Agricultural Systems最新文献

{"title":"Lowering the greenhouse gas and ammonia emissions from grassland-based dairy production","authors":"Owen Cashman ,&nbsp;Imelda Casey ,&nbsp;Marion Sorley ,&nbsp;Patrick Forrestal ,&nbsp;David Styles ,&nbsp;David Wall ,&nbsp;William Burchill ,&nbsp;James Humphreys","doi":"10.1016/j.agsy.2024.104151","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.agsy.2024.104151","url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>CONTEXT</h3><div>Lowering greenhouse gas (GHG) and ammonia emissions from ruminant production systems is critical to mitigating climate change and enrichment and acidification of vulnerable habitats. Quantifying emission reductions from the implementation of best practices (BP) on grassland-based dairy systems is essential to guide farmers and policy towards wider adoption of best practices.</div></div><div><h3>OBJECTIVE</h3><div>The aim was to evaluate the extent to which the adoption of BP lowered the GHG and ammonia emissions of grassland-based dairy systems per kg of fat protein corrected milk (FPCM) and per hectare (ha).</div></div><div><h3>METHODS</h3><div>Life cycle assessment was used to calculate emissions from systems of dairy production adopting BP. Data were collected from systems-scale experiments conducted at Solohead Research Farm, Co. Tipperary, Ireland (52°51′N, 08°21′W) between 2011 and 2022. There were three systems that had an average of 27 cows per system and an average annual stocking rate of 2.53 cows ha⁻¹. INT was the control and included average annual fertiliser N input of 265 kg ha⁻¹, applied as calcium ammonium nitrate (CAN 27.5% N) and urea (46 % N) and average annual clover content of grassland dry matter was 110 g kg⁻¹, and slurry was applied by splash plate. BPN included average annual fertiliser N input of 99 kg ha⁻¹ applied as urea or protected urea, clover content was 230 g kg⁻¹ and slurry was applied by trailing shoe. BPO received minimal (&lt;5 kg ha⁻¹) inputs of fertiliser N, clover content was 280 g kg⁻¹ and slurry was applied by trailing shoe. INT encompassed each of 7 experimental years, BPN 7 years and BPO 4 years. All relevant farm activity data was modelled on the basis of a 59 ha farm.</div></div><div><h3>RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS</h3><div>GHG emissions averaged 1.05, 0.80 and 0.73 kg CO₂e kg FPCM⁻¹ (<em>SEM</em> <em>=</em> <em>0.035, P</em> <em>&lt;</em> <em>0.001</em>) for INT, BPN and BPO respectively. GHG emissions per hectare were 15.0, 11.5 and 10.7 t CO₂e (<em>SEM</em> <em>=</em> <em>0.485, P</em> <em>&lt;</em> <em>0.001</em>). Ammonia emissions were lower from BPN and BPO compared with INT (P &lt; 0.001). Replacing artificial fertiliser N with biologically fixed N (BFN) had the largest impact on GHG mitigation. Low emissions slurry spreading (LESS) in the form of the trailing shoe and replacing artificial fertiliser N with BFN had the greatest impact on ammonia emissions.</div></div><div><h3>SIGNIFICANCE</h3><div>Adopting BP lowered GHG emissions by up to 29 % and ammonia emissions by up to 37 % compared with a conventional intensive system of grassland-based milk production. These results can aid farmers to contribute to emissions reduction targets.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":7730,"journal":{"name":"Agricultural Systems","volume":"222 ","pages":"Article 104151"},"PeriodicalIF":6.1,"publicationDate":"2024-11-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142653368","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Vegetation-based Ecological Functions Sustainability Index (VEFSI) for optimizing ecosystem services in orchards","authors":"Ilaria Bruno ,&nbsp;Ilaria Mania ,&nbsp;Matteo Lovera ,&nbsp;Luca Brondino ,&nbsp;Cristiana Peano","doi":"10.1016/j.agsy.2024.104186","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.agsy.2024.104186","url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>CONTEXT</h3><div>The need to quantify sustainability in agriculture and the ecosystem services it provides is increasingly felt by the sector. Indicators and indices are useful tools for this purpose, but are currently scarce in the specialized fruit-growing sector. In addition, there is a need for a more holistic view of the orchard system, which also considers unproductive spaces, such as the inter-row, where techniques can be implemented to improve adaptation to climate change.</div></div><div><h3>OBJECTIVES</h3><div>To help filling this gap, we developed VEFSI (Vegetation-based Ecological Functions Sustainability Index), a multifunctional index that can be used by technicians, researchers and farmers to establish the quality of grass cover in the orchard's inter-row in order to increase the ecosystem services performed by this.