Abstract: This report provides an overview of how grasslands are represented in six different farmscale  models represented in MACSUR. A survey was conducted, followed by a workshop in  which modellers discussed the results of the survey, and identified research challenges and  knowledge gaps. The workshop was attended by grassland as well as livestock specialists.  The investigated models differed largely with respect to how grasslands were represented,  e.g. as regards weather and management factors accounted for, spatial and temporal  resolution, and output variables. All models had grassland modules that simulate DM yield  and herbage N content (or crude protein (CP) content = N content x 6.25). Many models  also simulate P content, whereas only one simulate K content. About half of the model  simulate herbage energy value and/or herbage fibre content and fibre and/or dry matter  digestibility. Critical input data required from grassland models to simulate ruminant  productivity and GHG emissions at farm scale was identified by the workshop participants.  The different types of input data required were ranked in order of importance as regards  their influence on important system outputs. For simulation of ruminant productivity and  GHG emissions, herbage DM yield was ranked as the most important input variable from  grassland models, followed by CP content together with at least one variable describing  herbage fibre characteristics. These findings suggest that work on improving the ability of  the current grassland models with respect to simulation of fibre/energy should be  prioritized in farm-scale modelling aiming at quantifying livestock production and GHG  emissions under different management regimes and climate conditions. More work is also needed on model evaluation, a task that has not been prioritized yet for some models.

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.