This study examined productivity, nitrogen (N) flows and N balances in grassland-based systems of dairy production in Ireland. There were four stocking densities of dairy cows on grass ⁄ white clover pastures and four inputs of N as fertilizers, concentrates and biological fixation over 2 years; 2001 and 2002. Annual stocking densities were 1AE75, 2AE10, 2AE50 and 2AE50 cows ha )1 . Associated N inputs were 205, 230, 300 and 400 kg ha )1 respectively. There were eighteen cows per system. Cows calved within a 12-week interval in spring with a mean calving date of 28 February and lactation extended until mid-December in each year. There were no differences in annual milk yield (6337 kg cow )1 ; s.e.m. 106AE1), live weight or body condition score. Pre-grazing N concentrations in herbage increased (P < 0AE001) with increasing N input, whereas there were no differences in N concentrations in silage reflecting optimum N inputs for silage production. Grazed herbage accounted for 0AE64, silage 0AE26 and concentrates 0AE10 of annual dry matter consumed by the cows. Annual intakes of N ranged from 144 to 158 kg cow )1 and were mostly influenced by N concentration in grazed herbage. Annual output of N in milk and liveweight change was 38 kg cow )1 and was not different between systems. Annual N surpluses increased with increasing N inputs from 137 to 307 kg ha )1 , whereas the proportion of N inputs recovered in products declined from 0AE34 to 0AE24. More efficient N use was associated with lower N inputs and in particular lower N concentrations in grazed herbage.
Reducing electricity consumption in Irish milk production is a topical issue for 2 reasons. First, the introduction of a dynamic electricity pricing system, with peak and off-peak prices, will be a reality for 80% of electricity consumers by 2020. The proposed pricing schedule intends to discourage energy consumption during peak periods (i.e., when electricity demand on the national grid is high) and to incentivize energy consumption during off-peak periods. If farmers, for example, carry out their evening milking during the peak period, energy costs may increase, which would affect farm profitability. Second, electricity consumption is identified in contributing to about 25% of energy use along the life cycle of pasture-based milk. The objectives of this study, therefore, were to document electricity use per kilogram of milk sold and to identify strategies that reduce its overall use while maximizing its use in off-peak periods (currently from 0000 to 0900 h). We assessed, therefore, average daily and seasonal trends in electricity consumption on 22 Irish dairy farms, through detailed auditing of electricity-consuming processes. To determine the potential of identified strategies to save energy, we also assessed total energy use of Irish milk, which is the sum of the direct (i.e., energy use on farm) and indirect energy use (i.e., energy needed to produce farm inputs). On average, a total of 31.73 MJ was required to produce 1 kg of milk solids, of which 20% was direct and 80% was indirect energy use. Electricity accounted for 60% of the direct energy use, and mainly resulted from milk cooling (31%), water heating (23%), and milking (20%). Analysis of trends in electricity consumption revealed that 62% of daily electricity was used at peak periods. Electricity use on Irish dairy farms, therefore, is substantial and centered around milk harvesting. To improve the competitiveness of milk production in a dynamic electricity pricing environment, therefore, management changes and technologies are required that decouple energy use during milking processes from peak periods.
Three experiments investigating factors influencing the abundance of Rumex spp. (docks) in silage and grazed grassland swards are presented. In Experiment 1, Rumex obtusifolius plants were sown with perennial ryegrass and white clover in pots in March and harvested at either 5‐ or 10‐week intervals between June and October. The 10‐week harvest interval increased root dry‐matter production of R. obtusifolius compared with the 5‐week interval; herbage (above‐ground material) production was not significantly affected. In Experiment 2, R. obtusifolius and Rumex crispus population densities in grassland swards were correlated with soil P, K and Mg concentrations, and soil pH. In general, silage swards contained higher population densities than grazed swards. There were significant positive correlations between soil K concentrations and abundance of Rumex spp. in grazed swards and in silage swards. In Experiment 3, R. obtusifolius was sown with perennial ryegrass in pots in March. Treatments consisted of nine rates of K fertilization ranging between the equivalent of 0 and 600 kg K ha−1 year−1. Herbage was harvested at regular intervals (4–6 weeks except during the winter) until May of the following year. In general, perennial ryegrass dry‐matter yields were not greatly affected by soil K, whereas limited soil K supply tended to reduce dry‐matter production of R. obtusifolius. It is possible that maintenance of moderate soil K concentrations may play a role in limiting abundance of Rumex spp. in grassland.
