Intensive Silvopastoral Systems Mitigate Enteric Methane Emissions from Cattle
Gustavo Flores-Coello,
Juan H. Hernández-Medrano,
Juan Ku-Vera,
Daniel Diaz,
Francisco J. Solorio-Sánchez,
Lucero Sarabia-Salgado,
Francisco Galindo
Affiliations
Gustavo Flores-Coello
Department of Ethology, Wildlife and Laboratory Animals, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Science, National Autonomous University of Mexico (UNAM), Ciudad Universitaria, Mexico City Z.C. 04510, Mexico
Juan H. Hernández-Medrano
Department of Production Animal Health, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB T2N4N1, Canada
Juan Ku-Vera
Climate Change and Livestock Laboratory, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Science, Autonomous University of Yucatan, Mérida Z.C. 97100, Mexico
Daniel Diaz
Center for Complexity Sciences (C3), National Autonomous University of Mexico (UNAM), Ciudad Universitaria, Madrid Z.C. 04510, Mexico
Francisco J. Solorio-Sánchez
Department of Ruminant Nutrition and the Tropic Environment, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Science, Autonomous University of Yucatan, Mérida Z.C. 97100, Mexico
Lucero Sarabia-Salgado
Faculty of Veterinary Medicine n 1, Autonomous University of Guerrero (UAGro), Altamirano City Z.C. 40665, Mexico
Francisco Galindo
Department of Ethology, Wildlife and Laboratory Animals, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Science, National Autonomous University of Mexico (UNAM), Ciudad Universitaria, Mexico City Z.C. 04510, Mexico
Assessments of the efficiency of grazing systems, in terms of productivity and ecological sustainability, are necessary in view of the increased demand for animal protein. In this study, the methane (CH4) emissions (sniffer methodology), dry matter (DM) yield, paddock chemical composition (AOAC and Van Soest methods), nutrient intake (dry matter, DMI; crude protein, CPI; metabolizable energy, MEI), daily milk yield (DMY), body condition score (BCS), and body weight (BW) of cattle, in intensive silvopastoral systems (ISPSs) and monoculture systems (MSs), in the tropics of Mexico were evaluated. In the ISPS, CH4 emissions (18% less) and DMY were lower than in the MS. Cows from MSs tend to disperse across higher values of CH4 emissions per kg of DMI, as well as higher milk production, while cows from the ISPS were dispersed over a higher intake (DMI, CPI, and MEI) and lower CH4 emissions. There were no differences between systems in paddock DM yield, chemical composition, cows’ BCS, and BW, regardless of whether it was the dry (April to May) and rainy (September to October) season. Based on the results obtained in this study, ISPSs contribute to the mitigation of methane emissions in cattle; forage and animal production variables in both systems were similar, with a lower use of imported inputs in the ISPS.