Review: Towards the agroecological management of ruminants, pigs and poultry through the development of sustainable breeding programmes. II. Breeding strategies

Agroecology uses ecological processes and local resources rather than chemical inputs to develop productive and resilient livestock and crop production systems. In this context, breeding innovations are necessary to obtain animals that are both productive and adapted to a broad range of local contexts and diversity of systems. Breeding strategies to promote agroecological systems are similar for different animal species. However, current practices differ regarding the breeding of ruminants, pigs and poultry. Ruminant breeding is still an open system where farmers continue to choose their own breeds and strategies. Conversely, pig and poultry breeding is more or less the exclusive domain of international breeding companies which supply farmers with hybrid animals. Innovations in breeding strategies must therefore be adapted to the different species. In developed countries, reorienting current breeding programmes seems to be more effective than developing programmes dedicated to agroecological systems that will struggle to be really effective because of the small size of the populations currently concerned by such systems. Particular attention needs to be paid to determining the respective usefulness of cross-breeding v. straight breeding strategies of well-adapted local breeds. While cross-breeding may offer some immediate benefits in terms of improving certain traits that enable the animals to adapt well to local environmental conditions, it may be difficult to sustain these benefits in the longer term and could also induce an important loss of genetic diversity if the initial pure-bred populations are no longer produced. As well as supporting the value of within-breed diversity, we must preserve between-breed diversity in order to maintain numerous options for adaptation to a variety of production environments and contexts. This may involve specific public policies to maintain and characterize local breeds (in terms of both phenotypes and genotypes), which could be used more effectively if they benefited from the scientific and technical resources currently available for more common breeds. Last but not least, public policies need to enable improved information concerning the genetic resources and breeding tools available for the agroecological management of livestock production systems, and facilitate its assimilation by farmers and farm technicians

Effects of rearing system on performance, animal welfare and meat quality in two pig genotypes

Abstract The effects of an alternative rearing system (O) for growing-finishing pigs (sawdust-shave bedding with free outdoor access, 2.4 m²/pig) compared to a conventional (C) one (slatted floor, 0.65 m²/pig) were evaluated for performance, animal welfare and meat quality in two (Duroc or synthetic line crossbreds) genotypes. Trials were conducted in spring and winter, each involving one pen of 10 pigs / genotype / system (a total of 40 pigs / season). No significant interactions between rearing system and genotype were observed on any of the traits evaluated. On the whole, the O pigs spent 40% more time on exploratory activities, in particular towards the bedding, suggesting an improved animal welfare with the O system. Urine levels of cortisol and catecholamines in the O were similar with those in C pigs at 70kg. The O pigs exhibited a 6% increase in growth rate and were 5kg heavier at slaughter at the same age. Back fat depth and lean meat content, as well as plasma ACTH and cortisol, and urine cortisol and catecholamines levels at slaughter were not significantly affected by the rearing system. The O pigs exhibited similar pH 1 and pHu values, higher drip losses, but also higher intramuscular fat contents. The O system improved loin juiciness, but did not influence other eating quality traits

Influence de la réduction de lapport en nutriments sur les performances et les impacts environnementaux de lengraissement des porcs au Brésil.

