Performance of crossbred goat kids fed with diets varying in concentrate-to-forage ratio: intake, nutrient utilization, enteric methane emission and body weight changes

References

• Association of Analytical Chemists-AOAC. 2005. Official methods of analysis. 18th rev. Gaithersburg M.D (USA): Association of Analytical Chemists-AOAC.
   Google Scholar
• Atti N, Bocquier F, Khaldi G. 2004. Performance of the fat-tailed Barbarine sheep in its environment: adaptive capacity to alternation of underfeeding and re-feeding periods. A review. Anim Res. 53:165–176.
   Google Scholar
• Barbosa AL, Voltolini TV, Menezes DR, de Moraes SA, Nascimento JCS, de Souza Rodrigues RT. 2018. Intake, digestibility, growth performance, and enteric methane emission of Brazilian semiarid non-descript breed goats fed diets with different forage to concentrate ratios. Trop Anim Health Prod. 50:283–289.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bayat AR, Ventto L, Kairenius P, Stefański T, Leskinen H, Tapio I, Negussie E, Vilkki J, Shingfield KJ. 2017. Dietary forage to concentrate ratio and sunflower oil supplement alter rumen fermentation, ruminal methane emissions, and nutrient utilization in lactating cows. Anim Genomics, Transl Anim Sci. 1:277–286.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bhatta R, Enishi O, Takusari N, Higuchi K, Nonaka I, Kurihara M. 2008. Diet effects on methane production by goats and a comparison between measurement methodologies. J Agri Sci. 146:705–715.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brouček J. 2015. Methane yield from cattle, sheep, and goats housing with emphasis on emission factors. A review. Slovak J Anim Sci. 48:122–139.
   Google Scholar
• Department of Animal Husbandary, Dairing and Fisheries-DAHDF. 2012. 19th Livestock census. New Delhi (India):Ministry of Agriculture.
   Google Scholar
• FAOSTAT data [ accessed December 2018] (http://www.fao.org/faostat/en/#home).
   Google Scholar
• Granja-Salcedo YT, RibeiroJúnior CS, Jesus RB, Gomez-Insuasti AS, Rivera AR, Messana JD, Canesin RC, Berchielli TT. 2016. Effect of different levels of concentrate on ruminal microorganisms and rumen fermentation in Nellore steers. Arch Anim Nutr. 70:17–32.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• ICAR. 2013. Nutrient composition of Indian Feeds and fodders. New Delhi:Indian Council of Agriculture Research.
   Google Scholar
• IPCC. 2007. Summary for Policymakers. Sd S, Qin M, Manning Z, Chen M, Kb M, Mt A, Hl M, editors. Climate change 2007: the physical science basis. Contribution of working group I to the fourth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• IPCC. 2014. Climate change 2014: synthesis Report. Contribution of working groups I, II and III to the fifth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change, core writing team, Pachauri RK, Meyer and LA.
   Google Scholar
• Jiao HP, Dale AJ, Carson AF, Murray S, Gordon AW, Ferris CP. 2014. Effect of concentrate feed level on methane emissions from grazing dairy cows. J Dairy Sci. 97:7043–7053.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Johnson KA, Johnson DE. 1995. Methane emissions from cattle. J Anim Sci. 73:2483–2492.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Johnson KA, Westberg HH, Michal JJ, Cossalman MW. 2007. The SF6 tracer technique: methane measurement from ruminants. In: Measuring methane production fromruminants. Netherlands: Springer; p. 33–67.
