首页> 外文期刊>Agricultural Systems >Intensification of New Zealand beef farming systems
【24h】

Intensification of New Zealand beef farming systems

机译:加强新​​西兰牛肉种植体系

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
获取外文期刊封面目录资料

摘要

This study used whole-farm management, nutrient budgeting/greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and feed formulation computer tools to determine the production, environmental and financial implications of intensifying the beef production of typical New Zealand (NZ) sheep and beef farming systems. Two methods of intensification, feeding maize silage (MS) or applying nitrogen (N) fertiliser, were implemented on two farm types differing in the proportions of cultivatable land to hill land (25% vs. 75% hill). In addition, the consequences of intensification by incorporating a beef feedlot (FL) into each of the farm types were also examined. Feeding MS or applying N fertiliser substantially increased the amount of beef produced per ha. Intensifying production was also associated with increased total N leaching and GHG emissions although there were differences between the methods of intensification. Feeding MS resulted in lower environmental impacts than applying N even after taking into account the land to grow the maize for silage. Based on 2007/08 prices, typical NZ sheep and beef farms were making a financial loss and neither method of intensification increased profitability with the exception of small annual applications of N, especially to the 75% hill farm. These small annual additions of N fertiliser (<50 kg N/ha/yr applied in autumn and late winter) resulted in only small increases in annual N leaching (from 11 to 14 kg N/ha) and GHG emissions (from 3280 to 4000 kg CO sub(2) equivalents/ha). Limited N applications were particularly beneficial to 75% hill farms because small increases in winter carrying capacity resulted in relatively large increases in the utilisation of pasture growth during spring and summer than the 25% hill farms. Intensification by incorporating a beef feedlot reduced environmental emissions per kg of beef produced but considerably decreased profitability due to higher capital, depreciation and labour costs. The lower land-use capability farm type (75% hill) was able to intensify beef production to a proportionally greater extent than the higher land-use capability farm (25% hill) because of greater potential to increase pasture utilisation associated with a lower initial farming intensity and inherent constraints in the pattern of pasture supply.
机译:这项研究使用了全农场管理,营养预算/温室气体(GHG)排放和饲料配方计算机工具来确定加强典型的新西兰(NZ)绵羊和牛肉种植系统的牛肉生产对生产,环境和财务的影响。两种集约化方法是饲喂玉米青贮饲料(MS)或施用氮肥(N),这两种农场在可耕地与丘陵地的比例不同的两种农场(25%对75%的丘陵)上实施。此外,还研究了通过将牛肉饲养场(FL)纳入每种农场而集约化的后果。饲喂MS或施用氮肥可大大增加每公顷牛肉的产量。集约化方法之间也存在差异,但集约化生产还与总氮淋失和温室气体排放量增加有关。即使考虑到要种植青贮玉米的土地,饲喂MS对环境的影响也比施用氮对环境的影响要小。根据2007/08年的价格,典型的新西兰绵羊和牛肉养殖场正蒙受经济损失,除了每年少量施用氮肥外,特别是对75%的山地养殖场,集约化生产的任何一种方法都不会增加利润。这些少量的氮肥年添加量(秋季和冬季末施用的<50千克氮/公顷/年)导致每年的氮淋失(从11千克氮/公顷/公顷)和温室气体排放量(从3280千克增加至4000千克/年)千克CO sub(2)当量/公顷)。有限的氮肥施用量对75%的山地农场特别有利,因为与25%的山地农场相比​​,冬季承载能力的小幅提高导致春季和夏季牧场生长的利用相对增加。通过并入牛肉饲养场进行集约化处理可以减少每公斤牛肉生产所产生的环境排放量,但是由于更高的资本,折旧和人工成本而大大降低了盈利能力。与较高土地利用能力的农场(25%的山坡)相比,土地利用能力较低的农场(75%的山坡)能够在一定程度上增强牛肉生产,因为更高的潜力可以提高牧场利用率,而初始成本较低。耕作强度和牧场供应模式的内在限制。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 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