The only comment I have is that in the abstract and discussion you wrote:

"Enteric CH4 emissions per dry matter intake (DMI), measured in respiration chambers, decreased by 11% and 20.4%, respectively, for the 2 and 4 mg/kg BW groups and no further gain in CH4 yield thereafter was obtained with higher lovastatin supplementation."

and

"No further gain of methane yield with dosage higher than 4 mg/kg BW was ....."

To me a gain in yield implies an increase in methane per unit DMI rather than a decrease (or no further decrease) - which is what you found. Hence when you wrote "decreased by 11% and 20.4%, respectively, for the 2 and 4 mg/kg BW groups and no further gain in CH4 yield " the first bit makes sense - decrease in methane per DMI but the second bit doesn't - there wasn't a gain in yield - there was no further decrease

Compare this to the results:

"When CH4 reduction was adjusted to a per kg DMI (recorded during the two days gas measurement period) basis, CH4 production was 36.98 L/kg DMI for the control group and decreased (P<0.05) to 32.72 (7.8% reduction), 29.43 (20.4% reduction) and 29.21 L/kg DMI (21.0% reduction), respectively, for the 2, 4 and 6 mg/kg groups"

Hope that makes sense.

Also, please use the right acknowledgement for funding: "Funded by the New Zealand Government to support the objectives of the Livestock Research Group of the Global Research Alliance on Agricultural Greenhouse Gases. "
