首页> 外文期刊>Journal of Cleaner Production >Carbon footprint of milk from Holstein and Jersey cows fed low or high forage diet with alfalfa silage or corn silage as the main forage source
【24h】

Carbon footprint of milk from Holstein and Jersey cows fed low or high forage diet with alfalfa silage or corn silage as the main forage source

机译:来自Holstein和泽西牛奶的碳覆盖物喂养低或高牧草饮食与苜蓿青贮饲料或玉米青贮作为主要的牧草来源

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Our objective was to determine the cradle-to-farmgate carbon footprint of fat-and-protein corrected milk (FPCM) for four diets fed to two breeds using measured enteric methane and greenhouse gas emissions during manure storage and after field application. The diets were formulated as 2 x 2 factorial with forage neutral detergent fiber at two levels (19 and 24% of diet dry matter referred to as low forage and high forage diets, respectively) from two sources (70:30 or 30:70 ratio of alfalfa silage and corn silage). Measured emissions were incorporated in a modeled Wisconsin dairy farm with a herd consisting of 118 lactating cows (primiparous), 22 dry cows, and 119 heifers. Emissions were allocated between milk and meat using biophysical allocation, and a sensitivity analysis was performed to determine the impact of alternative allocation methods. Overall, carbon footprint was 1.43 kg CO2-e/kg FPCM for biophysical allocation, and 1.50 and 1.60 kg CO2-e/kg FPCM for economic and no allocation (100% allocated to milk), respectively. Forage source did not influence results. However, low forage-fed cows had 10% greater carbon footprint than high forage-fed cows (1.49 vs. 1.35 kg CO2-e/kg FPCM). Assuming similar herd structure, milk carbon footprint for Holsteins was 4.4% greater than for Jerseys (1.47 vs. 1.41 kg CO2-e/kg FPCM). Accounting for differences in fertility and replacement rate increased the difference in milk carbon footprint between breeds to 10%. Under our study conditions, differences in milk carbon footprint due to enteric fermentation were minimal but the differences became substantial when combining the effects of cow (enteric CH4) and manure (CH4 and N2O) emissions. These differences were exacerbated even further when accounted for the emissions associated with on-farm feed production and purchased feed (CO2 and N2O). This study highlights the need for an integrated approach to assess the effects of dietary manipulations on milk carbon footprint. (c) 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.commentSuperscript/Subscript Available/comment
机译:我们的目的是确定使用测量的肠溶甲烷和温室气体排放和粪便储存期间喂养两种品种的脂肪和蛋白质校正牛奶(FPCM)的摇篮对蛋白质校正牛奶(FPCM)的碳覆碳足迹和粪便储存。将饮食制成为2×2因子,饲料中性洗涤剂纤维分别从两个来源(分别称为低牧草和高牧草饮食的饮食干物质)(70:30或30:70苜蓿青贮和玉米青贮饲料)。测量的排放纳入了一个模拟的威斯康星州乳制品农场,其中牧群由118名哺乳奶牛(初始),22个干奶牛和119个小母牛组成。使用生物物理分配在牛奶和肉之间分配排放,并进行敏感性分析以确定替代分配方法的影响。总体而言,碳足迹为1.43千克CO2-E / KG FPCM,用于生物物理分配,1.50和1.60公斤CO2-E / kg FPCM分别用于经济,无分配(100%分配给牛奶)。牧草来源没有影响结果。然而,低牧草奶牛比高牧草喂养牛(1.49与1.35千克CO2-E / kg FPCM)的碳占牛群更大的碳足迹量大了10%。假设类似的畜群结构,Holsteins的牛奶碳足迹大于球衣的4.4%(1.47与1.41kg CO2-E / kg FPCM)。核算生育率和替换率的差异增加了品种之间牛奶碳足迹的差异为10%。在我们的研究条件下,由于肠道发酵引起的牛奶碳足迹的差异很小,但在结合牛(肠溶CH4)和粪肥(CH4和N2O)排放的影响时,差异变得很大。当占与农场饲料生产和购买饲料(CO2和N2O)相关的排放时,甚至进一步加剧了这些差异。本研究强调了需要一种综合方法来评估膳食操纵对牛奶碳足迹的影响。 (c)2021 elestvier有限公司保留所有权利。&评论&上标/下标可用& /评论

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号