Mjölkproducenters uppfattning om nya avelsverktyg

Den ekonomiska situationen är oroande för många mjölkproducenter, inte enbart i Sverige utan stora delar av Europa. Ungefär 6,5 % av de svenska mjölkföretagen läggs ner på årlig basis och det har varit så under de senaste decennierna, men storleksrationaliseringen har pågått längre än så, mjölkgårdarnas antal har minskat sedan mitten på 1900-talet. 2006–2007 var det också en större svacka i lönsamheter i samband med höga spannmålspriser tillsammans med politiska förändringar, och den ekonomiska oron de senaste åren beror främst på vikande mjölkpriser hos de större uppköparna. Avelsarbete är en strategi för att effektivisera mjölkproduktionen, tillsammans med andra åtgärder. Föreliggande rapport presenterar resultatet av en studie baserat på djupintervjuer med mjölkproducenter i Sverige. Intervjustudiens fokus är att belysa mjölkproducenternas åsikter, upplevelser och erfarenheter kring avelsmetoder, avelsrådgivning och avelsstrategier, utifrån sitt eget avelsarbete. Intervjuerna har under sommaren 2015 genomförts i regionerna Halland, Skaraborg och Uppland/Södermanland. Fem avelsmetoder, könssorterad sperma, genomisk selektion av kvigor/kor, embryoöverföring, korsningsavel samt köttras-semin, är fokus i övergripande forskningsprojektet som intervjustudien är en del av. Intervjustudien behandlar de fem avelsmetoderna samt frågor som rör avelsrådgivning, avelsintresse samt avelns betydelse. Ifrån intervjuerna såg vi inga stora skillnader mellan de utvalda regionerna gällande studiens syfte och frågeställningar. Dock såg vi vissa skillnader, även om det empiriska materialet visar nyanser, mellan de gårdar [åtta stycken] som använder avelsrådgivning och de gårdar [sex stycken] som inte gör det. Skillnaderna bestod bl.a. i avelsstrategi, varifrån lantbrukarna köper avelsmaterial och synen på rådgivning. Embryoöverföring, korsningsavel och genomisk selektion av hondjur var de tre avelsverktyg som under intervjuerna innehöll mest varierande åsikter och erfarenheter, t.ex. sågs genomisk selektion som både hjälpmedel och orsak till minskat intresse för avel. Lantbrukare påverkas av det rådande ekonomiska läget i mjölkbranschen. I denna studie har inte syftet varit att undersöka på vilket sätt mjölkproducenter påverkas och till vilken grad, men vi har sett tendenser att situationen påverkar lantbrukarnas avelsarbete. Berättelserna från lantbrukarna vittnar om att mjölkpriset och livdjursmarknaden är två exempel på faktorer som påverkar bl.a. val av avelsmetoder och strategi

Cdc25B cooperates with Cdc25A to induce mitosis but has a unique role in activating cyclin B1–Cdk1 at the centrosome

Cdc25 phosphatases are essential for the activation of mitotic cyclin–Cdks, but the precise roles of the three mammalian isoforms (A, B, and C) are unclear. Using RNA interference to reduce the expression of each Cdc25 isoform in HeLa and HEK293 cells, we observed that Cdc25A and -B are both needed for mitotic entry, whereas Cdc25C alone cannot induce mitosis. We found that the G2 delay caused by small interfering RNA to Cdc25A or -B was accompanied by reduced activities of both cyclin B1–Cdk1 and cyclin A–Cdk2 complexes and a delayed accumulation of cyclin B1 protein. Further, three-dimensional time-lapse microscopy and quantification of Cdk1 phosphorylation versus cyclin B1 levels in individual cells revealed that Cdc25A and -B exert specific functions in the initiation of mitosis: Cdc25A may play a role in chromatin condensation, whereas Cdc25B specifically activates cyclin B1–Cdk1 on centrosomes

Kunskapsbaserat växtskydd i praktiken - vilka faktorer spelar roll för lantbrukares beslutsfattande om växtskyddsåtgärder?

