2018
DOI: 10.1016/j.agsy.2017.11.004
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Forage management to improve on-farm feed production, nitrogen fluxes and greenhouse gas emissions from dairy systems in a wet temperate region

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

2
4
1

Year Published

2019
2019
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 11 publications
(7 citation statements)
references
References 32 publications
2
4
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Differences found in contrast to international literature on GHG emissions in dairy farms per kg of FPCM were due to the moderate mean yields of 13.5 kg/cow/day in the studied farms from both feeding strategies. In example, Doltra et al (2018) with lower emissions reported yields between 18 and 20 kg milk/cow/day, while Garg et al (2016) from work with smallholder farms in India reported emissions per kg of FPCM from cows similar to values herein reported.…”
Section: Greenhouse Gas Emissions From N Utilisationsupporting
confidence: 83%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…Differences found in contrast to international literature on GHG emissions in dairy farms per kg of FPCM were due to the moderate mean yields of 13.5 kg/cow/day in the studied farms from both feeding strategies. In example, Doltra et al (2018) with lower emissions reported yields between 18 and 20 kg milk/cow/day, while Garg et al (2016) from work with smallholder farms in India reported emissions per kg of FPCM from cows similar to values herein reported.…”
Section: Greenhouse Gas Emissions From N Utilisationsupporting
confidence: 83%
“…The GHG emissions from milk production were not different (P>0.05) between feeding strategies with a mean 2.1 kg CO2-eq/kg FPCM. These values are higher than reports by Doltra et al (2018) who found values between 1.5 and 1.2 kg CO2-eq/ kg milk for zero grazing and grazing systems respectively when comparing feeding systems in northern Spain.…”
Section: Greenhouse Gas Emissions From N Utilisationcontrasting
confidence: 78%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The total annual GHG emissions were strongly related to total feed eaten, and the lower feed supplies and associated lower stocking rates of the Improved systems were the key drivers of lower total GHG emissions in all three regions [11]. These findings align with international studies where the general trend was that increased farming intensity within a system (more input and more animals) may decrease the GHG intensity of milk (kg emissions/kg milk), but absolute emissions (kg emissions/ha) will increase [12][13][14]. Few studies have considered the wider issues of emissions to both air and water, impacts of mitigations on farm profitability, and the potential trade-offs from achieving these often-conflicting goals.…”
Section: Introductionsupporting
confidence: 78%
“…Regarding GWP, the primary source is animal husbandry which accounts for emissions from manure management (N 2 O, CH 4 ) and enteric fermentation in ruminants (CH 4 ), with the majority originating from the latter (Ogino et al, 2007;Dick et al, 2015;Doltra et al, 2018;Gislon et al, 2020). Therefore, the lower GWP from animal husbandry of the Lungau farms is caused by the lower stocking rates (0.88 and 1.04 dairy cows ha MP −1 for Lungau farms and MDF, respectively; Table 1), which lead to less enteric fermentation and lower emissions from manure management (Dong et al, 2006).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%