</div></div><div><h3>METHODS</h3><div>A dataset of field observation was collected during the year 2022–2023 in orchards located in South-West Piedmont (Northern Italy). Each record included observations on species richness, total vegetation cover and relative cover of each detected species. VEFSI was designed to include different ecological functions, such as nitrogen fixation, mechanical action performed by fascicled roots, soil cover performed by perennial organs, pollination service of the fruit crop and melliferous species for pollinator attraction. The index was calculated as a sum of scores attributed to single functions on the basis of the relative abundance of plants characterized by the corresponding functional traits.</div></div><div><h3>RESULTS AND CONCLUSION</h3><div>A positive relation has been found among VEFSI, vegetation cover (R² = 0.419; <em>P</em> &lt; 0.001) and number of species (R² = 0.53; P &lt; 0.001). Within the tested dataset the maximum theoretical value of 125 has not been reached, indicating trade-offs presence among functions. Despite this, the validation showed that VEFSI point out functional weaknesses and strengths of the vegetation covers, coherently with the real field situation. VEFSI proved to be a simple and reliable tool for estimating and evaluating ecological functions performed by orchard grassing.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":7730,"journal":{"name":"Agricultural Systems","volume":"223 ","pages":"Article 104186"},"PeriodicalIF":6.1,"publicationDate":"2024-11-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142699311","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Use of models for identification of nitrogen fertilization strategies for filling feeding gaps of cow-calf systems in the Flooding Pampas of Argentina","authors":"Horacio Berger ,&nbsp;Iris Vogeler ,&nbsp;Claudio F. Machado","doi":"10.1016/j.agsy.2024.104191","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.agsy.2024.104191","url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>CONTEXT</h3><div>Nitrogen availability is the primary limitation for the growth of tall fescue, Argentina's most widely cultivated cool-season pasture. Significant yield gaps exist in fescue pastures on commercial farms, where average annual yields are around 5 t/ha, compared to a potential yield of 10 to 15 t/ha. Nitrogen fertilization remains uncommon among cow-calf producers, highlighting the need for a deeper understanding of the complex interactions between nitrogen fertilizer management, stocking rate, and grazing management at the whole-farm level. Considering annual and inter-annual variations in pasture growth could enable regional beef producers to make more informed decisions, improving pasture yield potential, utilization, and overall farm profitability.</div></div><div><h3>OBJECTIVES</h3><div>I) to identify if N fertilization in autumn can boost pasture growth rates as reliable source of extra feed in autumn and winter, taking into account climate variability, and II) to assess how this affects farm-level productivity and profitability.</div></div><div><h3>METHODS</h3><div>An integrated modelling approach, combining a pasture model with a farm system beef cattle model, was employed. Various N fertilizer options (specifically, 100 kg N/ha applied in either autumn or spring) were allocated to 20 % and 40 % of farm areas, across stocking rates ranging from 0.9 to 1.3 head/ha. Simulations were conducted over the long term (1993–2013), focusing on tall fescue pasture growth. Seasonal pasture growth curves were calculated for each year, with particular attention given to identifying average years as well as those with dry autumns or dry springs.</div></div><div><h3>RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS</h3><div>In average years, increasing the stocking rate by 44 %, from 0.9 head/ha to 1.3, led to a 34 % increase in live weight production in weaner calves and improved gross margins by 30 %. Applying 100 kg N/ha to 20 % of the cow-calf farm, either in autumn or spring, enabled a stocking rate of 1.1 head/ha (a 22 % increase), sustaining gross margins even during dry seasons. Autumn fertilization produced a substantial residual yield response, with an average increase of +1.43 tons/ha in the following spring, and finally Expanding the fertilized area from 20 % to 40 % of the farm did not provide additional economic benefits.