No abstract

Accurately accounting for water budgets within regional agroecosystems is becoming an increasingly important practice, as both climate change and water consumption pressures have the potential for influencing agro-productivity and other water use activities. In this study, water budget measurements from 10 rainfed experimental sites across Canada were utilized to evaluate the performance of three models for their water partitioning capabilities: denitrification-decomposition (DNDC), Holos, and versatile soil moisture budget (VSMB). To assess the likely model performance at an upscaled national level, the models were applied at the site level with no water component-specific calibration. Evapotranspiration (ET) was found to be the dominate component of the water budget at the prairie sites (89%-149% of precipitation) (i.e., in comparison to runoff, tile drainage, and deep percolation), while both ET (37%-73% of precipitation) and drainage (19%-61% of precipitation) represented most of the water outflow budget at the sites in eastern and Atlantic Canada. As DNDC integrates daily crop growth dynamics with nitrogen, water, and heat stresses, in contrast to VSMB and Holos, which only utilize a water budget model, it was not surprising to find that DNDC consistently out-performed the other two models across all the statistical performance metrics considered at daily resolution.

ABSTRACT:The depletion of water resources, in terms of both quantity and quality, has become a major concern both locally and globally. Ruminants, in particular, are under increased public scrutiny due to their relatively high water use per unit of meat or milk produced. Estimating the water footprint of livestock production is a relatively new field of research for which methods are still evolving. This review describes the approaches used to quantify water use in ruminant production systems as well as the methodological and conceptual issues associated with each approach. Water use estimates for the main products from ruminant production systems are also presented, along with possible management strategies to reduce water use. In the past, quantifying water withdrawal in ruminant production focused on the water demand for drinking or operational purposes. Recently, the recognition of water as a scarce resource has led to the development of several methodologies including water footprint assessment, life cycle assessment, and livestock water productivity to assess water use and its environmental impacts. These methods differ with respect to their target outcome (efficiency or environmental impacts), geographic focus (local or global), description of water sources (green, blue, and gray), handling of water quality concerns, the interpretation of environmental impacts, and the metric by which results are communicated (volumetric units or impact equivalents). Ruminant production is a complex activity where animals are often reared at different sites using a range of resources over their lifetime. Additional water use occurs during slaughter, product processing, and packaging. Estimating water use at the various stages of meat and milk production and communicating those estimates will help producers and other stakeholders identify hotspots and implement strategies to improve water use efficiency. Improvements in ruminant productivity (i.e., BW and milk production) and reproductive efficiency can also reduce the water footprint per unit product. However, given that feed production makes up the majority of water use by ruminants, research and development efforts should focus on this area. More research and clarity are needed to examine the validity of assumptions and possible trade-offs between ruminants' water use and other sustainability indicators.

Abstract. Recently, bioreactors, such as biotrickling filters, have been used to reduce odor and gas emissions from livestock facilities. Considerable efforts have already been made over the years to evaluate and improve the efficiencies of bioreactors used for this purpose; however, no study has yet been published that attempts to provide a thorough assessment of the performance of bioreactors in eliminating most (if not all) of the gases exhausted from swine facilities. Thus, this study was conducted to obtain a better understanding of the performance of biotrickling filters in treating swine odors by conducting a comprehensive evaluation of their overall performance in removing odor and gaseous components. Evaluating the performance of biotrickling filters using persistent gaseous components, i.e., those that remain in the treated air and contribute to the malodor, helps identify areas of the treatment system that can still be potentially improved. The gaseous components monitored were ammonia (NH3), hydrogen sulfide (H2S), and volatile organic compounds (VOCs). Samples were collected from two four-week trials using three laboratory-scale pig chamber and biotrickling filter systems. The NH3 and H2S concentrations were measured using non-dispersive infrared and ultraviolet fluorescence analyzers, respectively, while VOCs were collected using adsorption tubes and analyzed by a gas chromatograph coupled with a mass spectrometer and an olfactory detection port (GC-MS-O). Samples for odor measurement were also collected and analyzed using a dynamic olfactometer. Linear regression and odor index were used to identify the odorants that had the largest odor impacts. Odor index is an integrated parameter that expresses the combined contributions of odor intensity and hedonic tone to the perceived odor. Of the 176 VOCs identified in the samples, the odor components that had the largest odor impacts included butanoic acid, 3-methylbutanoic acid, 2-methylbutanoic acid, 2-methylpropionic acid, pentanoic acid, p-cresol, 2,3-butanedione, and dimethyl sulfide. However, most of these substances were almost completely eliminated in the biotrickling filters, except p-cresol and dimethyl sulfide. This implies that optimizing the removal of poorly water-soluble components, such as p-cresol and dimethyl sulfide, could further improve the performance of biotrickling filters in treating swine odors. Keywords: Biotrickling filters, Removal efficiency, Swine odor components.