   Google Scholar
• Knapp JR, Laur GL, Vadas PA, Weiss WP, Tricarico JM. 2014. Invited review: enteric methane in dairy cattle production: quantifying the opportunities and impact of reducing emissions. J Dairy Sci. 97:3231–3261.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ma T, Deng KD, Tu Y, Zhang NF, Jiang CG, Liu J, Zhao YG, Diao QY. 2014. Effect of dietary forage-to-concentrate ratios on urinary excretion of purine derivatives and microbial nitrogen yields in the rumen of Dorper crossbred sheep. Livest Sci. 160:37–44.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Martin C, Morgavi DP, Doreau M. 2010. Methane mitigation in ruminants: from microbe to the farm scale. Anim. 4:351–365.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mcleod E, Chmura GL, Bouillon S, Salm R, Björk M, Duarte CM, Silliman BR. 2011. A blueprint for blue carbon: toward an improved understanding of the role of vegetated coastal habitats in sequestering CO2. Front Ecol Environ. 9:552–560.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mohini M, Mondal G, Thakur SS, Gupta S. 2016. Trends in methane emissions from Indian livestock. XVI biennial animal nutrition conference on innovative approaches for animal feeding and nutritional research, held at NDRI, Karnal, Invited papers. 17–20.
   Google Scholar
• Na Y, Li DH, Lee SR. 2017. Effects of dietary forage-to-concentrate ratio on nutrient digestibility and enteric methane production in growing goats (Capra hircushircus) and Sika deer (Cervusnipponhortulorum). Asian-Australasian J Anim Sci. 30:967–972.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nampoothiri VM, Mohini M, Malla BA, Mondal G, Pandita S. 2018. Growth performance, and enteric and manure greenhouse gas emissions from Murrah calves fed diets with different forage to concentrate ratios. Anim Nutr. 4:215–221.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• NATCOM. 2004. India’s initial national communication to the United Nations framework convention on climate change. Ministry of Environment and Forests.
   Google Scholar
• NRC. 2001. Nutrient requirements of dairy cattle. 7th Rev. Washington (D. C): National Academy of Sciences. National Research Council.
   Google Scholar
• NRC. 2007. Nutrient requirements of small ruminants: sheep, goats, cervids, and new world camelids. Washington:National Academy Press.
   Google Scholar
• Patra AK. 2012. Estimation of methane and nitrous oxide emissions from Indian livestock. J Environ Monit. 14:2673–2684.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Rashid MM, Haque KS, Hoque MA, Sarkar NR, Bhuiyan AKFH. 2015. Effect of concentrate to roughage ratio on cost effective growth performances of Brahman crossbred calves. J Agri Sci Technol. 5:286–295.
   Google Scholar
• Ribeiro CS, Granja-Salcedo YT, Messana JD, Neto AJ, Canesin RC, Fiorentini RC, Mff A, Tt B. 2015. Feeding increasing concentrate to Tifton 85 hay ratios modulated rumen fermentation and microbiota in Nellore feedlot steers. J Agric Sci. 153:1116–1127.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shibata M, Terada T. 2010. Factors affecting methane production and mitigation in ruminants. Anim Sci J. 81:2–10.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Steinfeld HP, Gerber TD, Wassenaar V, Castel M, Rosales M, Rosales, de Haan C. 2006. Livestock’s long shadow: environmental issues and options. Food & Agriculture Org.
   Google Scholar
• Tauqir NA, Shahzad MA, Nisa M, Sarwar M, Fayyaz M, Tipu MA. 2011. Response of growing buffalo calves to various energy and protein concentrations. Livest Sci. 137:66–72.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Soest PV, Robertson JB, Lewis BA. 1991. Methods for dietary fiber, neutral detergent fiber, and nonstarch polysaccharides in relation to animal nutrition. J Dairy Sci. 74:3583–3597.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Williams SRO, Moate PJ, Hannah MC, Ribaux BE, Wales WJ, Eckard RJ. 2011. Background matters with the SF6 tracer method for estimating enteric methane emissions from dairy cows: a critical evaluation of the SF6 procedure. Anim Feed Sci Technol. 170:265–276.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yagoub YM, Babiker SA. 2008. Effect of dietary energy level on growth and carcass characteristics of female goats in Sudan. Livest Res Rural Dev. 20. http://www.lrrd.org/lrrd20/12/yago20202.htm
   Google Scholar