Abstract: Sustainable low-carbon pork production is a priority in most pig meat producing countries. In Brazil the feed supplied to the animals is rich in nutrients and their reduction remains questioned. The objective of this study was to evaluate the effect of reducing dietary nutrient content for fattening pigs on their performance and environmental impact. The study addressed the growing-finishing phase of pig production including feed production, animal housing and manure management. Forty gilts and 40 barrows were distributed in a randomized block design with two treatments and 10 replicates per treatment. The treatments consisted in two feeding strategies with in four feeding phases in each. In the standard (ST) strategy, feed was formulated with standard Brazilian recommendations. In the low nutrient (LN) strategy, requirements were adjusted by using the InraPorc® model. Performance and excretion data were used to calculate, through life cycle assessment (LCA), the carbon emissions and the potentials of acidification and eutrophication. The functional unit was the kg of body weight gain (BWG). Both feeding strategies led to similar growth performance, with ADG of 919 g/d and FCR of 2.68 kg/kg. Carcass and meat quality were also not affected by treatments. Carbon footprint was reduced in the LN strategy in comparison with ST (2.57 versus 2.67 kg CO2-eq./kg BWG). Similar effects were observed for acidification (57.2 versus 62.3 g SO2-eq./kg BWG) and eutrophication (17.2 versus 19.0 g PO4-eq./kg BWG). Results suggest that nutritional adjustment based on prediction models is a valuable alternative to standard formulation in Brazil, which allows to improve economic results and to reduce environmental burdens without affecting technical performance. Resumo: A produção sustentável de carne suína de baixo carbono é uma prioridade na maioria dos países produtores de carne de suíno. No Brasil, a alimentação fornecida aos animais é rica em nutrientes e sua redução permanece questionada. O objetivo deste estudo foi avaliar o efeito da redução do teor de nutrientes na dieta de suínos de engorda em seu desempenho e impacto ambiental. O estudo abordou a fase de crescimento e terminação da produção de suínos, incluindo a produção de rações, alojamento de animais e manejo de dejetos. Quarenta leitoas e 40 machos foram distribuídos em delineamento de blocos casualizados com dois tratamentos e dez repetições por tratamento. Os tratamentos consistiram em duas estratégias de alimentação com quatro fases de alimentação em cada. Na estratégia padrão (ST), o alimento foi formulado com recomendações brasileiras padrão. Na estratégia de baixo nutriente (LN), os requisitos foram ajustados usando o modelo InraPorc®. Os dados de desempenho e excreção foram utilizados para calcular, através da avaliação do ciclo de vida (ACV), as emissões de carbono e os potenciais de acidificação e eutrofização. A unidade funcional foi o kg de ganho de peso corporal (GP). Ambas as estratégias de alimentação levaram a um desempenho de crescimento semelhante, com um GMD de 919 g / dia e FCR de 2,68 kg / kg. A qualidade da carcaça e da carne também não foi afetada pelos tratamentos. A pegada de carbono foi reduzida na estratégia do LN em comparação com o ST (2,57 versus 2,67 kg CO2eq./kg BWG). Efeitos semelhantes foram observados para a acidificação (57,2 versus 62,3 g SO2-eq / kg de peso corporal) e eutrofização (17,2 versus 19,0 g PO4- eq / kg de peso corporal). Os resultados sugerem que o ajuste nutricional baseado em modelos de previsão é uma alternativa valiosa para a formulação padrão no Brasil, o que permite melhorar os resultados econômicos e reduzir a carga ambiental sem afetar o desempenho técnico

Report on developing bottom-up Marginal Abatement Cost Curves (MACCS) for representative farm types.

bitstream/item/177181/1/D11.2-Report-on-developing-bottom-up-MACCs-for-representative-farm-types-0263D69D-63D3-4EA3-A333-EDA004AFDFCB1.pd

Composition, potential emissions and agricultural value of pig slurry from Spanish commercial farms

