banner



Home  ›  Tina Drew An Animal Cell In Her Science Notebook. Whatã¢â‚¬â„¢s Wrong With The Cell?

Tina Drew An Animal Cell In Her Science Notebook. Whatã¢â‚¬â„¢s Wrong With The Cell?

Written By Thursday, June 30, 2022 Add Comment Edit

Whatã¢â‚¬â„¢s Your Beef? Grass-fed Modeling Report Carbon Footprint

. 2020 Apr;fourteen(4):834-845.

doi: 10.1017/S1751731119002519. Epub 2022 Oct 31.

LIFE Beef CARBON: a common framework for quantifying grass and corn based beef farms' carbon footprints

Affiliations

  • PMID: 31666147
  • PMCID: PMC7283046
  • DOI: ten.1017/S1751731119002519

Gratis PMC commodity

LIFE BEEF CARBON: a common framework for quantifying grass and corn based beef farms' carbon footprints

Brute. 2020 Apr .

Costless PMC article

Abstract

Europe'south roadmap to a low-carbon economic system aims to cut greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions 80% below 1990 levels by 2050. Beef production is an of import source of GHG emissions and is expected to increment equally the world population grows. LIFE BEEF CARBON is a voluntary European initiative that aims to reduce GHG emissions per unit of beef (carbon footprint) by 15% over a 10-year flow on 2172 farms in four large beef-producing countries. Changes in farms beef carbon footprint are usually estimated via simulation modelling, just the methods current models utilize differ. Thus, our initial goal was to develop a common modelling framework to estimate beef farms carbon footprint. The framework was adult for a diverse prepare of Western Europe farms located in Ireland, Spain, Italy and France. Whole subcontract and life cycle assessment (LCA) models were selected to quantify emissions for the different production contexts and harmonized. Carbon Inspect was chosen for Ireland, Bovid-CO2 for Espana and CAP'2ER for French republic and Italia. All models were tested using xx case study farms, that is, 5 per country and quantified GHG emissions associated with on-farm live weight proceeds. The comparing showed the ranking of beef systems gross carbon footprint was consistent beyond the three models. Suckler to weaning or store systems generally had the highest carbon footprint followed by suckler to beef systems and fattening beef systems. When practical to the aforementioned farm, Carbon Audit'due south footprint estimates were slightly lower than CAP'2ER, but marginally higher than Bovid-CO2. These differences occurred because the models were adjusted to a specific region's product circumstances, which meant their emission factors for cardinal sources; that is, methane from enteric fermentation and GHG emissions from concentrates were less accurate when used outside their target region. Thus, for the mutual modelling framework, region-specific LCA models were chosen to estimate beef carbon footprints instead of a single generic model. Additionally, the Carbon Inspect and Bovid-CO2 models were updated to include carbon removal by soil and other environmental metrics included in CAP'2ER, for example, acidification. This allows all models to assess the effect carbon mitigation strategies accept on other potential pollutants. Several options were identified to reduce beef farms carbon footprint, for case, improving genetic merit. These options were assessed for beefiness systems, and a mitigation plan was created by each nation. The cumulative mitigation effect of the LIFE BEEF CARBON plan was estimated to exceed the projects reduction target (-15%).

Keywords: cattle; greenhouse gas; life cycle cess; modelling; sustainability.

Conflict of involvement argument

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of involvement.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1

Central greenhouse gas (GHG) emission sources modelled by CAP'2ER, Carbon Audit and Bovid-CO2. Dotted line represents the organisation purlieus. Bluish box represents off-farm emission sources, and green box represents on-subcontract sources. Cattle purchases were non included.

Figure 2
Figure 2

Gross carbon footprints of case report beef cattle farms calculated using the modelling tools Carbon Audit, CAP'2ER and Bovid-CO2. Footprints were estimated in terms of CO2 equivalents (CO2e) and related to live weight gain (LWG). French farms: FR1–FR2 = suckler to weaning; FR3 = suckler to beef with purchases; FR4 = beef fattening; and FR5 = store to weaning and beef. Irish farms: IE1 = suckler to beefiness; IE2 = suckler to weaning; IE3 = dairy calf to beef; IE4 = dairy calf to store; and IE5 = beef fattening. Spanish farms: ES1, ES3 and ES4 = suckler to beef with purchases and ES2 and ES5 = beefiness fattening. Italian farms: IT1–IT4 = beef fattening and IT5 = suckler to weaning.

Similar articles

  • A case study of the carbon footprint of milk from loftier-performing confinement and grass-based dairy farms.

