toggle visibility Search & Display Options

Select All    Deselect All
 |   | 
Details
   print
  Records Links
Author Fan, F.; Henriksen, C.B.; Porter, J. doi  openurl
  Title Relationship between stoichiometry and ecosystem services: A case study of it organic farming systems Type Journal Article
  Year 2018 Publication Ecological Indicators Abbreviated Journal Ecological Indicators  
  Volume 85 Issue Pages 400-408  
  Keywords Ecosystem services; Organic farming; Stoichiometry; Field practices; Soil Carbon Storage; Ecological Stoichiometry; Agricultural Management; Earthworm Populations; Nitrogen-Fixation; Cropping Systems; New-Zealand; Quantification; Valuation; Matter  
  Abstract Over the past five decades, the delivery of global Ecosystem Services (ES) has diminished and this has been driven partly by anthropogenic activities. Agro-ecosystems cover almost 40% of the terrestrial surface on Earth, and have been considered as one of the most significant ecological experiments with a potential to both contribute to and mitigate global ES loss. In the present study, six different ES (food and fodder production, carbon sequestration, biological pest control, soil water storage, nitrogen regulation and soil formation) were quantified in various organic farming systems and the hypothesis that there is a link between these ES and C:N, C:O and H:O stoichiometric ratios in farming systems was experimentally tested. The results show that different ES are correlated with the stoichiometric ratios to different extents. There are significant positive linear correlations between C:N stoichiometric ratios and all measured ES in the investigated organic farming systems, while not all the ES are correlated with the C:O and H:O ratios. This study has expanded the horizons of stoichiometry by linking a fundamental chemical property of molecules with an emergent property of organic farming systems, namely their ecosystem service provision.  
  Address 2018-06-07  
  Corporate Author Thesis  
  Publisher Place of Publication Editor  
  Language English Summary Language Original Title  
  Series Editor Series Title Abbreviated Series Title  
  Series Volume Series Issue Edition  
  ISSN (up) 1470-160x ISBN Medium  
  Area Expedition Conference  
  Notes CropM, ft_macsur Approved no  
  Call Number MA @ admin @ Serial 5201  
Permanent link to this record
 

 
Author Kässi, P.; Känkänen, H.; Niskanen, O.; Lehtonen, H.; Höglind, M. url  doi
openurl 
  Title Farm level approach to manage grass yield variation under climate change in Finland and north-western Russia Type Journal Article
  Year 2015 Publication Biosystems Engineering Abbreviated Journal Biosystems Engineering  
  Volume 140 Issue Pages 11-22  
  Keywords silage grass; risk management; dairy farms; buffer storage; agricultural economics; grassland modelling; dairy-cows; impact; security; timothy; harvest; future; growth; norway; europe; time  
  Abstract Cattle feeding in Northern Europe is based on grass silage, but grass growth is highly dependent on weather conditions. If ensuring sufficient silage availability in every situation is prioritised, the lowest expected yield level determines the cultivated area in farmers’ decision-making. One way to manage the variation in grass yield is to increase grass production and silage storage capacity so that they exceed the annual consumption at the farm. The cost of risk management in the current and the projected future climate was calculated taking into account grassland yield and yield variability for three study areas under current and mid-21st century climate conditions. The dataset on simulated future grass yields used as input for the risk management calculations were taken from a previously published simulation study. Strategies investigated included using up to 60% more silage grass area than needed in a year with average grass yields, and storing silage for up to 6 months more than consumed in a year (buffer storage). According to the results, utilising an excess silage grass area of 20% and a silage buffer storage capacity of 6 months were the most economic ways of managing drought risk in both the baseline climate and the projected climate of 2046-2065. It was found that the silage yield risk due to drought is likely to decrease in all studied locations, but the drought risk and costs implied still remain significant. (C) 2015 IAgrE. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.  
  Address  
  Corporate Author Thesis  
  Publisher Place of Publication Editor  
  Language English Summary Language Original Title  
  Series Editor Series Title Abbreviated Series Title  
  Series Volume Series Issue Edition  
  ISSN (up) 1537-5110 ISBN Medium Article  
  Area Expedition Conference  
  Notes TradeM Approved no  
  Call Number MA @ admin @ Serial 4671  
Permanent link to this record
 

