Cargando…

Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Calf- and Yearling-Fed Beef Production Systems, With and Without the Use of Growth Promotants

SIMPLE SUMMARY: A spring calving herd (~350 beef cows) over two production cycles was used to compare the whole-farm greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions among calf-fed vs. yearling-fed production systems, with and without growth implants. Farm GHG emissions initially included enteric CH(4), manure CH(4)...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Basarab, John, Baron, Vern, López-Campos, Óscar, Aalhus, Jennifer, Haugen-Kozyra, Karen, Okine, Erasmus
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2012
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4494322/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26486917
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ani2020195
_version_ 1782380069385142272
author Basarab, John
Baron, Vern
López-Campos, Óscar
Aalhus, Jennifer
Haugen-Kozyra, Karen
Okine, Erasmus
author_facet Basarab, John
Baron, Vern
López-Campos, Óscar
Aalhus, Jennifer
Haugen-Kozyra, Karen
Okine, Erasmus
author_sort Basarab, John
collection PubMed
description SIMPLE SUMMARY: A spring calving herd (~350 beef cows) over two production cycles was used to compare the whole-farm greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions among calf-fed vs. yearling-fed production systems, with and without growth implants. Farm GHG emissions initially included enteric CH(4), manure CH(4) and N(2)O, cropping N(2)O, and energy use CO(2). The carbon footprint ranged from 19.9–22.5 kg CO(2)e per kg carcass weight. Including soil organic carbon loss from annual cropping and carbon sequestration from perennial pastures and haylands further reduced the carbon footprint by 11–16%. The carbon footprint of beef was reduced by growth promotants (4.9–5.1%) and by calf-fed beef production (6.3–7.5%). ABSTRACT: A spring calving herd consisting of about 350 beef cows, 14–16 breeding bulls, 60 replacement heifers and 112 steers were used to compare the whole-farm GHG emissions among calf-fed vs. yearling-fed production systems with and without growth implants. Carbon footprint ranged from 11.63 to 13.22 kg CO(2)e per kg live weight (19.87–22.52 kg CO(2)e per kg carcass weight). Enteric CH(4) was the largest source of GHG emissions (53–54%), followed by manure N(2)O (20–22%), cropping N(2)O (11%), energy use CO(2) (9–9.5%), and manure CH(4) (4–6%). Beef cow accounted for 77% and 58% of the GHG emissions in the calf-fed and yearling-fed. Feeders accounted for the second highest GHG emissions (15% calf-fed; 35–36% yearling-fed). Implants reduced the carbon footprint by 4.9–5.1% compared with hormone-free. Calf-fed reduced the carbon footprint by 6.3–7.5% compared with yearling-fed. When expressed as kg CO(2)e per kg carcass weight per year the carbon footprint of calf-fed production was 73.9–76.1% lower than yearling-fed production, and calf-fed implanted was 85% lower than hormone-free yearling-fed. Reducing GHG emissions from beef production may be accomplished by improving the feed efficiency of the cow herd, decreasing the days on low quality feeds, and reducing the age at harvest of youthful cattle.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4494322
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2012
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-44943222015-09-30 Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Calf- and Yearling-Fed Beef Production Systems, With and Without the Use of Growth Promotants Basarab, John Baron, Vern López-Campos, Óscar Aalhus, Jennifer Haugen-Kozyra, Karen Okine, Erasmus Animals (Basel) Article SIMPLE SUMMARY: A spring calving herd (~350 beef cows) over two production cycles was used to compare the whole-farm greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions among calf-fed vs. yearling-fed production systems, with and without growth implants. Farm GHG emissions initially included enteric CH(4), manure CH(4) and N(2)O, cropping N(2)O, and energy use CO(2). The carbon footprint ranged from 19.9–22.5 kg CO(2)e per kg carcass weight. Including soil organic carbon loss from annual cropping and carbon sequestration from perennial pastures and haylands further reduced the carbon footprint by 11–16%. The carbon footprint of beef was reduced by growth promotants (4.9–5.1%) and by calf-fed beef production (6.3–7.5%). ABSTRACT: A spring calving herd consisting of about 350 beef cows, 14–16 breeding bulls, 60 replacement heifers and 112 steers were used to compare the whole-farm GHG emissions among calf-fed vs. yearling-fed production systems with and without growth implants. Carbon footprint ranged from 11.63 to 13.22 kg CO(2)e per kg live weight (19.87–22.52 kg CO(2)e per kg carcass weight). Enteric CH(4) was the largest source of GHG emissions (53–54%), followed by manure N(2)O (20–22%), cropping N(2)O (11%), energy use CO(2) (9–9.5%), and manure CH(4) (4–6%). Beef cow accounted for 77% and 58% of the GHG emissions in the calf-fed and yearling-fed. Feeders accounted for the second highest GHG emissions (15% calf-fed; 35–36% yearling-fed). Implants reduced the carbon footprint by 4.9–5.1% compared with hormone-free. Calf-fed reduced the carbon footprint by 6.3–7.5% compared with yearling-fed. When expressed as kg CO(2)e per kg carcass weight per year the carbon footprint of calf-fed production was 73.9–76.1% lower than yearling-fed production, and calf-fed implanted was 85% lower than hormone-free yearling-fed. Reducing GHG emissions from beef production may be accomplished by improving the feed efficiency of the cow herd, decreasing the days on low quality feeds, and reducing the age at harvest of youthful cattle. MDPI 2012-04-16 /pmc/articles/PMC4494322/ /pubmed/26486917 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ani2020195 Text en © 2012 by the authors; licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Basarab, John
Baron, Vern
López-Campos, Óscar
Aalhus, Jennifer
Haugen-Kozyra, Karen
Okine, Erasmus
Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Calf- and Yearling-Fed Beef Production Systems, With and Without the Use of Growth Promotants
title Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Calf- and Yearling-Fed Beef Production Systems, With and Without the Use of Growth Promotants
title_full Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Calf- and Yearling-Fed Beef Production Systems, With and Without the Use of Growth Promotants
title_fullStr Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Calf- and Yearling-Fed Beef Production Systems, With and Without the Use of Growth Promotants
title_full_unstemmed Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Calf- and Yearling-Fed Beef Production Systems, With and Without the Use of Growth Promotants
title_short Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Calf- and Yearling-Fed Beef Production Systems, With and Without the Use of Growth Promotants
title_sort greenhouse gas emissions from calf- and yearling-fed beef production systems, with and without the use of growth promotants
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4494322/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26486917
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ani2020195
work_keys_str_mv AT basarabjohn greenhousegasemissionsfromcalfandyearlingfedbeefproductionsystemswithandwithouttheuseofgrowthpromotants
AT baronvern greenhousegasemissionsfromcalfandyearlingfedbeefproductionsystemswithandwithouttheuseofgrowthpromotants
AT lopezcampososcar greenhousegasemissionsfromcalfandyearlingfedbeefproductionsystemswithandwithouttheuseofgrowthpromotants
AT aalhusjennifer greenhousegasemissionsfromcalfandyearlingfedbeefproductionsystemswithandwithouttheuseofgrowthpromotants
AT haugenkozyrakaren greenhousegasemissionsfromcalfandyearlingfedbeefproductionsystemswithandwithouttheuseofgrowthpromotants
AT okineerasmus greenhousegasemissionsfromcalfandyearlingfedbeefproductionsystemswithandwithouttheuseofgrowthpromotants