</div></div><div><h3>SIGNIFICANCE</h3><div>This study provides valuable, forward-looking insights into how nitrogen fertilization strategies can improve productivity and profitability of cow-calf farms in the Flooding Pampas, especially under variable seasonal climate conditions. While limitations and areas for future research are acknowledged, the findings may also offer practical guidance for boosting livestock productivity in similar environments.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":7730,"journal":{"name":"Agricultural Systems","volume":"223 ","pages":"Article 104191"},"PeriodicalIF":6.1,"publicationDate":"2024-11-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142699310","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Trade-off of greenhouse gas emissions from double-cropped rice due to straw retention and zero tillage practices","authors":"Shiva Prasad Parida ,&nbsp;Pratap Bhattacharyya ,&nbsp;Soumya Ranjan Padhy ,&nbsp;Sujit Kumar Nayak ,&nbsp;Anubhav Das","doi":"10.1016/j.agsy.2024.104194","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.agsy.2024.104194","url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>CONTEXT</h3><div>Zero tillage and straw retention have been presented large scale to curb the menace of straw burning and sustaining soil health in rice production systems. At the same time, we know rice cultivation particularly double rice cropping system is an anthropogenic source of atmospheric greenhouse gas (GHGs) emissions, mainly, Methane (CH₄), Nitrous oxide (N₂O), and Carbon dioxide (CO₂). Thus, it is important to know how straw retention and zero tillage affect the GHGs emissions in the rice-rice system.</div></div><div><h3>OBJECTIVE</h3><div>The study, we made an effort to assess the straw retention/incorporation and zero-tillage (ZT) practices on GHGs emissions, yield, and soil labile carbon pools in rice, to identify sustainable practices that reduce GHG emissions, improve soil health, and at the same time addresses the issue of straw burning.</div></div><div><h3>METHODS</h3><div>A two-year field study was conducted with four (04) treatments; (i) Immediate incorporation of rice straw after harvesting of previous crop (IIRS); (ii) Zero-tillage (with straw retention) with glyphosate spray (ZT); (iii) Spreading of rice straw over field (SRS); and (iv) Zero-tillage (with straw retention) without glyphosate application (ZT + SR). The GHGs fluxes were measured during both straw decomposition (before rice transplanting) as well as rice growing periods during both wet and dry seasons of the two consecutive years.</div></div><div><h3>RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS</h3><div>The average seasonal Methane (CH₄), Nitrous oxide (N₂O), and Carbon dioxide (CO₂) emissions and global warming potential (GWP) were significantly higher in IIRS followed by SRS, ZT, and ZT + SR during straw decomposition as well as rice growing periods. Similarly, the soil labile carbon pools and enzymatic activities were also higher in IIRS as compared to other treatments. Moreover, the increased percentage of SOC from initial to final was higher in IIRS (25.8 %), followed by SRS (23.3 %), ZT (20.7 %), and ZT + SR (17.9 %). However, the crop yield was not significantly influenced by the straw incorporation/retention and tillage practices. So, it is evident there is a trade-off of soil carbon improvement &amp; GHGs emissions in zero tillage (ZT) and straw retention/ incorporation practices. Straw retention/incorporation in soil on one hand increased carbon storage but at the same time also enhanced GHGs emissions. Zero tillage (with straw retention) without glyphosate spray could be recommended for sustainable straw management.</div></div><div><h3>SIGNIFICANCE</h3><div>The study identifies zero-tillage with straw retention without glyphosate spray (ZT + SR) for sustainable straw management, which increases the carbon build-up and decreases the GHGs emissions while addressing the issue of straw burning.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":7730,"journal":{"name":"Agricultural Systems","volume":"223 ","pages":"Article 104194"},"PeriodicalIF":6.1,"publicationDate":"2024-11-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142699309","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"A pathway for decreasing the water footprint from grazing-based beef production systems in the Tropics","authors":"Mariana Pereira Barsotti ,&nbsp;Roberto Giolo de Almeida ,&nbsp;Manuel Claudio Motta Macedo ,&nbsp;Rodrigo da Costa Gomes ,&nbsp;Julio Cesar Pascale Palhares ,&nbsp;Andre Mazzetto ,&nbsp;Uta Dickhoefer","doi":"10.1016/j.agsy.2024.104192","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.agsy.2024.104192","url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>CONTEXT</h3><div>Water availability shapes agricultural land use patterns, which in turn impacts water supplies. Beef cattle production is one of the most water-intensive food production activities. Therefore, it is fundamental to identify pathways to reduce water consumption and to determine suitable producing-regions to mitigate the current pressures on water resources.