 
Author Reidsma, P.; Wolf, J.; Kanellopoulos, A.; Schaap, B.F.; Mandryk, M.; Verhagen, J.; van Ittersum, M.K. url  doi
openurl 
  Title Climate change impact and adaptation research requires integrated assessment and farming systems analysis: a case study in the Netherlands Type Journal Article
  Year 2015 Publication Environmental Research Letters Abbreviated Journal Environ. Res. Lett.  
  Volume 10 Issue 4 Pages 045004  
  Keywords climate change adaptation; scenario; farm diversity; crop simulation; bio-economic farm modelling; european-union; crop yields; agriculture; responses; models; wheat; variability; improvement; strategies; scenarios  
  Abstract Rather than on crop modelling only, climate change impact assessments in agriculture need to be based on integrated assessment and farming systems analysis, and account for adaptation at different levels. With a case study for Flevoland, the Netherlands, we illustrate that (1) crop models cannot account for all relevant climate change impacts and adaptation options, and (2) changes in technology, policy and prices have had and are likely to have larger impacts on farms than climate change. While crop modelling indicates positive impacts of climate change on yields of major crops in 2050, a semiquantitative and participatory method assessing impacts of extreme events shows that there are nevertheless several climate risks. A range of adaptation measures are, however, available to reduce possible negative effects at crop level. In addition, at farm level farmers can change cropping patterns, and adjust inputs and outputs. Also farm structural change will influence impacts and adaptation. While the 5th IPCC report is more negative regarding impacts of climate change on agriculture compared to the previous report, also for temperate regions, our results show that when putting climate change in context of other drivers, and when explicitly accounting for adaptation at crop and farm level, impacts may be less negative in some regions and opportunities are revealed. These results refer to a temperate region, but an integrated assessment may also change perspectives on climate change for other parts of the world.  
  Address 2016-10-31  
  Corporate Author Thesis  
  Publisher Place of Publication Editor  
  Language English Summary Language Original Title  
  Series Editor Series Title Abbreviated Series Title  
  Series Volume Series Issue Edition  
  ISSN (up) 1748-9326 ISBN Medium Article  
  Area Expedition Conference  
  Notes CropM Approved no  
  Call Number MA @ admin @ Serial 4800  
Permanent link to this record
 

 
Author Reidsma, P.; Wolf, J.; Kanellopoulos, A.; Schaap, B.F.; Mandryk, M.; Verhagen, J.; van Ittersum, M.K. url  doi
openurl 
  Title Climate change impact and adaptation research requires integrated assessment and farming systems analysis: a case study in the Netherlands Type Journal Article
  Year 2015 Publication Environmental Research Letters Abbreviated Journal Environ. Res. Lett.  
  Volume 10 Issue 4 Pages 045004  
  Keywords climate change adaptation; scenario; farm diversity; crop simulation; bio-economic farm modelling; european-union; crop yields; agriculture; responses; models; wheat; variability; improvement; strategies; scenarios  
  Abstract Rather than on crop modelling only, climate change impact assessments in agriculture need to be based on integrated assessment and farming systems analysis, and account for adaptation at different levels. With a case study for Flevoland, the Netherlands, we illustrate that (1) crop models cannot account for all relevant climate change impacts and adaptation options, and (2) changes in technology, policy and prices have had and are likely to have larger impacts on farms than climate change. While crop modelling indicates positive impacts of climate change on yields of major crops in 2050, a semi-quantitative and participatory method assessing impacts of extreme events shows that there are nevertheless several climate risks. A range of adaptation measures are, however, available to reduce possible negative effects at crop level. In addition, at farm level farmers can change cropping patterns, and adjust inputs and outputs. Also farm structural change will influence impacts and adaptation. While the 5th IPCC report is more negative regarding impacts of climate change on agriculture compared to the previous report, also for temperate regions, our results show that when putting climate change in context of other drivers, and when explicitly accounting for adaptation at crop and farm level, impacts may be less negative in some regions and opportunities are revealed. These results refer to a temperate region, but an integrated assessment may also change perspectives on climate change for other parts of the world.  
  Address  
  Corporate Author Thesis  
  Publisher Place of Publication Editor  
  Language English Summary Language Original Title  
  Series Editor Series Title Abbreviated Series Title  
  Series Volume Series Issue Edition  
  ISSN (up) 1748-9326 ISBN Medium Article  
  Area Expedition Conference  
  Notes CropM, ftnotmacsur Approved no  
  Call Number MA @ admin @ Serial 4649  
Permanent link to this record
 

