Beneficial management practices and mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions in the agriculture of the Canadian Prairie: a review

Asgedom, Haben; Kebreab, E.

doi:10.1007/s13593-011-0016-2

Cited by 57 publications

(28 citation statements)

References 91 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Other studies examining pasture management intensification (Asgedom and Kebreab, 2011;Bell et al, 2012b;Foley et al, 2011) also reported this relationship. Pasture yield and forage quality are dependent on precipitation patterns.…”

Section: Pasture Management Cow-calf Efficiency and Whole-system Susmentioning

confidence: 61%

Optimizing diet and pasture management to improve sustainability of U.S. beef production

White

Brady

Capper³

et al. 2014

Agricultural Systems

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

a b s t r a c tSystem sustainability balances environmental impact, economic viability and social acceptability. Assessment methods to investigate impacts of enterprise management and consumer decisions on sustainability of beef cattle operations are critically needed. Tools of this nature are especially important given the predictions of climate variability and the dependence of beef production systems on forage availability. A model optimizing nutritional and pasture management was created to examine the environmental impact of beef production. The model integrated modules calculating cradle-to-farm gate environmental impact, diet cost, pasture growth and willingness to pay (WTP). Least-cost diet and pasture management options served as a baseline to which environmental-impact reducing scenarios were compared. Economic viability was ensured by a constraint limiting change in diet cost to less than consumer WTP. Increased WTP was associated with improved social acceptability. Model outputs were evaluated by comparing to published data. Sensitivity analysis of the WTP constraint was conducted. A series of scenarios then examined how forecasted changes in precipitation patterns might alter forage supply and opportunities to reduce environmental impact in three regions in the United States. On a national scale, single-objective optimization indicated individual reductions in greenhouse gases (GHG), land use and water use of 3.6%, 5.4% and 4.3% were possible by changing diets. Multi-objective optimization demonstrated that GHG, land and water use could be simultaneously reduced by 2.3%. To achieve this change, cow-calf diets relied on grass hay, continuously-or rotationally-grazed irrigated and fertilized pasture as well as rotationally-grazed pasture. Stocker diets used rotationally-grazed, irrigated and fertilized pasture and feedlot diets used grass hay as a forage source. The model was sensitive to consumer WTP. When alternative precipitation patterns were simulated, opportunities to decrease the environmental impact of beef production in the Pacific Northwest and Texas were reduced by precipitation changes; whereas opportunities in the Midwest improved. Economic viability, rather than biological limitations, reduced the potential to improve environmental impact under future precipitation scenarios. Decreased spring rainfall resulted in lower pasture yields and required greater use of stored forages. Related increases in diet cost reduced opportunities to appropriate funds toward investment in environmental-impact reducing pasture management strategies. The model developed in this study is a robust tool that can be used to assess the impacts of enterprise management and consumer decisions on beef production sustainability.

show abstract

Section: Pasture Management Cow-calf Efficiency and Whole-system Susmentioning

confidence: 61%

Optimizing diet and pasture management to improve sustainability of U.S. beef production

White

Brady

Capper³

et al. 2014

Agricultural Systems

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Increasing N fertilizer application for the sake of providing sufficient quantity of grains to meet the ever-growing population's needs has given rise to heavy carbon emissions. A well consideration of applying the N fertilizer at right rate, proper selection of the N sources, and timing application is highly recommended (Asgedom and Kebreab 2011). Cropping system is the major component of farmland, by managing farm in space and time.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Also, cropping intensification is recognized as a key farming strategy in reducing global warming potential (Gan et al 2012). The adoption of intercropping has significant advantages on carbon sequestration than conventional sole cropping (Asgedom and Kebreab 2011;Gan et al 2011a). For example, maize-soybean (Glycine max L.) intercropping (Dyer et al 2012) and maize-wheat intercropping (Beedy et al 2010) enhance soil carbon sequestration and reduce carbon emission significantly compared to the corresponding monocultures.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Less carbon emissions of wheat–maize intercropping under reduced tillage in arid areas

