This document discusses several topics related to ruminants and sustainability, including: 1) The need to increase efficient use of byproducts from food/fiber processing as animal feed sources by 2050 to meet growing demand while minimizing land use. 2) Research into herbivore gut ecosystems and rumen systems biology to better understand microbe interactions and maximize production with lower environmental impact. 3) Evidence that certain animal products can provide health benefits to humans if produced sustainably, and that grass-fed systems and lipid supplementation can alter milk fatty acid profiles. 4) Greenhouse gas emissions from livestock vary significantly depending on production system and management practices, and methane mitigation strategies include lipid supplementation, feed add

1. 13-14 November 2008
E. J. Kim, C. J. Newbold and
N. D. Scollan
Ruminants and sustainability: The
main improvements possibilities
Jamie Newbold

2. Demand on land increasing
New knowledge-based farming systems profitable at farm level, produce
competitive products, environmentally sustainable and energy efficient
(SCAR, 2008)
Feed
Land Use
Food Fuel
Fibre

3. Additional grain required by 2050
1048 million tonnes of which:
–430 million tonnes for livestock
–480 million tonnes for humans
(IAASTD 2009)

4. Sources of feed for animal production
• Forages from land not able to grow crops
• Crop residues
• Food and fiber processing by-products
Human - inedible materials:

5. Common by-products used for feed
Nutrient supplied By-product
Protein brewer’s grains, distiller’s grains,
cull beans, feather meal
Protein and energy brewer’s grains, distiller’s grains,
corn gluten feed, peanut
screenings, wheat mids
Energy bakery meal, fat, hominy feed,
snack food waste, soft drink syrup,
soyhulls, vegetable, fruit-
processing waste
Roughage sources apple pomace, corn cobs,
cottonseed hulls, peanut hulls, rice
by-products
There are wide range of by-products. Increased and efficient use of by-products is
important for animal agriculture in future!!!

6. 1960 1970 1980 1990
Cropland 1409 1432 1417 1444
Pastures and meadows 2569 3059 3333 3402
Forests and Woodlands 4046 4028 4100 4029
Other 5307 4872 4229 4205
World land use million hectares

7. Herbivore Gut Ecosystems
Understanding the interaction between gut microbes,
animals and the forage they eat in order to maximise
production and reduce environmental impact

8. Integrated analysis
(Meta)genome
Transcriptome
Proteome
Metabolome
Microbial
products for
industry
Primary feeds
Low
emissions
Improved feed
Trait selection
Rumen Systems Biology

9. Animal products and health
• high in fat
• saturated fatty acids
• cardiovascular disease
• carcinogenic potential
• source of micronutrients

10. Meat, milk/dairy
Quality
protein
Haem-iron
Quality lipids
(n-3 PUFA)
Essential
minerals
(Zn, Se, Ca, P) Balanced
vitamins
(B9, B12, A)

11. Hazard ratios (and 95% CIs) for 2-y incidence of
hypertension by quartile dairy product intake in
2245 Dutch adults aged >=55 y
11 Quartiles of intake (Engberink et al., 2009)

12. 12
Epidemiological evidence indicates
that milk has cardioprotective
properties such that simply reducing
consumption of dairy foods to meet
SFA targets may not be a sound
public health approach
(Givens, 2008)

13. Grass silage and added oils
milk lipids
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
SFA MUFA PUFA
%ofmilkfattyacids
Control
Rapeseed oil
Soya bean oil
Linseed oil
(Shingfield et al., 2008)
Modelling suggests such changes at
EU level would reduce CHD…
implementation which require major
changes in agro-food industry at both
economic and political
(Givens, 2008)

14. CH4
N2O

15. GHG emissions (kg CO2e/kg product) by
livestock product
Beef 12.98
Sheep 17.4
Pig 6.35
Poultry 4.57
Milk 1.32
Foster et al (2006)

16. Farm 1 Farm 2
Mean (Range) Mean (Range)
Total 1215
(368- 3726)
3091
(789 – 9305)
Total GHG emissions on two mixed
sheep/cattle farms
(kg CO2 e /ha/year)
(Edwards-Jones et al., 2009)
Farm 1 - Intensive lowland
Farm 2 - Organic extensive