[EN] Pig slurry is a valuable fertilizer for crop production but at the same time its management may pose environmental risks. Slurry samples were collected from 77 commercial farms of four animal categories (gestating and lactating sows, nursery piglets and growing pigs) and analyzed for macronutrients, micronutrients, heavy metals and volatile fatty acids. Emissions of ammonia (NH3) and biochemical methane potential (BMP) were quantified. Slurry electrical conductivity, pH, dry matter content and ash content were also determined. Data analysis included an analysis of correlations among variables, the development of predictionmodels for gaseousemissions and the analysis of nutritional content of slurries for crop production. Descriptive information is provided in this work and shows a wide range of variability in all studied variables. Animal category affected some physicochemical parameters, probably as a consequence of different slurry management and use of cleaning water. Slurries from gestating sows and growing pigs tended to be more concentrated in nutrients, whereas the slurry from lactating sows and nursery piglets tended to be more diluted. Relevant relationships were found among slurry characteristics expressed in fresh basis and gas emissions. Predictivemodels using on-farmmeasurable parameterswere obtained forNH3 (R2 = 0.51) andCH4 (R2 = 0.76), which suggests that BMP may be estimated in commercial farms from easily determined slurry characteristics. Finally, slurry nutrient composition was highly variable. Therefore, complete analyses of slurries should be performed for an effective and environmental friendly land application.This project was funded by the Spanish Ministry of Science and Innovation (AGL2011-30023) and the Valencian Government (ACOMP/2013/118). We thank the BABEL Project, Building Academic Bonds between Europe and Latin America. Erasmus Mundus Programme Action 2 for PhD fellowships. The translation of this paper was funded by the Universitat Politecnica de Valencia, Spain.Antezana-Julian, WO.; Blas, CD.; García-Rebollar, P.; Rodríguez, C.; Beccaccia, A.; Ferrer Riera, P.; Cerisuelo, A.... (2016). Composition, potential emissions and agricultural value of pig slurry from Spanish commercial farms. Nutrient Cycling in Agroecosystems. 104(2):159-173. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10705-016-9764-3S1591731042Aarnink AJA, Verstegen MWA (2007) Nutrition, key factor to reduce environmental load from pig production. Livest Sci 109(1–3):194–203Abubaker J, Risberg K, Jönsson E, Dahlin A S, Cederlund H, Pell M (2015) Short-term effects of biogas digestates and pig slurry application on soil microbial activity. Appl Environ Soil Sci. Article ID 658542: 1–15Adekunle KF, Okolie JA (2015) A review of biochemical process of anaerobic digestion. Adv Biosci Biotechnol 6:205–212Angelidaki I, Alves M, Bolzonella D, Borzacconi L, Campos JL, Guwy J, Kalyuzhnyi S, Jenicek P, Van Lier JB (2009) Defining the biomethane potential (BMP) of solid organic wastes and energy crops: a proposed protocol for batch assays. Water Sci Technol 59(5):927–934Antezana W, Calvet S, Beccaccia A, Ferrer P, De Blas C, García-Rebollar P, Cerisuelo A (2015) Effects of nutrition on digestion efficiency and gaseous emissions from slurry in growing pigs: III. Influence of varying the dietary level of calcium soap of palm fatty acids distillate with or without orange pulp supplementation. Anim Feed Sci Technol 209:128–136APHA (2005) Standard methods for the examination of water and wastewater. Centennial, BaltimoreBai ZH, Qin W, Chen Q, Oenema O, Zhang FS (2014) Changes in pig production in china and their effects on nitrogen and phosphorus use and losses. Environ Sci Technol 48:12742–12749Beccaccia A, Ferrer P, Ibáñez MA, Estellés F, Rodríguez C, Moset V, De Blas C, Calvet S, García-rebollar P (2015) Relationships among slurry characteristics and gaseous emissions at different types of commercial spanish pig farms. Span J Agric Res 13(1):1–15Conn KL, Topp E, Lazarovits G (2007) Factors influencing the concentration of volatile fatty acids, ammonia, and other nutrients in stored liquid pig manure. J Environ Qual 36(2):440–447Diacono M, Montemurro F (2010) Long-term effects of organic amendments on soil fertility. A review. Agron Sustain Dev 30:401–422. doi: 10.1051/agro/2009040Díez JA, Hernaiz P, Muñoz MJ, Torre A, Vallejo A (2006) Impact of pig slurry on soil properties, water salinization, nitrate leaching and crop yield in a four-year experiment in Central Spain. Soil Use Manag 20(4):444–450Dourmad J-Y, Jondreville C (2007) Impact of nutrition on nitrogen, phosphorus, Cu and Zn in pig manure, and on emissions of ammonia and