</div></div><div><h3>OBJECTIVE</h3><div>Our objectives were to assess the water footprint of beef cattle in different land use systems and investigate the potential of alternative production strategies to reduce the environmental impacts associated with water resources use.</div></div><div><h3>METHODS</h3><div>The water footprint of beef produced in conventional pasture system (CON), agropastoral (ICL), and agro-silvopastoral (ICLF) systems was analysed from cradle-to-farm gate using a life cycle assessment approach, which included a complementary analysis of the environmental impacts of the rainfall water consumption in the Brazilian Cerrado.</div></div><div><h3>RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS</h3><div>Increases in the efficiency of the systems (e.g., greater feed conversion efficiency, stocking rates, reduced slaughter age of animals, amongst others) resulted in a lower water footprint and water scarcity footprint in ICL (18,332 L and 1526 L/kg carcass weight), followed by ICLF (31,024 L and 1846 L/kg carcass weight) compared to CON (60,023 L and 2446 L/kg carcass weight). The impact of rainfall water consumption (i.e., green water scarcity) was lowest in ICL (182–328 L_{world equivalents}/kg carcass weight). Although the tree presence in ICLF systems can limit the productivity, it improves the thermal environment as well as the canopy structure and nutritional value of forage on pastures for grazing animals, thereby reducing the water footprint indicators compared to CON systems. The environmental impacts of rainfall water consumed should not be neglected in water footprint studies due to its importance for restoring water cycles, which is particularly complex in diversified land uses, such as ICL and ICLF. In conclusion, ICL and ICLF are viable production strategies for reducing the environmental impacts of water consumption in grazing-based systems.</div></div><div><h3>SIGNIFICANCE</h3><div>The research was carried out in the Brazilian Cerrado, a major region for producing and exporting beef cattle in the world and a biome of strategic importance in the water resources dynamics. The region faces significant water consumption challenges because of the accelerated agricultural development disassociated from long-term planning and monitoring of its water resources use. Therefore, our findings are critical in supporting ecosystem resilience and production of beef by also providing insights into the environmental impacts of water consumption in agropastoral and agro-silvopastoral systems, which have been underrepresented in scientific literature.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":7730,"journal":{"name":"Agricultural Systems","volume":"222 ","pages":"Article 104192"},"PeriodicalIF":6.1,"publicationDate":"2024-11-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142653146","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Developing a registration system for farmers' varieties","authors":"Bram De Jonge ,&nbsp;Bhramar Dey ,&nbsp;Bert Visser","doi":"10.1016/j.agsy.2024.104183","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.agsy.2024.104183","url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>CONTEXT</h3><div>Many countries only allow seed of registered varieties to be legally produced and sold in the market. Due to strict requirements regarding the characteristics (e.g., distinctness, uniformity, and stability) and performance (e.g., outperforming high-yielding varieties under standardized growing conditions) for varieties to be released, this implies that many farmers' varieties are confined to the spheres of the informal sector as ‘potential planting materials’: their production, use, exchange, and trade remain unregulated, largely unsupported, and their importance underestimated.</div></div><div><h3>OBJECTIVE</h3><div>The present article provides a guided approach on how to develop and implement a registration system suitable for farmers' varieties in full recognition of their inherent properties that often distinguish them from those that are developed in the formal seed sector.</div></div><div><h3>METHOD</h3><div>By following the seed regulatory value chain through which new crop varieties normally reach the market, this article analyses approaches to solve key questions that need to be addressed when adapting that regulatory chain to facilitate the registration and release of farmers' varieties. These questions range from what constitutes a farmers' variety to which rights a registrant may receive over the registered variety vis-à-vis other stakeholders. Answers are provided based on country cases, a literature review, and the learnings and inputs received during several stakeholder workshops and meetings organized in the context of seed system development programmes.