What question did this study set out to answer?

April 4, 2026Journal of Animal Science0 citations

Comparison of Greenhouse Gas Emissions Under Adaptive Multi-paddock and Continuous Grazing Systems Across Two U.S. Regions

CSCarlee M Salisbury JRJason E. Rowntree LTLogan R Thompson

Key Points

The study aims to compare greenhouse gas emissions under adaptive multi-paddock and continuous grazing systems across two regions of the U.S.
Conducted an observational study across Southeast and Northern Great Plains regions.
Measured soil and enteric greenhouse gas emissions using GreenFeed emission systems.
Controlled for soil type, land-use history, and climate by selecting paired ranches.
Under adaptive multi-paddock grazing in the Southeast, CH4 emissions were significantly lower (159.09 vs. 270.93 g/day).
CO2 emissions were also lower in the Southeast under adaptive multi-paddock grazing (6,644.58 vs. 9,199.72 g/day).
In the Northern Great Plains, CO2 emissions were lower under adaptive multi-paddock grazing, but CH4 emissions were similar between treatments.
In 2025, both CH4 and CO2 emissions were higher under adaptive multi-paddock grazing in the Northern Great Plains.

Abstract

Abstract Greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from livestock production systems are a significant component of agricultural emissions, prompting interest in management strategies that may mitigate their impact. Grazing lands represent a substantial portion of the U.S. agricultural landscape and contribute significantly to carbon cycling and methane emissions. With appropriate management, they also offer a viable pathway for climate mitigation. Adaptive Multi-Paddock (AMP) grazing is proposed as a regenerative alternative to conventional continuous grazing (CG), with potential to alter soil carbon dynamics and reduce enteric methane output. This observational study compares GHG emissions under AMP and CG management across two U.S. regions: the Southeast (SE) and the Northern Great Plains (NGP). Measurements focused on soil and enteric GHG emissions, specifically carbon dioxide (CO2) and methane (CH4). In each region, paired ranches were selected to control for soil type, land-use history, and climate. Enteric CH4 and carbon dioxide (CO2) production was determined utilizing 2 GreenFeed emission measurement systems (AHCS; C-Lock Inc., Rapid City, SD). Only visits greater than 3 minutes in duration were used for analysis. Greenhouse gas GHG emissions differed between AMP and CG systems across years and gas types. In the SE (2019), enteric CH4 (159.09 vs. 270.93 g/day, P 0.05) and CO2 (6,644.58 vs. 9,199.72 g/day, P 0.01) emissions were lower under AMP than CG. In the NGP (2024), CH4 emissions were similar between treatments (192.82 vs. 186.26 g/day, P = 0.38), while CO2 remained lower under AMP (6,813.37 vs. 7,606.30 g/day, P 0.01). In 2025 (NGP), both CH4 and CO2 emissions were higher under AMP, with CH4 at 247.09 vs. 203.02 g/day and CO2 at 9,314.67 vs. 7,657.48 g/day (P 0.01 for both) These results highlight that AMP grazing for an enteric CH4 benefit will be context-specific, with cattle type, forage quality, and localized weather all influencing emission rates.

AI에게 질문

Bookmark

View Full Paper