odours. Livest Sci 112(3):192–198EUROSTAT (2015) Pig farming sector—statistical portrait. Pig Farming in the European Union: considerable variations from one member state to another. Statistics in Focus 15/2014. Author: Pol Marquer, Teresa Rabade, Roberta Forti ISSN:2314-9647, Catalogue number: KS-SF-14-015-EN-NFangueiro D, Lopes C, Surgy S, Vasconcelos E (2012a) Effect of the pig slurry separation techniques on the characteristics and potential availability of N to plants in the resulting liquid and solid fractions. Biosyst Eng 113(2):187–194Fangueiro D, Ribeiro H, Vasconcelos E, Coutinho J, Cabral F (2012b) Influence of animal slurries composition and relative particle size fractions on the C and N mineralization following soil incorporation. Biomass Bioenergy 47:50–51Ferrer P, Cambra-López M, Cerisuelo A, Peñaranda D, Moset V (2014) The use of agricultural substrates to improve methane yield in anaerobic co-digestion with pig slurry: effect of substrate type and inclusion level. Waste Manag 34:196–203Galassi G, Colombini S, Malagutti L, Crovetto GM, Rapetti L (2010) Effects of high fibre and low protein diets on performance, digestibility, nitrogen excretion and ammonia emission in the heavy pig. Anim Feed Sci Technol 161:3–4Gopalan P, Jensen PD, Batstone DJ (2013) Anaerobic digestion of swine effluent: impact of production stages. Biomass Bioenergy 48:121–129Hernández D, Fernández JM, Plaza C, Polo A (2007) Water-soluble organic matter and biological activity of a degraded soil amended with pig slurry. Sci Total Environ 378:101–103Hernández D, Polo A, Plaza C (2013) Long-term effects of pig slurry on barley yield and N use efficiency under semiarid mediterranean conditions. Eur J Agron 44:47–86Hristov AN, Oh J, Lee C, Meinen R, Montes F, Ott T, Firkins J, Rotz A, Dell C, Adesogan A, Yang W, Tricarico J, Kebreab E, Waghorn G, Dijkstra J, Oosting S (2013) Mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions in livestock production—A review of technical options for non-CO2 emissions. In: Gerber PJ, Henderson B, Makkar HPS (eds) FAO Animal Production and Health Paper No. 177. FAO, RomeIguácel F, Yagüe MR, Betrán J, Orús F (2011) Ensayos de Fertilización Con Purín Porcino, En Cereales de Invierno de Secano, Dirección General de Desarrollo Rural, Centro de Transferencia Agroalimentaria, Gobierno de Aragón. Informe Técnico 226:15Jarret G, Cerisuelo A, Peu P, Martinez J, Dourmad JY (2012) Impact of pig diets with different fibre contents on the composition of excreta and their gaseous emissions and anaerobic digestion. Agric Ecosyst Environ 160:51–58Jouany JP (1982) Volatile fatty acid and alcohol determination in digestive contents, silage juices, bacterial cultures and anaerobic fermentor contents. Sci Alimen 2:131–144Krupa SV (2003) Effects of atmospheric ammonia (NH3) on terrestrial vegetation: a review. Environ Pollut 124(2):179–221Mantovi P, Fumagalli L, Beretta GP, Guermandi M (2006) Nitrate leaching through the unsaturated zone following pig slurry applications. J Hydrol 316:1–4Martínez-Suller L, Azzellino A, Provolo G (2008) Analysis of livestock slurries from farms across Northern Italy: relationship between indicators and nutrient content. Biosyst Eng 99(4):540–552Moral R, Moreno-Caselles J, Perez-Murcia MD, Perez-Espinosa A, Rufete B, Paredes C (2005a) Characterisation of the organic matter pool in manures. Bioresour Technol 96(2):153–158Moral R, Perez-Murcia MD, Perez-Espinosa A, Moreno-Caselles J, Paredes C (2005b) Estimation of nutrient values of pig slurries in Southeast Spain using easily determined properties. Waste Manag 25(7):719–725Moral R, Perez-Murcia MD, Perez-Espinosa A, Moreno-Caselles J, Paredes C, Rufete B (2008) Salinity, organic content, micronutrients and heavy metals in pig slurries from South-Eastern Spain. Waste Manag 28(2):367–371Morazán H, Alvarez-Rodriguez J, Seradj AR, Balcells J, Babot D (2015) Trade-offs among growth performance, nutrient digestion and carcass traits when feeding low protein and/or high neutral-detergent fiber diets to growing-finishing pigs. Anim Feed Sci Technol 207:168–180Moset V, Cambra-López M, Estellés F, Torres AG, Cerisuelo A (2012) Evolution of chemical composition and gas emissions from aged pig slurry during outdoor storage with and without prior solid separation. Biosyst Eng 111(1):2–10Ndegwa PM, Vaddella VK, Hristov N, Joo HS (2009) Measuring concentrations of ammonia in ambient air or exhaust air stream using acid traps.  