Kebreab, E., Tedeschi, L., Dijkstra, J., Ellis, J. L., Bannink, A., & France, J. (2016). Modeling Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Enteric Fermentation. In E. Kebreab (Ed.), Advances in Agricultural Systems (Vol. 6, pp. 173–196). Synthesis and Modeling of Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Carbon Storage in Agricultural and Forest Systems to Guide Mitigation and Adaptation, Advances in Agricultural Systems (6).
Abstract: Livestock directly contribute to greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions mainly through methane (CH4) and nitrous oxide (N2O) emissions. For cost and practicality reasons, quantification of GHG has been through development of various types of mathematical models. This chapter addresses the utility and limitations of mathematical models used to estimate enteric CH4 emissions from livestock production. Models used in GHG quantification can be broadly classified into either empirical or mechanistic models. Empirical models might be easier to use because they require fewer input variables compared with mechanistic models. However, their applicability in assessing mitigation options such as dietary manipulation may be limited. The major driving variables identified for both types of models include feed intake, lipid and nonstructural carbohydrate content of the feed, and animal variables. Knowledge gaps identified in empirical modeling were that some of the assumptions might not be valid because of geographical location, health status of animals, genetic differences, or production type. In mechanistic modeling, errors related to estimating feed intake, stoichiometry of volatile fatty acid (VFA) production, and acidity of rumen contents are limitations that need further investigation. Model prediction uncertainty was also investigated, and, depending on the intensity and source of the prediction uncertainty, the mathematical model may inaccurately predict the observed values with more or less variability. In conclusion, although there are quantification tools available, global collaboration is required to come to a consensus on quantification protocols. This can be achieved through developing various types of models specific to region, animal, and production type using large global datasets developed through international collaboration.
|
|
Waha, K., & Müller, C. (2013). The essential temperature routines in LPJmL for wheat simulations. In P. D. Alderman, E. Quilligan, S. Asseng, F. Ewert, & M. P. Reynolds (Eds.), (pp. 81–84). Proceedings of the Workshop ‘Modeling Wheat Response to High Temperature’ CIMMYT, El Batan, Texcoco, Mexico, June 19-21, 2013.
|
|
Porter, J. R., Xie, L., Challinor, A. J., Cochrane, K., Howden, S. M., Iqbal, M. M., et al. (2014). Food security and food production systems. In C. B. Field, V. R. Barros, D. J. Dokken, K. J. Mach, M. D. Mastrandrea, T. E. Bilir, et al. (Eds.), (pp. 485–533). Part A: Global and Sectoral Aspects. Contribution of Working Group II to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel of Climate Change (IPCC), Climate Change 2014: Impacts, Adaptation, and Vuln. Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA: Cambridge University Press.
|
|
Prange, S., Vohland, K., Conradt, T., & Hattermann, F. F. (2013). Klimabedingte Veränderungen der Abflussdynamik von ausgewählten deutschen Fließgewässern und ihre naturschutzfachliche Bedeutung. In: Schutzgebiete Deutschlands im Klimawandel – Risiken und Handlungsoptionen. In F. Badeck, K. Böhning-Gaese, G. Ellwanger, J. Hanspach, P. L. Ibisch, S. Klotz, et al. (Eds.), (pp. 55–69). Naturschutz und Biologische Vielfalt, 129. Bonn-Bad Godesberg: Bundesamt für Naturschutz.
|
|
Dirnböck, T., Bezák, P., Dullinger, S., Haberl, H., Lotze-Campen, H., Mirtl, M., et al. (2013). Critical Scales for Long-Term Socio-ecological Biodiversity Research. In S. J. Singh, H. Haberl, M. Chertow, M. Mirtl, & M. Schmid (Eds.), (pp. 123–138). Long Term Socio-Ecological Research, Human-environment interactions (2). Dordrecht: Springer.
|
