Article

Comparative Analysis of Enteric Methane Emissions in Lactating Holstein Cows Using the GreenFeed Monitoring System and the Sniffer Method

Kyunghwan Oh1,8, Yoorae Kim2, Janghoon Jo3, Wonseob Kim4, Yubeen Cho1, Taketo Obitsu5, Eunjoong Kim6, Huseong Lee7, Sanggun Roh8, Jaesung Lee1, Sungdae Lee9, Honggu Lee1,*
Author Information & Copyright
1Department of Animal Science, Konkuk University, Seoul 05029, Korea.
2Department of Animal Science, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park 16802, United States.
3Department of Animal Science, Purdue University, West Lafayette 47907, United States.
4Department of Animal Resources, Daegu University, Gyeongsan 38453, Korea.
5Graduate School of Biosphere Science, Hiroshima University, Higashi-Hiroshima 739-8528, Japan.
6Department of Animal Science and Biotechnology, Kyungpook National University, Sangju 37224, Korea.
7Institute of Agriculture, Academic Assembly, Shinshu University, Nagano 399-4598, Japan.
8Graduate School of Agricultural Science, Tohoku University, Sendai 980-8572, Japan.
9Precision Animal Nutrition Division, National Institute of Animal Science, Rural Development Administration, Wanju 55365, Korea.
*Corresponding Author: Honggu Lee, Department of Animal Science, Konkuk University, Seoul 05029, Korea, Republic of. Phone: +82-2-450-0523. E-mail: hglee66@konkuk.ac.kr.

© Copyright 2026 Korean Society of Animal Science and Technology. This is an Open-Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Abstract

This study aimed to evaluate two different spot-sampling methods—the sniffer-based method (SB) and the GreenFeed system (GF)—for estimating enteric methane (CH<sub>4</sub>) emissions in dairy cows. Specifically, this study was performed to determine whether the SB using a gas hood system could serve as an acceptable alternative to the GF under practical on-farm conditions. A total of 24 lactating Holstein cows were used across three experimental phases (n = 24). CH<sub>4</sub> emissions were measured eight times over four consecutive days in each phase, with measurements taken twice per phase using both the GF and SB. CH<sub>4</sub> emissions from the SB were estimated by applying the CH<sub>4</sub>-to-carbon dioxide ratio to a previously validated prediction equation. Results showed that the GF tended to report higher CH<sub>4</sub> emissions (312.9 ± 56.50 g/d) compared to the SB (297.1 ± 61.83 g/d). Bland–Altman analysis showed acceptable agreement between methods, with a bias of 15.78 g/d and 95% limits of agreement ranging from –96.12 to 127.68 g/d, corresponding to 7.1% of the total range. For the CH<sub>4</sub>-to-carbon dioxide ratio, the SB produced consistently higher values (0.077 ± 0.012) than the GF (0.064 ± 0.011). Bland–Altman analysis for the CH<sub>4</sub>-to-carbon dioxide ratio indicated a small mean bias (–0.012) and minimal proportional deviation (21.3%). Variance homogeneity testing using the Brown-Forsythe test indicated no significant method-dependent differences in CH<sub>4</sub> emission variability across experimental phases (<italic>p</italic> = 0.104). Phase-specific performance of the SB showed acceptable agreement with the GF, with mean absolute percentage errors ranging from 11.57% to 19.20% and confidence rates between 80.80% and 88.43% across phases. In summary, the SB provided CH<sub>4</sub> estimates comparable to those from the GF across all experimental phases. Given its advantages such as portability, flexible installation, and low operational cost, the SB represents a feasible and accessible alternative for on-farm quantification of CH<sub>4 </sub>emissions in dairy cows. Together, these findings indicate that the SB provides acceptable estimates of CH<sub>4</sub> emissions from lactating Holstein cows under on-farm conditions, making it a feasible on-farm measurement method alternative to the GF.

Keywords: Dairy cow; GreenFeed system; Measurement technique; Methane emission; Sniffer


Revised Publication Charge

(Effective for articles submitted beginning January 1, 2026)

The publication charge is 1,500,000 Korean Won per article for members of the Korean Society of Animal Science and Technology (KSAST), and 2,000,000 Korean Won for non-members. First and corresponding authors are required to pay the annual membership fee.

The publication charge for a corresponding author outside Korea is 1,500 US dollars per article.


I don't want to open this window for a day.