Chai

et al. 2014

Agron. Sustain. Dev.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Intercropping is used to increase grain production in many areas of the world. However, this increasing crop yield costs large amounts of water used by intercropped plants. In addition, intercropping usually requires higher inputs that induce greenhouse gas emissions. Actually, it is unknown whether intercropping can be effective in waterlimited arid areas. Here, we measured crop yield, water consumption, soil respiration, and carbon emissions of wheatmaize intercropping under different tillage and crop residue management options. . Reduced tillage decreased C emission over conventional tillage by 6.7 % for the intercropping, 5.9 % for monoculture maize, and 7.1 % for monoculture wheat. Compared to monoculture maize, wheat-maize intercropping used more water but emitted 3.4 kg C per hectare per millimeter of water used, which was 23 % lower than monoculture maize. Overall, our findings show that maize-wheat intercropping with reduced tillage coupled with stubble mulching can be used to increase grain production while effectively lower carbon emissions in arid areas.

show abstract

“…Further, the cattle industry plays an essential role in the Canadian economy, generating more than $7.3B in cash farm sales in 2011 (www5.statcan.gc.ca/cansim/a47, Table 0020065 Farm Financial Survey, Financial Structure by Farm Type, Average per Farm, accessed December 2014), much of it benefitting rural communities. In order to manage these contrasting attributes and to inform government policy (Asgedom and Kebreab 2011), it is important to document the current husbandry practices used in beef cattle operations and to document changes that have occurred over time. The last targeted, extensive farm survey of beef cattle husbandry in Canada, the Livestock Farm Practices Survey (LFPS), was completed in 2006 (Sheppard et al 2009;Sheppard and Bittman 2012), with a more limited survey of the sale and consumption of pasture-finished beef being conducted in 2005 (Lozier et al 2005).…”

Section: Mots Clé Smentioning

confidence: 99%

Beef cattle husbandry practices across Ecoregions of Canada in 2011

SheppardS.¹,

BittmanS.

DonohoeG.

et al. 2015

Can. J. Anim. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Sheppard, S. C., Bittman, S., Donohoe, G., Flaten, D., Wittenberg, K. M., Small, J. A., Berthiaume, R., McAllister, T. A., Beauchemin, K. A., McKinnon, J., Amiro, B. D., MacDonald, D., Mattos, F. and Ominski, K. H. 2015. Beef cattle husbandry practices across Ecoregions of Canada in 2011. Can. J. Anim. Sci. 95: 305–321. Beef production in Canada is diverse in many dimensions with numbers of cattle per operation ranging over 10 000-fold, pasture usage from nil to 100%, and types of operations from solely cow–calf to exclusively feedlot finishing. This study summarizes management information obtained from a survey conducted in 2012 (about 2011) on 1009 beef operations in Canada. Many of the results clearly differentiate the practices in the Prairies from those in Ontario and Quebec. Compared to eastern Canada, the Prairies had earlier and shorter calving seasons, higher weaning weights, utilized more winter grazing with a variety of strategies, grew and fed more barley than corn, used more seasonal feeding areas and feedlots (and hence fewer barns), and more commonly spread manure in the fall. Many of the management practices used by cow–calf operations would have low environmental impact, including extensive use of grazing even in winter, low fertilizer inputs and feeding perennial forages with a high content of legumes. Some practices such as not covering forages or manure storage structures were common and could be changed to improve forage quality and reduce manure emissions. Most forage was harvested 3–7 d after full bloom. Earlier harvest has the potential to improve forage quality, which could reduce dependence on arable crops. Finishing operations used more housing, fed more arable-land crops and less perennial forages, and practiced little grazing. Rationale regarding the adoption of many of the management strategies was reported by the producers. For example, winter grazing was adopted primarily to reduce costs and labour, but for some it was also linked to a late calving season. Preferred sources of technical information included their own experience, farm print media, producer organisations and demonstrations at field days. The survey also identified several areas in which the industry may realize improved sustainability.

show abstract

Beneficial management practices and mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions in the agriculture of the Canadian Prairie: a review

Abstract: International audienc

Cited by 57 publications

References 91 publications

Optimizing diet and pasture management to improve sustainability of U.S. beef production

Optimizing diet and pasture management to improve sustainability of U.S. beef production

Less carbon emissions of wheat–maize intercropping under reduced tillage in arid areas

Beef cattle husbandry practices across Ecoregions of Canada in 2011

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About