Skip to main content

Role of Ruminant Animals in Global Climate Change

Ruminant animals are great contributors to the human food chain due to their ability to utilize complex polysaccharides in plant cell walls (cellulose, hemicelluloses and pectin), which are otherwise non digestible to any of the mammalian digestive enzyme and turn these into meat and milk for human consumption. Digestion of these polysaccharides in ruminant diets is attributable to anaerobic biodegradation of these compounds into their respective monomers by microorganisms (bacteria and fungi) present in the forestomach of the animals. In spite of their contribution to the human food chain, ruminant animals are often debated as one of the contributing factors in global climate change due to the emission of CH4 as a byproduct of fermentative digestion of feedstuffs in the forestomach. In addition, production of methane by ruminants causes a significant amount of feed energy loss which could be used for animal growth and production if methane production is prevented.

Domestic ruminant animals are one of the important anthropogenic sources of methane which contribute approximately 23% (81 Tg of CH4) of the total anthropogenic annual methane production, and this is the second largest (fossil fuel is the first) source of anthropogenic methane production. Approximately two thirds of total methane production by domestic ruminants is contributed by cattle and the rest is shared by other domestic ruminants like buffalo, sheep, goats etc. Several factors influence the enteric methane emissions from ruminants. Daily dry matter intake, digestibility of the feed, amount of fibres and soluble carbohydrate in diet, type of volatile fatty acids (VFAs) produced during fermentation (acetate: propionate ratio) etc, effect the amount of enteric methane production. Similarly, animal species, breed and composition of the microbial population in the rumen and rumen pH also affect methane production. 

Thus, reduction in methane emission from ruminants has twofold benefits. Firstly, it will help to reduce the global warming due to greenhouse gases and secondly, it reduces feed energy loss. Reduction in methane emission will result in higher growth and productivity of ruminant and improve the efficiency of feed utilization with the same amount of energy supplied. Reduction in GHG emissions from ruminant animals could be done earlier than from other sectors and requires less effort and financial investment thus making the strategy more feasible.

P.S.: References are available on request.


  1. what may be the intervention then ?

    1. There are lots of strategies being considered and studied to reduce the emissions from Ruminants..increasing the productivity of the animals could be the most feasible method for developing countries which will help to reduce the emissions per unit livestock products. I will be happy to send the details if you want more details on intervention strategies. Thank you for following.

  2. Interesting read... I must admit I was quite ignorant about the fact that ruminant animals also contribute to GHG emissions. From what you write, a change of diet for ruminants might be a strategy as well, but that might not be feasible for a country like ours... at least not in the short to medium term I think.

    Thanks for the article, I will be interested to read more like these.

  3. That's true Nirmal sir, even changing in diet could help to reduce the emissions and lots of research are running in this area...feeding plants consisting saponin, tannin and certain essential oils also help to reduce the emission significantly but the the challenge here is this changes in emission is temporary i.e. animal revert to original emissions rate once they adopt the food...some of our indigenous plant/herbs may have potential to reduce the emissions but requires research in this area...there are lots of other alternatives being studied


Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Basic Concepts of Food Security: Definition, Dimensions and Integrated Phase Classification

by Yadav Sharma Bajagai "Food Security" is one of major elements of development and poverty alleviation and has been the goal of many international and national public organizations. The issue is so important that according to the state of food insecurity in the world 2012 published by FAO around 870 million people (out of which 852 million from developing countries) are estimated to have been undernourished in the period 2010-12. Although the phrase "Food Security" is being used widely, the definition and concept of food security is elusive and being evolved and expanded over time.

Agriculture and Food Security Project (AFSP) Nepal: An Initiative to Fight Against Hunger

Background Household food deficiency due to low agricultural productivity, limited livelihood opportunities, inefficient food distribution system, weak market linkage, poor infrastructure and lack of awareness among general public about healthy food habit are some of the development challenges in Nepal. Within the country western Nepal suffer more from poverty and hunger with 37% of the people living below the poverty line compared to the national average of 25.16%. Similarly, productivity of major crops is significantly lower than the national average which is already among the lowest in South Asia. Per capita consumption of animal products (32 litres of milk, 7.5 kg of meat and 6.4 eggs per capita per annum) is among the lowest in the region hunger indices pointing to an extremely alarming situation. Household food balance (result of food inflow, household production, household consumption and outflow) is negative almost throughout the year in the region.  Government of

Competition between sheep and kangaroos in Australia

by Yadav Sharma Bajagai Summery   Millions of sheep and kangaroos share the same habitat in the sheep rangelands of southern Australia and dietary competition between these two species has been a matter of concern to pastoralists, conservation ecologists and animal scientists for long time. This issue has been tried to be addressed in this article. It is found that sheep and kangaroos both positively select grass and forb resulting considerable overlapping in their diet during flush season. But when grasses are in short supply during drought, sheep are forced to eat more of less preferred vegetation (chenopods). Sheep are more flexible than kangaroos to shift into chenopods and other shrubs decreasing the overlap in diet during dry season. Dietary competition is not significant when pasture biomass production is high (>30 g DM/m 2 ) but it requires due attention when there is low biomass production during drought. Issue has been discussed and recommendation has been d