17. Returns from Animal Production
(Energy in Human Food / Energy in Feed)
Total Human Edible
Product USA Other USA Other
Beef 0.07 0.04 0.65 7.60
Pork 0.21 0.16 0.31 0.40
Poultry meat 0.19 0.19 0.28 0.50
Eggs 0.17 0.13 0.24 0.30
Milk 0.25 0.15 1.07 3.05
Feed Inputs

18. Improved
fertility
Improved
health
Improved
genetics
Decreased No.
of animals
required per
kg product
More
energy
dense
feed
Decreased CH4
emissions per
animal
Routes for impact of management and
technology interventions designed to
improve productivity on GHG emissions
from livestock (Gill et al. 2009)

19. Redirection of metabolic hydrogen
Methods of methane mitigation:
Feed
CH4
CO2
Methanogens
Protozoa
Microbial cells
200
220
240
260
280
300
320
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
Control AberAvon
WSC(g/kgDM)
CH4(mmol/gDMD)
CH4 (mmol/g DM degraded)
WSC (g/kg DM)

20. -10
0
10
20
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
oC
CH4emission(llamb-1d-1)
Control HWSC Mean temp
c. 20% reduction in
emission per lamb
Live weight Gain (g/d)
Control 106
HWSC 153

21. CH4
CO2
Methanogens
Protozoa
H2
H2
Methane production: a microbially driven process to remove hydrogen
Feed

22. Literature summary of added fat vs CH4 production
Y = 5.562 (SE = 0.590) × % added fat; r2 = 0.67; P = 0.004

23. 0
1
2
3
4
5
6
0 2 20 0 2 20
Allicin concentration (µg/mL)
Methaneproduction(mmol/d)
0.000
0.002
0.004
0.006
0.008
0.010
0.012
0.014
0.016
Methanogens(ΔΔCt)
a
a
b
A
A
B
CH4
CO2
Methanogens
Protozoa
Methods of methane mitigation:
Inhibition of methanogens

24. Pyrosequencing
www.454.com
Genomic DNA
The V3 region of the 16s rRNA (400 bp) was amplified using27F and
357R. Both primers carry on the 5’ extremity the adaptators (Roche,
Amplicon protocol) needed for the emulsion PCR and a 4bp tag was
included between the 357R primer and the adaptator.These tags
allowed us to discriminateeach of the 9 samples when sequenced
from the 357R primer. Five PCR for each sample(9 DNA samples)
were pooled sent for sequencing on a Genome Sequencer FLX
system .

25. 0
1
2
3
4
5
20
25
30
Prevotella
Ruminobacter
Succinivibrio
Treponema
Ruminococcus
Fibrobacter
Butyrivibrio
Megasphaera
Control Bicarbonate Yeast
b
a
b
a
b
a
a
bb
Amylolytic Plan cell wall
degraders
Lactate utilising
Bacterial composition at the genera level

27. Rumen conditioningsheep (Chloroform, CHCl3)
High concentrate High hay
x20 x20
CHCl3 + CHCl3 +CHCl3 - CHCl3 -
x10 x10 x10 x10
Weaning
Sampling Sampling
Field for 12 wks
Sampling Sampling
TRFLP, pyrosequencing, methane chambers
TRFLP, pyrosequencing, methane chambers

28. Table of Means Showing CH4/L/D from Hay:Concentrate diet (H:C), Hay diet (H),
Chloroform -Untreated (-) and Chloroform -Treated (+) Lambs
Period 1
H:C H SED P- Values
- + - + D/C Diet (D) Chloroform (C) D/C
CH4/L/D
12.25 4.72 8.20 5.92 2.723 0.466 0.017 0.185
CH4/L/Kg
DMI 12.00 5.80 19.80 17.20 4.320 0.004 0.158 0.563

29. Table of Means Showing CH4/L/D from Hay:Concentrate diet (H:C), Hay diet (H),
Chloroform -Untreated (-) and Chloroform -Treated (+) Lambs
Period 2
H:C H SED P- Values
- + - + D/C Diet (D) Chloroform (C) D/C
CH4/L/D
23.80 20.07 20.14 17.10 1.922 0.023 0.020 0.800
CH4/L/Kg
DMI 21.02 18.82 17.38 17.09 0.885 <.001 0.059 0.140

31. Questions