 
Author Hutchings, N.J.; Özkan Gülzari, Ş.; de Haan, M.; Sandars, D. doi  openurl
  Title How do farm models compare when estimating greenhouse gas emissions from dairy cattle production Type Journal Article
  Year 2018 Publication Animal Abbreviated Journal Animal  
  Volume 12 Issue 10 Pages 2171-2180  
  Keywords dairy cattle; farm-scale; model; greenhouse gas; Future Climate Scenarios; Systems-Analysis; Milk-Production; Crop; Production; Mitigation; Intensity; Impacts  
  Abstract The European Union Effort Sharing Regulation (ESR) will require a 30% reduction in greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by 2030 compared with 2005 from the sectors not included in the European Emissions Trading Scheme, including agriculture. This will require the estimation of current and future emissions from agriculture, including dairy cattle production systems. Using a farm-scale model as part of a Tier 3 method for farm to national scales provides a more holistic and informative approach than IPCC (2006) Tier 2 but requires independent quality control. Comparing the results of using models to simulate a range of scenarios that explore an appropriate range of biophysical and management situations can support this process by providing a framework for placing model results in context. To assess the variation between models and the process of understanding differences, estimates of GHG emissions from four farm-scale models (DailyWise, FarmAC, HolosNor and SFARMMOD) were calculated for eight dairy farming scenarios within a factorial design consisting of two climates (cool/dry and warm/wet) x two soil types (sandy and clayey) x two feeding systems (grass only and grass/maize). The milk yield per cow, follower cow ratio, manure management system, nitrogen (N) fertilisation and land area were standardised for all scenarios in order to associate the differences in the results with the model structure and function. Potential yield and application of available N in fertiliser and manure were specified separately for grass and maize. Significant differences between models were found in GHG emissions at the farm-scale and for most contributory sources, although there was no difference in the ranking of source magnitudes. The farm-scale GHG emissions, averaged over the four models, was 10.6 t carbon dioxide equivalents (CO(2)e)/ha per year, with a range of 1.9 t CO(2)e/ha per year. Even though key production characteristics were specified in the scenarios, there were still significant differences between models in the annual milk production per ha and the amounts of N fertiliser and concentrate feed imported. This was because the models differed in their description of biophysical responses and feedback mechanisms, and in the extent to which management functions were internalised. We conclude that comparing the results of different farm-scale models when applied to a range of scenarios would build confidence in their use in achieving ESR targets, justifying further investment in the development of a wider range of scenarios and software tools.  
  Address 2019-01-07  
  Corporate Author Thesis  
  Publisher Place of Publication Editor  
  Language English Summary Language Original Title  
  Series Editor Series Title Abbreviated Series Title  
  Series Volume Series Issue Edition  
  ISSN (up) 1751-7311 ISBN Medium  
  Area Expedition Conference  
  Notes TradeM, ft_macsur Approved no  
  Call Number MA @ admin @ Serial 5212  
Permanent link to this record
Select All    Deselect All
 |   | 
Details
   print

Save Citations:
Export Records: