethiopia. Input and output data were collected from 24 dairy farms through a combination of questionnaire survey and direct on-farm measurements. CH 4 emissions were estimated via Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Tier 2 procedures. The findings revealed that cows in Agula had numerically shorter age at first service (AFS; mean ± standard deviation (SD); 13.92 ± 0.83 months) and calving intervals (CI 13.75 ± 0.50 months) than those in Wukro (14.63 ± 0.29 and 14.38 ± 0.48 months, respectively). The average daily milk yield (ADMY) was numerically higher for cows in Agula (13.88 ± 2.85 L, L) than those in Wukro (12.79 ± 2.21 L). Major challenges in milk production in the study area included limited space, feed shortages and high feed costs. The estimated CH 4 emissions per mature, crossbred dairy cow were numerically higher in Agula (100 kg CH 4 head −1 yr −1 ) than those estimated for Wukro cows (88 kg CH 4 head −1 yr −1 ). However, on a per-kg-milk basis, the two location-based feeding systems were comparable in estimated CH 4 intensity, while the feeding system in Agula was associated with numerically higher milk yield and shorter AFS/CI.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- Estimated enteric methane emissions and performance of crossbred dairy cows in two location-based feeding systems in northern Ethiopia
- Date Crossref
- 07/09/2026
- Éditeur
- Springer Science and Business Media LLC
- Type
- journal-article
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude et ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.
Institutions déclarées
Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.