Skip to main content
. 2016 May 20;3:39. doi: 10.3389/fvets.2016.00039

Table 1.

List of developed linear and non-linear statistical models used to predict CH4 production (MJ/day) from buffaloes, sheep, goats, and tropical cattle.

Species Equation: CH4 (MJ/day) RMSE R2 RMSPE%
Sheep (96)
Eq. 1 = 0.208(±0.040) + 0.049(±0.0039) × GE intake (MJ/day) 0.24 0.86 22.7
Eq. 2 = 0.550(±0.172) + 1.299(±0.126) × DM intake (kg/day) − 0.266(±0.053) × FL − 0.00093(±0.00042) × NDF (g/kg) 0.22 0.92 22.4
Eq. 3 = −0.784(±0.269) + 0.138(±0.0084) × ME intake (MJ/day) − 0.378(±0.062) × FL + 0.00294(±0.00046) × OMDm − 1.943(±0.381) × metabolizability 0.21 0.94 24.5
Eq. 4 = 5.699(±1.94) − [5.699(±1.94) − 0.133(±0.047)] × exp[−0.021(±0.0071) × ME intake (MJ/day)] 0.14 0.91 20.7
IPCC (93)a = 0.065 × GE intake (MJ/day) 23.1
FAO (1)b = [(9.75 − 0.005 × DM digestibility g/kg)/100] × GE intake (MJ/day) 30.6
Goat (95)
Eq. 5 = 0.242(±0.073) + 0.0511(±0.0073) × DE intake (kg/day) 0.31 0.83 30.3
Eq. 6 = −1.042(±0.271) + 2.205(±0.395) × NDF intake (kg/day) − 2.417(±1.102) × EE intake (kg/day) + 1.456(±0.323) × NFC intake (kg/day) + 0.0208(±0.0039) × OMDm (g/kg) − 0.513(±0.137) × FL 0.14 0.82 30.3
Eq. 7 = 0.885(±0.154) + 0.809(±0.0867) × DM intake (kg/day) − 0.397(±0.0494) × FL + 0.0198(±0.0022) × OMDm (g/kg) + 2.04(±0.234) × ADF intake (kg/day) − 8.54(±0.548) × EE intake (kg/day) 0.24 0.88 36.3
Eq. 8 = 1.721(±0.151) × {1 − exp[−0.0721(±0.0092) × ME intake (kg/day)]} 0.17 0.79 38.0
Buffalo (2, 89)
Eq. 9 = 1.29(±0.576) + 0.788(±0.099) × DM intake (kg/day) 0.81 19.4
Eq. 10 = −0.436(±0.665) + 0.678(±0.184) × DM intake (kg/day) + 0.697(±0.347) × NDF intake (kg/day) 0.85 16.1
Eq. 11 = 21.71(±3.84) − [21.71(±3.84) − 0.732(±0.637)] − exp[−0.0485(±0.0094) × DM intake (kg/day)] 0.79 21.2
Cattle (94)
Eq. 12 = 9.311(±1.060) + 0.042(±0.001) × GE intake + 0.094(±0.014) × NDF − 0.381(±0.092) × EE + 0.008(±0.001) × BW + 1.621(±0.119) × MF; for lactating cattle 2.59 15.6
Eq. 13 = 2.880(±0.200) + 0.053(±0.001) × GE intake − 0.190(±0.049) × EE; for non-lactating cattle 1.29 14.4
Eq. 14 = 1.487(±0.318) + 0.046(±0.001) × GE intake + 0.032(±0.005) × NDF + 0.006(±0.0007) × BW; For heifer cattle 1.23 18.6
Eq. 15 = 0.221(±0.151) + 0.048(±0.001) × GE intake + 0.005(±0.0005) × BW; for steer 0.92 15.1
Tropical cattle (98)
Eq. 16 = 1.29(±0.906) + 0.878(±0.125) × DM intake 5.49 0.70 31.0
Eq. 17 = 0.910(±0.746) + 1.472(±0.154) × DM intake − 1.388(±0.451) × FL − 0.669(±0.338) × ADF intake 4.22 0.84 22.2
Eq. 18 = 71.47(±22.14) × [1 − exp(−0.0156(±0.0051) × DM intake)] 3.56 0.83 30.3

aIPCC (93) had RMSPE% of 52.4, 27.2, 18.6–30.5, and 32.5 for the database of goat, buffalo, cattle, and tropical cattle, respectively.

bFAO (1) had RMSPE% of 51.0 and 19.2–29.7% for the database of goat and cattle, respectively.

GE, gross energy; DE, digestible energy; DM, dry matter; NDF, neutral detergent fiber; FL, feeding level; ADF, acid detergent fiber; ME, metabolizable energy; EE, ether extract; NFC, non-fiber carbohydrate; OMDm, organic matter digestibility at maintenance level of feed intake; MF, milk fat (%); BW, body weight (kg); RMSE, root means square error; RMSPE, root mean square prediction error.