</div></div><div><h3>RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS</h3><div>Based on a discussion of the major principles and elements of current variety registration systems developed for the formal seed sector, our analysis leads to a plausible approach through which a farmers' variety registration system could be implemented. In that context, this study provides guidance on who qualifies to register a farmers' variety, how to agree on more flexible criteria for distinctness, uniformity, and stability, and elaborates key principles that can inform solutions for the division and distribution of rights, and access and benefit-sharing.</div></div><div><h3>SIGNIFICANCE</h3><div>Several national governments have indicated their interest in implementing a farmers' variety registration system. However, the practicalities on the ground and the principles that could guide implementation have not been elaborated or well-defined in the literature. This article aims to fill that gap. Through the registration and diffusion of farmers' varieties, governments will contribute to an increase of on-farm agro-biodiversity that can enhance farmers' resilience and livelihoods, while contributing to the implementation of Farmers' Rights as defined in the FAO International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":7730,"journal":{"name":"Agricultural Systems","volume":"222 ","pages":"Article 104183"},"PeriodicalIF":6.1,"publicationDate":"2024-11-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142653149","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Win-win or lose-win? Economic-climatic synergies and trade-offs in dual-purpose cattle systems","authors":"Rasmus Bang ,&nbsp;Stine Samsonstuen ,&nbsp;Bjørn Gunnar Hansen ,&nbsp;Mario Guajardo ,&nbsp;Hanne Møller ,&nbsp;Jon Kristian Sommerseth ,&nbsp;Julio Cesar Goez ,&nbsp;Ola Flaten","doi":"10.1016/j.agsy.2024.104189","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.agsy.2024.104189","url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>CONTEXT</h3><div>Researchers have identified numerous strategies to improve economic performance and reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emission intensity in combined milk and beef production on dairy farms. However, there remains a need to better understand how the effectiveness of these strategies varies under different operational conditions.</div></div><div><h3>OBJECTIVE</h3><div>This study aims to examine how the economic and GHG emission intensity mitigation effectiveness of increased milk yield, extended longevity of dairy cows, reduced age at first calving, and intensified beef production from bulls depend on operational conditions in dual purpose cattle systems.</div></div><div><h3>METHOD</h3><div>We present a quantitative framework to (1) economically optimize production at farm level under various constraints and (2) calculate corresponding GHG emissions. The framework is tailored for Norwegian dual-purpose cattle systems and used to assess the economic and GHG emission intensity mitigation effects of incremental adjustments in relevant decisions.</div></div><div><h3>RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS</h3><div>The results show that increased milk yield, extended productive life of dairy cows, reduced age at first calving, and lower slaughter age of bulls can lead to economic and climatic win-wins in terms of higher gross margins and reduced emissions per kg of protein produced. However, they may also result in lose-win and win-lose outcomes depending on the operational conditions. All four measures free up roughage production capacity, which, if used to maintain/increase milk and/or beef production, typically results in economic gains. However, if e.g., the available milk quota or space prevent this, economic losses may occur. The climate impact also depends on how the freed-up capacity is used: if it boosts production, the effects vary based on the scale and type of increase and the farm's initial setup, while unused capacity leads to reduced emission intensity. Conflicts typically arise when: 1) the extra capacity increases less climate-friendly production, raising emission intensity despite economic gains, or 2) extra capacity cannot be used, causing economic losses despite climate benefits. Our results also show that what can be labeled a win in climate terms, and to what extent, depends on the selected target metric(s).