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)...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
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 |