Emergy evaluation of organic rice-duck mutualism system

Yang, Xi; Qin, Pei

doi:10.1016/j.ecoleng.2007.11.006

Cited by 48 publications

(25 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This system creates a yield-increasing model of integrated utilization of paddy resources for rice production and, more importantly, duck breeding. Thus, a mutually beneficial situation is established for both rice growing and duck breeding in this system rather than a simple combination (Xi and Qin 2009;Pin et al 2012). A number of studies have compared the rice-duck mutualism organic farming as an organic farming system to conventional cultivation methods with respect to environmental and ecological issues.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Efficient use of energy through organic rice–duck mutualism system

Pirdashti

Mohammadi

et al. 2015

Agron. Sustain. Dev.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Industrial agriculture is not efficient anymore due in particular to the use of nonrenewable energy such as fossil fuels. Organic agriculture is an alternative system that aims to reduce the consumption of fossil fuels, pesticides, and mineral fertilizers. Animal-crop systems present potential mutual benefits, but such systems have been rarely studied quantitatively. Here, we compare energy inputs and outputs of organic riceduck farming with conventional rice production in Mazandaran province, Iran. Our results show that the global energy input of organic rice-duck, 79,307 MJ ha . The most used energy was fuel, amounting to 40 % of total energy for organic rice-duck and 33 % for conventional rice. Then, machinery consumed 25 % of total energy for organic rice-duck and 20 % for conventional rice. Then, fertilizers consumed 20 % of total energy in the form of organic fertilizers for organic rice-duck versus 16 % in the form of mineral fertilizers for conventional rice. Overall, our findings show that organic rice-duck farming has more energy efficiency than conventional rice farming.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Efficient use of energy through organic rice–duck mutualism system

Pirdashti

Mohammadi

et al. 2015

Agron. Sustain. Dev.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Chemical residuals and NO 3 -usage are the main factors to impact the safety of products (Xi and Qin 2009). As shown in Figure 2, the values of PSI in the RD and the RM were −0.60 and −0.78, respectively; the data suggested that the safety potential of products in the RD was higher than that of RM.…”

Section: Energy Indicesmentioning

confidence: 82%

“…A new index, product safety index based on energy (PSI = −C/(F + R1)), was also suggested to evaluate product safety, which was the negative value of the ratio of energy in chemical pesticides and fertilizers to the total purchased energy and in which C is the sum of chemical fertilizer and pesticide energy (Xi and Qin 2009). In addition, economic indices used were output/input ratio, gross income, and net income.…”

Section: Main Energy and Economic Indicesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessment of nomadic rice-duck complex ecosystem on energy and economy

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction: Modern intensive rice production has brought a large amount of environmental pollution and do not guarantee the safety of rice quality. Thus, to improve the farmer's rice production model to reduce agro-chemicals is of great importance to decrease pollution and to guarantee the security of food quality. Here, our experiments illustrated that nomadic rice-duck complex ecosystem (RD) could reduce energy input and increase both energy output and the values of the product safety index based on energy (PSI). Results: According to the results of our experiments, RD and rice monoculture production system (RM) were −0.6 and −0.78, respectively, which indicated that the safety potential of products in RD was higher than that of RM. Protein yield based on RD was significantly higher than that of RM. The output/input, gross income, and net income of RD were 15.26%, 39.51%, and 44.80%, respectively, higher than that of RM; the data suggest that the economic benefits of RD were greater than that of RM. Conclusions: Consequently, as an intermediate-type technology, RD could become a feasible alternative that could reduce agro-chemical application rate without decreasing rice yield and increasing labor intensity. Furthermore, as an inheritance and development of the Chinese farming culture, RD is a classic Chinese farming technology withstanding more than 700 years of tests.

show abstract

“…UEVs adopted from those papers are multiplied by 1.61 for conversion to the new baseline of 15.20×10 24 sej/year) and China EMR in 2013 (Liu et al (2015) with the baseline 15.20×10 24 sej/year). UEVs reference for respective row number: 14 refer to Xi and Qin (2009) with the baseline of 9.26×10 24 sej/year (UEVs adopted from those papers are multiplied by 1.64 for conversion to the new baseline of 15.20×10 24 sej/year); 15, 16, 17, and 18 refer to Wu et al (2013) with the baseline of 9.26×10 24 sej/year (UEVs adopted from those papers are multiplied by 1.64 for conversion to the new baseline of 15.20×10 24 sej/year) and PWR had the same FYE, but system FYE was not shown in the CCP model. The EIPS values were low in all three systems, suggesting that the products were not safe, particularly in CCP and PWR.…”

Section: Emergy Indices Of the Three Production Systemsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Emergy Analysis has been applied to different fields, and it has become a promising tool for evaluation of ecological-economic systems (Castellini et al, 2006;Zhang et al, 2007;Coppola et al, 2009;Vassallo et al, 2009). In addition, it has been used to assess agricultural production on different scales (Campbell, 2001;Chen et al, 2006;la Rosa et al, 2008;Pizzigallo et al, 2008;Xi and Qin, 2009;Lu et al, 2010).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Emergy assessment of three home courtyard agriculture production systems in Tibet Autonomous Region, China

Guan

Sha

Zhang

et al. 2016

J. Zhejiang Univ. Sci. B

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:Home courtyard agriculture is an important model of agricultural production on the Tibetan plateau. Because of the sensitive and fragile plateau environment, it needs to have optimal performance characteristics, including high sustainability, low environmental pressure, and high economic benefit. Emergy analysis is a promising tool for evaluation of the environmental-economic performance of these production systems. In this study, emergy analysis was used to evaluate three courtyard agricultural production models: Raising Geese in Corn Fields (RGICF), Conventional Corn Planting (CCP), and Pea-Wheat Rotation (PWR). The results showed that the RGICF model produced greater economic benefits, and had higher sustainability, lower environmental pressure, and higher product safety than the CCP and PWR models. The emergy yield ratio (EYR) and emergy self-support ratio (ESR) of RGICF were 0.66 and 0.11, respectively, lower than those of the CCP production model, and 0.99 and 0.08, respectively, lower than those of the PWR production model. The impact of RGICF (1.45) on the environment was lower than that of CCP (2.26) and PWR (2.46). The emergy sustainable indices (ESIs) of RGICF were 1.07 and 1.02 times higher than those of CCP and PWR, respectively. With regard to the emergy index of product safety (EIPS), RGICF had a higher safety index than those of CCP and PWR. Overall, our results suggest that the RGICF model is advantageous and provides higher environmental benefits than the CCP and PWR systems.

show abstract

Emergy evaluation of organic rice-duck mutualism system

Cited by 48 publications

References 8 publications

Efficient use of energy through organic rice–duck mutualism system

Efficient use of energy through organic rice–duck mutualism system

Assessment of nomadic rice-duck complex ecosystem on energy and economy

Emergy assessment of three home courtyard agriculture production systems in Tibet Autonomous Region, China

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About