</div></div><div><h3>SIGNIFICANCE</h3><div>Governments and societies strive to balance food production with environmental goals. In this context, it is essential to identify farm-level economic and climatic win-win and lose-win scenarios, not only for farmers but also for policymakers and the broader society. This study could inform decision-making and policy development, potentially enhancing economic and climatic performance in combined milk and meat production.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":7730,"journal":{"name":"Agricultural Systems","volume":"222 ","pages":"Article 104189"},"PeriodicalIF":6.1,"publicationDate":"2024-11-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142653148","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"The dairy production system in the north of Sweden under possible future food scenarios","authors":"Stanley Zira ,&nbsp;Markos Managos ,&nbsp;Stina Printz ,&nbsp;Mikaela Lindberg ,&nbsp;Serina Ahlgren ,&nbsp;Ulf Sonesson","doi":"10.1016/j.agsy.2024.104177","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.agsy.2024.104177","url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Context</h3><div>The dairy production system fills an important role by providing nutrient-dense foods in Swedish diets, however, future efforts to improve its sustainability necessitate structural changes.</div></div><div><h3>Objective</h3><div>We present an innovative study which assesses the effects of these future changes in the dairy system in northern Sweden, the Norrland region, which has a subarctic climate.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>Four scenarios were developed: 1) Food as Industry: Food is a commodity, and its production is an industry that can be invested in to benefit society. 2) Food as Technology: New technologies, such as nutrient density trackers and microbiome mapping, are used for personalized dietary plans. Additionally, novel foods from microbial cultures are produced. 3) Food as Culture: More locally produced food and diverse food products are consumed. 4) Food Forgotten: Land previously used for food and feed is converted to bioenergy production, climate mitigation, and adaptation infrastructure. These scenarios were compared to the baseline i.e. present dairy system for dairy production capacity, carbon flow and carbon footprint.</div></div><div><h3>Results and conclusions</h3><div>Food as industry resulted in increased dairy production capacity with decreased carbon footprint but increased carbon imports. Food as technology provided decreased dairy production capacity and increased carbon footprint but with decreased carbon imports. Food as culture, maintained dairy production capacity with a decreased carbon footprint and carbon imports. Food forgotten resulted in decreased dairy production capacity and increased carbon imports but with decreased carbon footprint. Food as culture benefits all - specifically dairy production capacity, carbon footprint and carbon imports. However, further research is required to explore implications on soil organic carbon stocks over time in Norrland.</div></div><div><h3>Significance</h3><div>Our study sheds light on the potential impacts of future dairy production in a subarctic climate and aims to help in decision making.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":7730,"journal":{"name":"Agricultural Systems","volume":"222 ","pages":"Article 104177"},"PeriodicalIF":6.1,"publicationDate":"2024-11-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142653145","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"How to use residual biomass streams in circular food systems to minimise land use or GHG emissions","authors":"Benjamin van Selm ,&nbsp;Renske Hijbeek ,&nbsp;Corina E. van Middelaar ,&nbsp;Imke J.M. de Boer ,&nbsp;Martin K. van Ittersum","doi":"10.1016/j.agsy.2024.104185","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.agsy.2024.104185","url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Context</h3><div>Transitioning to future circular economies and food systems will increase demand for biomass in society. Residual streams, which include food loss, food waste and by-products (e.g., rapeseed meal) from agriculture and food production are a valuable source of biomass in more circular food systems. It is currently unclear if and whether these residual streams should be utilised optimally: as animal feed, composted as organic fertiliser or for anaerobic digestion to produce biogas (methane) and digestate (fertiliser) to minimise environmental impacts from food systems.