Vi har gjort en systematisk litteraturöversikt över hur ny kunskap om växtskydd når gårdsnivå. Frågor som vi har ställt till vårt material är: vilka hinder finns för implementering av ny forskning omkring växtskydd? Genom vilka kanaler når ny kunskap gården?Detta är en delstudie i ett projekt med både en naturvetenskaplig och en samhällsvetenskaplig del

Dairy cattle farmers' preferences for different breeding tools

Breeding technologies play a significant role in improving dairy cattle production. Scientifically proven tools for improved management and genetic gain in dairy herds, such as sexed semen, beef semen, genomic testing, dairy crossbreeding, and multiple ovulation embryo transfer (MOET), are readily available to dairy farmers. However, despite good accessibility, decreasing costs, and continuous development of these tools, their use in Sweden is limited. This study investigated Swedish dairy farmers' preferences for breeding tools through a survey including a discrete choice experiment. The survey was distributed online to 1 521 Swedish farmers and by an open link published through a farming magazine. In total, the study included 204 completed responses. The discrete choice experiment consisted of 10 questions with two alternative combinations, which gave 48 combinations in total. Utility values and part-worth values were computed using a conditional logit model based on the responses in the discrete choice experiment for nine groups of respondents: one group with all respondents, two groups based on respondents using dairy crossbreeding or not within the past 12 months, two based on herd size, two based on respondent age, and two based on whether respondents had used breeding advisory services or not. The strongest preferences in all groups were for using sexed semen and beef semen. Genomic testing was also significantly preferred by all groups of respondents. Except in large herds, MOET on own animals was significantly and relatively strongly disfavoured by all groups. Buying embryos had no significant utility value to any group. Dairy crossbreeding had low and insignificant utility values in the group of all respondents, but it was strongly favoured by the group that had used dairy crossbreeding within the past 12 months, and it was disfavoured by the group that had not. Part-worth values of combined breeding tools showed that combinations of sexed and beef semen, alone or with genomic testing without dairy crossbreeding, were the most preferred tools. Compared with the most common combinations of breeding tools used in the past 12 months, the part-worth values indicated that Swedish dairy farmers may prefer to use breeding tools more than they do today. Statements on the different breeding tools indicated that the respondents agreed with the benefits attributed to the breeding tools, but these benefits may not be worth the cost of genomic testing and the time consumption of MOET. These valuable insights can be used for further development of breeding tools

Toward a critical and interdisciplinary understanding of illegal hunting

Illegal hunting has constituted an expression of contested legitimacy of wildlife regulation across the world for centuries. In the following report, we critically engage with the state of the art on the illegal hunting phenomenon. We do so to reveal emerging scholarly perspectives on the crime. Specifically, we aim to capture the complexity of illegal hunting as a socio-political phenomenon rather than an economically motivated crime. To do so, we adopt a critical perspective that pays particular attention to the societal processes that contribute to the criminalization of historically accepted hunting practices. To capture perspectives on illegal hunting, fifteen researchers from various countries participated in an illegal hunting workshop in Copenhagen 16-17th June 2014. A primary contribution of the research workshop was to bring together criminologists, sociologists, anthropologists and geographers, each equipped with their own research perspective, to engage in a critical and interdisciplinary discussion on how to apprehend and constructively address the challenges of illegal hunting in contemporary society. A majority of those that attended were primarily based in the Nordic and the UK context, which motivated a strong focus on the illegal hunting that currently takes places in these countries. Similar trends of illegal hunting were identified across Europe, many of which traced from EU legislation on the reintroduction of large carnivores or other controversial wildlife conservation projects. In the workshop, proceedings took the form of individual presentations, plenary discussions and group work. Common themes that emerged from these presentations were: illegal hunting as communicating socio-political resistance; the targeting of specific species based on its symbolism or environmental history; illegal hunting as symptom of class struggles; the role of rewilding and domestication of nature on wildlife regulation; corruption, complicity and conflicts of loyalty in enforcement, and discrepancies and discontinuities in legality. These themes were framed in an understanding of illegal hunting as a complex, multifaceted expression that transgresses livelihood based motivation. Critical discussions conceptualised illegal hunting as a crime of dissent. This meant situating crimes as everyday forms of resistance against the regulatory regime. In so doing, the relationship between hunters and public authorities was highlighted as a potential source of disenfranchisement. In this interactionist perspective, illegal hunting tells us not just about the rationales of the offenders. It also elucidates the broader context in which non-compliance with regulation serves as symptoms of democratic and legitimacy deficits on the state level. Erratic transitions in legislation and a subsequent discord between legal, cultural and moral norms in society were identified as factors that contribute to the conflict. Crucially, the research workshop and the report contribute with three perspectives. First, it emphasizes the need to uncover the grey areas of complicity in wildlife crime. Previously corruption, bribery and selective law enforcement have been associated with wildlife trafficking in the global south, but this understanding is too blunt for the complicity that exists in many other contexts. Here conflicts of loyalty exist across several strata of society and differ in degrees. In highlighting this fact, we show a more opaque and contingent climate of complicity around illegal hunting in Northern Europe and elsewhere. Second, as crimes of dissent seeking to publicise injustices, illegal hunting and its associated resistance tactics are counterproductive by constituting a ‘dialogue of the dead’. With this is mean that such communication is prone to distortion, misunderstanding and exaggeration and does no favors to hunters. There is consequently a need to move to a clarity of messages, as in institutionalised diogue processes. Third, hunting regulation cannot be seen in isolation to the broader differences in society in terms of values, economic factors and development. Research questions for future scholarship concluded the workshop and are summarized in the report. In terms of illuminating the junctures at which additional research is needed, these questions may provide important guidance. Above all, the report is intended as help for policy-makers, wildlife managers and law enforcement in better understanding and responding to the complexities of illegal hunting. We hope this will lead to more long-term preventative measures that address the core of the issue rather than proximate causes. The workshop was organized by the Environmental Communication Division of the Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences. The event constituted a part of the FORMAS funded research project Confronting challenges to political legitimacy of the natural resource management regulatory regime in Sweden - the case of illegal hunting in Sweden whose members include Erica von Essen, Dr. Hans Peter Hansen and Dr. Helena Nordström Källström from the Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Professor Tarla R. Peterson from Texas A&M University and Dr. Nils Peterson from North Carolina State University