    O'Brien D, Capper JL, Garnsworthy PC, Grainger C, Shalloo L. O'Brien D, et al. J Dairy Sci. 2022 Mar;97(iii):1835-51. doi: 10.3168/jds.2013-7174. Epub 2022 Jan 17. J Dairy Sci. 2014. PMID: 24440256

  • Diversification not specialization reduces global and local ecology burdens from livestock product.

    Soteriades AD, Foskolos A, Styles D, Gibbons JM. Soteriades Advert, et al. Environ Int. 2022 Nov;132:104837. doi: 10.1016/j.envint.2019.05.031. Epub 2022 Aug 23. Environ Int. 2019. PMID: 31450105

  • Carbon footprint and ammonia emissions of California beef production systems.

    Stackhouse-Lawson KR, Rotz CA, Oltjen JW, Mitloehner FM. Stackhouse-Lawson KR, et al. J Anim Sci. 2012 December;90(12):4641-55. doi: 10.2527/jas.2011-4653. Epub 2012 Sep 5. J Anim Sci. 2012. PMID: 22952361

  • Reducing climate impacts of beef production: A synthesis of life cycle assessments across direction systems and global regions.

    Cusack DF, Kazanski CE, Hedgpeth A, Grub K, Cordeiro AL, Karpman J, Ryals R. Cusack DF, et al. Glob Chang Biol. 2022 May;27(ix):1721-1736. doi: 10.1111/gcb.15509. Epub 2022 Mar 3. Glob Chang Biol. 2021. PMID: 33657680 Gratis PMC commodity. Review.

  • Challenges and opportunities to capture dietary furnishings in on-farm greenhouse gas emissions models of ruminant systems.

    Vibart R, de Klein C, Jonker A, van der Weerden T, Bannink A, Bayat AR, Crompton 50, Durand A, Eugène M, Klumpp K, Kuhla B, Lanigan G, Lund P, Ramin M, Salazar F. Vibart R, et al. Sci Full Environ. 2022 May xv;769:144989. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.144989. Epub 2022 Jan viii. Sci Full Environ. 2021. PMID: 33485195 Review.

Cited by 2 articles

  • The Genetics of Thermoregulation in Pigs: A Review.

    Gourdine JL, Rauw WM, Gilbert H, Poullet N. Gourdine JL, et al. Forepart Vet Sci. 2022 Dec thirteen;viii:770480. doi: x.3389/fvets.2021.770480. eCollection 2021. Front end Vet Sci. 2021. PMID: 34966808 Complimentary PMC article. Review.

  • Influence of various spooky methods on the sustainable beef production based on high voltage electrical stimulation.

    Banach JK, Żywica R, Matusevičius P. Banach JK, et al. PLoS One. 2022 November 3;xvi(11):e0240639. doi: ten.1371/journal.pone.0240639. eCollection 2021. PLoS I. 2021. PMID: 34731168 Free PMC commodity.

References

    1. Asem-Hiablie S, Battagliese T, Stackhouse-Lawson KR and Alan Rotz C 2018. A life cycle assessment of the environmental impacts of a beefiness system in the Usa. The International Journal of Life Bike Assessment, 24, 441–455. doi:ten.1007/s11367-018-1464-6 - DOI
    1. Asoprocarne 2018. Piemonte beef producers association. Retrieved on 20 June 2022 from http://www.asprocarne.com/
    1. Asoprovac 2018. Spanish clan of producers of beefiness cattle. Retrieved on 20 June 2022 from https://world wide web.asoprovac.com/asoprovac/quienes-somos
    1. Bellarby J, Tirado R, Leip A, Weiss F, Lesschen JP and Smith P 2013. Livestock greenhouse gas emissions and mitigation potential in Europe. Global Change Biology 19, 3–18. - PubMed
    1. Berton M, Agabriel J, Gallo L, Lherm Thou, Ramanzin M and Sturaro E 2017. Ecology footprint of the integrated France–Italian republic beef production arrangement assessed through a multi-indicator approach. Agricultural Systems 155, 33–42.

MeSH terms

Substances

LinkOut - more resources

  • Full Text Sources

    • Elsevier Scientific discipline
    • Europe PubMed Primal
    • PubMed Fundamental

  • Research Materials

    • NCI CPTC Antibody Characterization Plan

  • Miscellaneous

    • NCI CPTAC Assay Portal

mcguiresaidee79.blogspot.com

Source: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31666147/

Source: https://mcguiresaidee79.blogspot.com/2022/05/whataaas-your-beef-grass-fed-modeling.html

Posted by: labarberanexce2001.blogspot.com

0 Response to "Tina Drew An Animal Cell In Her Science Notebook. Whatã¢â‚¬â„¢s Wrong With The Cell?"

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)

Iklan Atas Artikel

Iklan Tengah Artikel 1

Iklan Tengah Artikel 2

Iklan Bawah Artikel