Abstract: The study was based on data collected during 5 yr (2003-2007) and was aimed at assessing the effects of the month, slaughter house of destination (differing for stocking density, openings, brightness, and cooling device types), length of the journey, and temperature-humidity index (THI) on mortality of heavy slaughter pigs (approximately 160 kg live weight) during transport and lairage. Data were obtained from 24,098 journeys and 3,676,153 pigs transported from 1,618 farms to 3 slaughter houses. Individual shipments were the unit of observation. The terms dead on arrival (DOA) and dead in pen (DIP) refer to pigs that died during transport and in lairage at the abattoir before slaughtering, respectively. These 2 variables were assessed as the dependent counts in separate univariate Poisson regressions. The independent variables assessed univariately in each set of regressions were month of shipment, slaughter house of destination, time traveled, and each combination of the month with the time traveled. Two separate piecewise regressions were done. One used DOA counts within THI levels over pigs transported as a dependent ratio and the second used DIP counts within THI levels over pigs from a transport kept in lairage as a dependent ratio. The THI was the sole independent variable in each case. The month with the greatest frequency of deaths was July with a risk ratio of 1.22 (confidence interval: 1.06-1.36; P < 0.05) and 1.27 (confidence interval: 1.06-1.51; P < 0.05) for DOA and DIP, respectively. The lower mortality risk ratios for DOA and DIP were recorded for January and March (P < 0.05). The aggregated data of the summer (June, July, and August) versus non-summer (January, March, September, and November) months showed a greater risk of pigs dying during the hot season when considering both transport and lairage (P < 0.05). The mortality risk ratio of DIP was lower at the slaughter house with the lowest stocking density (0.64 m(2)/100 kg live weight), large open windows on the roof and sidewalls, low brightness (40 lx) lights, and high-pressure sprinklers as cooling devices. The mortality risk ratio of DOA increased significantly for journeys longer than 2 h, whereas no relationship was found between length of transport and DIP. The piecewise analysis pointed out that 78.5 and 73.6 THI were the thresholds above which the mortality rate increased significantly for DOA and DIP, respectively. These results may help the pig industry to improve the welfare of heavy slaughter pigs during transport and lairage.

Abstract: We assessed the weather data aggregation effect (DAE) on the simulation of cropping systems for different crops, response variables, and production conditions. Using 13 process-based crop models and the ensemble mean, we simulated 30 yr continuous cropping systems for 2 crops (winter wheat and silage maize) under 3 production conditions for the state of North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany. The DAE was evaluated for 5 weather data resolutions (i.e. 1, 10, 25, 50, and 100 km) for 3 response variables including yield, growing season evapotranspiration, and water use efficiency. Five metrics, viz. the spatial bias (Delta), average absolute deviation (AAD), relative AAD, root mean squared error (RMSE), and relative RMSE, were used to evaluate the DAE on both the input weather data and simulated results. For weather data, we found that data aggregation narrowed the spatial variability but widened the., especially across mountainous areas. The DAE on loss of spatial heterogeneity and hotspots was stronger than on the average changes over the region. The DAE increased when coarsening the spatial resolution of the input weather data. The DAE varied considerably across different models, but changed only slightly for different production conditions and crops. We conclude that if spatially detailed information is essential for local management decision, higher resolution is desirable to adequately capture the spatial variability for heterogeneous regions. The required resolution depends on the choice of the model as well as the environmental condition of the study area.

Abstract: Eddy covariance data from four European grassland sites are used to probabilistically invert the CARAIB (CARbon Assimilation In the Biosphere) dynamic vegetation model (DVM) with 10 unknown parameters, using the DREAM((ZS)) (DiffeRential Evolution Adaptive Metropolis) Markov chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) sampler. We focus on comparing model inversions, considering both homoscedastic and heteroscedastic eddy covariance residual errors, with variances either fixed a priori or jointly inferred together with the model parameters. Agreements between measured and simulated data during calibration are comparable with previous studies, with root mean square errors (RMSEs) of simulated daily gross primary productivity (GPP), ecosystem respiration (RECO) and evapotranspiration (ET) ranging from 1.73 to 2.19, 1.04 to 1.56 g C m(-2) day(-1) and 0.50 to 1.28 mm day(-1), respectively. For the calibration period, using a homoscedastic eddy covariance residual error model resulted in a better agreement between measured and modelled data than using a heteroscedastic residual error model. However, a model validation experiment showed that CARAIB models calibrated considering heteroscedastic residual errors perform better. Posterior parameter distributions derived from using a heteroscedastic model of the residuals thus appear to be more robust. This is the case even though the classical linear heteroscedastic error model assumed herein did not fully remove heteroscedasticity of the GPP residuals. Despite the fact that the calibrated model is generally capable of fitting the data within measurement errors, systematic bias in the model simulations are observed. These are likely due to model inadequacies such as shortcomings in the photosynthesis modelling. Besides the residual error treatment, differences between model parameter posterior distributions among the four grassland sites are also investigated. It is shown that the marginal distributions of the specific leaf area and characteristic mortality time parameters can be explained by site-specific ecophysiological characteristics.