The radicalisation of rural resistance: How hunting counterpublics in the Nordic countries contribute to illegal hunting

Populist hunting movements have risen in recent years to safeguard rural interests against nature conservation. In extreme cases this movement has been accompanied by the illegal hunting of protected species. Using Sweden and Finland as a case study, the article elucidates how the perceived exclusion of hunters in the public debate on conservation mobilised this subculture toward resistance against regulatory agencies. Establishment of an alternative discursive platform comprising several ruralities - counterpublic in Negt and Kluge's original term - allowed hunters to publicise oppositional needs, interests and rationalities in the debate, and was a key juncture in their radicalisation trajectory. Finally the paper argues that failure to grant recognition to the counterpublic radicalised some individuals beyond counterpublic by engaging in illegal hunting. This practice is marked by the termination of political debate with society and represents a danger to political legitimacy

Om illegal jakt i Fennoskandia

Ett ökat missnöje bland delar av landsbygdsbefolkningen och jägarsamhället gentemot bevarandepolitiken för stora rovdjur har påverkat den sociopolitiskt motiverade illegala jakten på dessa arter. Denna typ av jaktbrott har legat som grund för undersökningen i ett tvärvetenskapligt internationellt samarbetsprojekt lett av forskare vid Sveriges lantbruksuniversitet, vid Ultuna. Efter tre år av djupintervjuer med jägare, en enkätundersökning, jämförelser med andra delar av världen och nära samarbete med forskare i Fennoskandia avslutades projektet 2016. Föreliggande rapport fullbordar resultatförmedlingen och den avslutande diskussionen omkring forskningsresultaten från projektet och ger samtidigt uppslag för framtida forskning. För första gången presenterades hela projektet och dess medlemmar för en publik bestående av praktiker och intressegrupper runt jakt. Rapporten sammanfattar på detta sätt två dagars temadiskussioner i en workshop med 45 representanter från olika samhällssektorer, bland annat jägare- jordbruks- och naturskyddsorganisationer, länsstyrelser, Naturvårdsverket, polis och åklagare som de ser ut i länderna som utgör Fennoskandia: Sverige, Norge, Danmark och Finland. Diskussionerna handlade om social kontroll och illegal jakt, att flytta viltförvaltningen till domstolarna, EUs inflytande och olika plattformar för att förebygga illegal jakt, speciellt på stora rovdjur, som vargar. Rapporten riktar sig till både forskare och praktiker som möter problem med social accepterade, men hemliga och gömda, former av illegal jakt som i sin tur beror av statsapparatens legitimitetskris, misstro mot politik och politiker och som också är en manifestation för landsbygdens motstånd i ett modernt samhälle.The following report marks the dissemination and discussion of the research results and insights for future research produced by this project. Hence, it represents the first time the full research project and its members stand before the public and interest groups. The report synthesizes two days of workshop thematic discussions between 45 participants from societal sectors including hunting and nature conservation NGOs, county administrative boards, Environmental Protection Agencies, law enforcement, environmental attorneys and farming associations as they feature across the Fennoscandian countries: Sweden, Norway, Denmark and Finland. Its discussions center on social control in wildlife crime, the juridification of hunting issues, the influence of the EU and platforms for going forward to mitigate poaching, in particular of large carnivores like the wolf. The report is an essential read for both researchers and practitioners faced with the problem of socially accepted, but secretive and hidden, forms of illegal hunting in response to governmental legitimacy crises, distrust of policy and policy-makers, and as a manifestation of rural resistance in modernity