</div></div><div><h3>Objective</h3><div>Our aim is to understand which residual streams are to be utilised as animal feed, compost or for anaerobic digestion in circular food systems to achieve minimum agricultural land use and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions under scenarios with different dietary preferences.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>Taking the Netherlands as a case study, we employed the FOODSOM model, an iterative linear optimisation model of a circular food system in the Netherlands. FOODSOM minimises agricultural land use or GHG emissions while meeting the dietary requirements of the population. Four scenarios based on two different human diets and two food system objectives (i.e., minimise land use or GHG emissions) were developed.</div></div><div><h3>Results &amp; conclusions</h3><div>Our results show by-products should be fed to livestock when aiming to minimise agricultural land use and GHG emissions, food loss and waste is best fed to livestock when minimising land use, but composted or digested when minimising GHG emissions. The decision to compost or digest food waste depends on whether the GHG emissions from anaerobic digestion are assigned to the food system or the biogas (methane) produced.</div></div><div><h3>Significance</h3><div>Our results provide guidance on how residual streams, including food loss, food waste and by-products can be optimally utilised in future circular food systems to achieve minimal agricultural land use and GHG emissions when meeting dietary requirements.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":7730,"journal":{"name":"Agricultural Systems","volume":"222 ","pages":"Article 104185"},"PeriodicalIF":6.1,"publicationDate":"2024-11-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142653147","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"A sustainable game changer? Systematic review of serious games used for agriculture and research agenda","authors":"Sylvain Dernat ,&nbsp;Myriam Grillot ,&nbsp;Federico Andreotti ,&nbsp;Gilles Martel","doi":"10.1016/j.agsy.2024.104178","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.agsy.2024.104178","url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>CONTEXT</h3><div>Serious games can be used as a tool for learning, increasing coordination, supporting decision-making processes, and other purposes that can strengthen sustainability transitions. While agriculture is an important corner stone for these transitions, little research has been done on serious games on agricultural and none on the potential link with sustainability issues.</div></div><div><h3>OBJECTIVE</h3><div>This article is a systematic review of published research articles on the use of serious games to address agricultural issues. It aimed to understand how these serious games incorporate or are likely to address sustainability issues.</div></div><div><h3>METHODS</h3><div>The process of the review is described accord to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA). After data collection, we conducted a four-step analysis: i) short bibliometric analysis of the corpus, ii) descriptive analysis of the games' characteristics, iii) comprehensive analysis on sustainability based on a framework developed to define what is sustainable agriculture, iv) analysis of assessment of the games.</div></div><div><h3>RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS</h3><div>Results were based on 237 articles including 182 empirical studies. We showed that the number of articles on serious games in agriculture have recently increased throughout the world. Serious games can reach different goals: i) learning, particularly on specific topics, ii) mediation and co-design, iii) research. Games can be seen as effective means to enable stakeholders to work together. In a context of sustainability transitions, serious games can be used to tackle complex issues. However, more effort must be undertaken to assess the real impact of the game.</div></div><div><h3>SIGNIFICANCE</h3><div>This review confirmed the importance of serious games in agricultural research aiming to enhance sustainability transition. We identified gaps and proposed a research agenda to further work on i) inclusion of the diversity of games, ii) rethinking using of games with possible combinations, iii) opening to broader agricultural productions, iv) assessing the real impact of the games, v) using games for transdisciplinary research.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":7730,"journal":{"name":"Agricultural Systems","volume":"222 ","pages":"Article 104178"},"PeriodicalIF":6.1,"publicationDate":"2024-11-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142653367","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}