There is uncertainty about the potential reduction of soil nitrous oxide (N2O) emission when fertilizer nitrogen (FN) is partially or completely replaced by biological N fixation (BNF) in temperate grassland. The objectives of this study were to 1) investigate the changes in N2O emissions when BNF is used to replace FN in permanent grassland, and 2) evaluate the applicability of the process-based model DNDC to simulate N2O emissions from Irish grasslands. Three grazing treatments were: (i) ryegrass (Lolium perenne) grasslands receiving 226 kg FN ha−1 yr−1 (GG+FN), (ii) ryegrass/white clover (Trifolium repens) grasslands receiving 58 kg FN ha−1 yr−1 (GWC+FN) applied in spring, and (iii) ryegrass/white clover grasslands receiving no FN (GWC-FN). Two background treatments, un-grazed swards with ryegrass only (G–B) or ryegrass/white clover (WC–B), did not receive slurry or FN and the herbage was harvested by mowing. There was no significant difference in annual N2O emissions between G–B (2.38±0.12 kg N ha−1 yr−1 (mean±SE)) and WC-B (2.45±0.85 kg N ha−1 yr−1), indicating that N2O emission due to BNF itself and clover residual decomposition from permanent ryegrass/clover grassland was negligible. N2O emissions were 7.82±1.67, 6.35±1.14 and 6.54±1.70 kg N ha−1 yr−1, respectively, from GG+FN, GWC+FN and GWC-FN. N2O fluxes simulated by DNDC agreed well with the measured values with significant correlation between simulated and measured daily fluxes for the three grazing treatments, but the simulation did not agree very well for the background treatments. DNDC overestimated annual emission by 61% for GG+FN, and underestimated by 45% for GWC-FN, but simulated very well for GWC+FN. Both the measured and simulated results supported that there was a clear reduction of N2O emissions when FN was replaced by BNF.
This study compared the profitabilities of systems of dairy production based on N‐fertilized grass (FN) and grass‐white clover (WC) grassland and assessed sensitivity to changing fertilizer N and milk prices. Data were sourced from three system‐scale studies conducted in Ireland between 2001 and 2009. Ten FN stocked between 2·0 and 2·5 livestock units (LU) ha−1 with fertilizer N input between 173 and 353 kg ha−1 were compared with eight WC stocked between 1·75 and 2·2 LU ha−1 with fertilizer N input between 79 and 105 kg ha−1. Sensitivity was confined to nine combinations of high, intermediate and low fertilizer N and milk prices. Stocking density, milk and total sales from WC were approximately 0·90 of FN. In scenarios with high fertilizer N price combined with intermediate or low milk prices, WC was more (P < 0·05) profitable than FN. Based on milk and fertilizer N prices at the time, FN was clearly more profitable than WC between 1990 and 2005. However, with the steady increase in fertilizer N prices relative to milk price, the difference between FN and WC was less clear cut between 2006 and 2010. Projecting into the future and assuming similar trends in fertilizer N and milk prices to the last decade, this analysis indicates that WC will become an increasingly more profitable alternative to FN for pasture‐based dairy production.
Little consideration has been given to how farm management, specifically tactics used to implement the management strategy, may influence the carbon footprint (CF) and land use for milk produced on commercial farms. In this study, the CF and land use of milk production from 18 Irish commercial dairy farms were analyzed based on foreground data from a 12-mo survey capturing management tactics and background data from the literature. Large variation was found in farm attributes and management tactics; for example, up to a 1.5-fold difference in fertilizer nitrogen input was used to support the same stocking density, and up to a 3.5-fold difference in concentrate fed for similar milk output per cow. However, the coefficient of variation for milk CF between farms only varied by 13% and for land use by 18%. The overall CF and overall land use of the milk production from the 18 dairy farms was 1.23±0.04kg of CO2 Eq and 1.22±0.05 m(2) per kilogram of energy-corrected milk. Milk output per cow, economic allocation between exports of milk and liveweight, and on-farm diesel use per ha were found to be influential factors on milk CF, whereas the fertilizer N rate, milk output per cow, and economic allocation between exports of milk and liveweight were influential on land use. Effective sward management of white clover within a few farms appeared to lower the CF but increased on-farm land use. It was concluded that a combination of multiple tactics determines CF and land use for milk production on commercial dairy farms and, although these 2 measures of environmental impact are correlated, a farm with a low CF did not always have low land use and vice versa.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.