Related Experiment Video
Updated: Sep 28, 2025

The Use of an Automated System GreenFeed to Monitor Enteric Methane and Carbon Dioxide Emissions from Ruminant Animals
Published on: September 7, 2015
Integrating heterogeneous across-country data for proxy-based random forest prediction of enteric methane in dairy
Enyew Negussie1, Oscar González-Recio2, Mara Battagin3
1Animal Genomics and Breeding, Natural Resources Institute Finland (Luke), 31600 Jokioinen, Finland.
Abstract:
Direct measurements of methane (CH4) from individual animals are difficult and expensive. Predictions based on proxies for CH4 are a viable alternative. Most prediction models are based on multiple linear regressions (MLR) and predictor variables that are not routinely available in commercial farms, such as dry matter intake (DMI) and diet composition. The use of machine learning (ML) algorithms to predict CH4 emissions from across-country heterogeneous data sets has not been reported. The objectives were to compare performances of ML ensemble algorithm random forest (RF) and MLR models in predicting CH4 emissions from proxies in dairy cows, and assess effects of imputing missing data points on prediction accuracy. Data on CH4 emissions and proxies for CH4 from 20 herds were provided by 10 countries. The integrated data set contained 43,519 records from 3,483 cows, with 18.7% missing data points imputed using k-nearest neighbor imputation. Three data sets were created, 3k (no missing records), 21k (missing DMI imputed from milk, fat, protein, body weight), and 41k (missing DMI, milk fat, and protein records imputed). These data sets were used to test scenarios (with or without DMI, imputed vs. nonimputed DMI, milk fat, and protein), and prediction models (RF vs. MLR). Model predictive ability was evaluated within and between herds through 10-fold cross-validation. Prediction accuracy was measured as correlation between observed and predicted CH4, root mean squared error (RMSE) and mean normalized discounted cumulative gain (NDCG). Inclusion of DMI in the model improved within and between-herd prediction accuracy to 0.77 (RMSE = 23.3%) and 0.58 (RMSE = 31.9%) in RF and to 0.50 (RMSE = 0.327) and 0.13 (RMSE = 42.71) in MLR, respectively than when DMI was not included in the predictive model. When missing DMI records were imputed, within and between-herd accuracy increased to 0.84 (RMSE = 18.5%) and 0.63 (RMSE = 29.9%), respectively. In all scenarios, RF models out-performed MLR models. Results suggest routinely measured variables from dairy farms can be used in developing globally robust prediction models for CH4 if coupled with state-of-the-art techniques for imputation and advanced ML algorithms for predictive modeling.
More Related Videos
08:29Measuring Liver Mitochondrial Oxygen Consumption and Proton Leak Kinetics to Estimate Mitochondrial Respiration in Holstein Dairy Cattle
Published on: November 30, 2018
06:52Lab-Scale Model to Evaluate Odor and Gas Concentrations Emitted by Deep Bedded Pack Manure
Published on: July 19, 2018
Related Concept Videos
Prediction Intervals
However, the point estimate is most likely not the exact value of the population parameter, but close to it. After calculating point estimates, we construct interval estimates, called confidence intervals or prediction intervals. This prediction interval comprises a range of values unlike the point estimate and is a better predictor of the observed sample value, y.
Multiple Regression
Farmers can use multiple regression to determine the crop yield based on more than one factor, such as water availability, fertilizer, soil properties, etc. Here, the crop yield is the response or dependent variable as it depends on the other independent variables. The analysis requires the construction of a scatter plot...