J Environ Qual 38(2):647–653Nicholson FA, Chambers BJ, Williams JR, Unwin RJ (1999) Heavy metal contents of livestock feeds and animal manures in England and Wales. Bioresour Technol 70(1):23–31Olusegun OS (2014) Influence of NPK 15-15-15 Fertilizer and Pig Manure on Nutrient Dynamics and Production of Cowpea, Vigna unguiculata L. Walp. Am J Agric For 2(6):267Parera i Pous J, Olivé D, Mallol Nabot C, Torrijos NC (2010) Adaptación Del Uso de La Conductividad Eléctrica (CE) Para Determinar de Forma Rápida El Contenido En Nutrientes Del Purín Porcino En Catalunya. International Workshop on Anaerobic Digestion of Slaughterhouse Waste, pp 67–76Patience JF, Gould SA, Koehler D, Corrigan B, Elsbernd A, Holloway CL (2015) Super-dosed phytase improves rate and efficiency of gain in nursery pigs. Anim Ind Rep AS 661:98Penha HG, Menezes JF, Silva CA, Lopes G, Carvalho CA, Ramos SJ, Guilherme LRG (2015) Nutrient accumulation and availability and crop yields following long-term application of pig slurry in a Brazilian Cerrado soil. Nutr Cycl Agroecosyst 101(2):259–269Popovic O, Jensen LS (2012) Storage temperature affects distribution of carbon, VFA, ammonia, phosphorus, copper and zinc in raw pig slurry and its separated liquid fraction. Water Res 46(12):3849–3858Provolo G, Martínez-Suller L (2007) In situ determination of slurry nutrient content by electrical conductivity. Bioresour Technol 98(17):3235–3242Sánchez M, González JL (2005) The fertilizer value of pig slurry. I. Values depending on the type of operation. Bioresour Technol 96(10):1117–1123SAS Institute (2008) SAS/STAT User´s guide, v 9.3. SAS Institute Inc., CarySchoumans OF, Chardon WJ, Bechmann ME, Gascuel-Odoux C, Hofman G, Kronvang B, Rubæk HG, Ulén B, Dorioz JM (2014) Mitigation options to reduce phosphorus losses from the agricultural sector and improve surface water quality: a review. Sci Total Environ 468–469:1255–1266Schröder JJ, Cordell D, Smit AL, Rosemarin A (2010) Sustainable use of phosphorus. Plant Research International Wageningen UR. Report 357Scotford IM, Cumby TR, White RP, Carton OT, Lorenz F, Hatterman U, Provolo G (1998) Estimation of the nutrient value of agricultural slurries by measurement of physical and chemical properties. J Agric Eng Res 71(3):291–305Snoek DJW, Johannes DS, Ogink NWM, Koerkamp PWGG (2014) Sensitivity analysis of mechanistic models for estimating ammonia emission from dairy cow urine puddles. Biosyst Eng 121:12–24Suresh A, Choi HL, Oh DI, Moon OK (2009) Prediction of the nutrients value and biochemical characteristics of swine slurry by measurement of EC—electrical conductivity. Bioresour Technol 100:4683–4689Thygesen O, Triolo JM, Sommer SG (2012) Indicators of physical properties and plant nutrient content of animal slurry and separated slurry. Biol Eng Trans 5(3):123–135Triolo JM, Sommer SG, Møller HB, Weisbjerg MR, Jiang XY (2011) A new algorithm to characterize biodegradability of biomass during anaerobic digestion: influence of lignin concentration on methane production potential. Bioresour Technol 102:9395–9402Van Duivenbooden N, de Wit CT, Van Keulen H (1996) Nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium relations in five major cereals reviewed in respect to fertilizer recommendations using simulation modelling. Fertil Res Wagening 44:37–49Viguria M, Sanz-Cobeña A, López DM, Arriaga H, Merino P (2015) Ammonia and greenhouse gases emission from impermeable covered storage and land application of cattle slurry to bare soil. Agric Ecosyst Environ 199:261–271Villamar CA, Canuta T, Belmonte M, Vidal G (2012) Characterization of swine wastewater by toxicity identification evaluation methodology (TIE). Water Air Soil Pollut 223(1):363–369Villamar CA, Rodríguez DC, López D, Peñuela G, Vidal G (2013) Effect of the generation and physical–chemical characterization of swine and dairy cattle slurries on treatment technologies. Waste Manage Res 31(8):820–828Villar MC, Petrikova V, Díaz-Raviña M, Carballas T (2004) Recycling of organic wastes in burnt soils: combined application of poultry manure and plant cultivation. Waste Manage 24(4):365–370Webb J, Menzi H, Pain BF, Misselbrook TH, Dämmgen U, Hendriks H, Döhler H (2005) Managing ammonia emissions from livestock production in Europe. Environ Pollut 135:399–406Webb J, Broomfield M, Jones S, Donovan B (2014) Ammonia and odour emissions from UK pig farms and nitrogen leaching from outdoor pig production. Sci Total Environ 470:865–875Weiland P (2010) Biogas production: current state and perspectives. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 85:849–860Yagüe MR, Bosch-Serra AD, Boixadera J (2012) Measurement and estimation of the fertiliser value of pig slurry by physicochemical models: usefulness and constraints. Biosyst Eng 111(2):206–216Zhang W, Wei Q, Wu S, Qi D, Li W, Zuo Z, Dong R (2014) Batch anaerobic co-digestion of pig manure with dewatered sewage sludge under mesophilic conditions. Appl Energy 128:175–18