Oct 22, 2015 - 1 billion hungry. ⦠Food production to increase 70% by 2050. ⦠Adaptation to Climate Change critical. 2. Avoiding Dangerous Climate Change.
Relationship between buffalo production, the environment and new tools of environmental management related to sustainable production systems R. Barahona-Rosales, M. F. Cerón-Muñoz, J. F. Naranjo, D. M. Bolívar
Introduction – the environmental impact of animal production All anthropogenic activities have an impact – which can be positive or negative – on the environment
Animal production is not an exception: 1. Greenhouse gas emissions (GHG - climate change) 2. Nutrient excretion (nitrogen, phosphorous) 3. Land usage 4. Energy expenditure – fossil fuel
Introduction – the environmental impact of animal production Never before there has been this amount of interest on the environment: 1. Despite lack of agreement, climate change is receiving lots of attention 2. It should be expected that agricultural activities, animal production included, take active part both in mitigating as well as adapting to climate change
Climate Smart Agriculture Agriculture and food systems must improve and ensure food security, and to do so they need to adapt to climate change and natural resource pressures, and contribute to mitigating climate change. These challenges, being interconnected, have to be addressed simultaneously. Holmgren, 2009
Climate Smart agriculture Agriculture that sustainably: ◦ increases productivity ◦ increases resilience (adaptation) ◦ reduces/removes GHGs
AND
enhances achievement of national food security and development goals Holmgren, 2009
Two Goals of Our Time 1. Achieving Food Security ◦ 1 billion hungry ◦ Food production to increase 70% by 2050 ◦ Adaptation to Climate Change critical 2. Avoiding Dangerous Climate Change ◦ ”2 degree goal” requires major emission cuts ◦ Agriculture and Land use = 30% of emissions.. ◦ ..and needs to be part of the solution
Holmgren, 2009
Mechanisms available to deal with climate changeNAMAs http://www.fao.org/inaction/micca/resources/tools /en/
Available mechanisms to deal with CC- NAMAs NAMAs A set of actions independently proposed by developing countries that lead to the reduction of GHG emissions - in a measurable, reportable and verifiable way - below the level of what would result from continuing to do things in a Business As Usual (BAU) scenario
Available mechanisms to deal with CC- NAMAs NAMAs arise from the need to close the gap between the current commitments to the Protocol and projected GHG emissions In addition, the should also help balancing the responsibilities given the high emission levels that non-Annex B countries have today González et al., 2015
Available mechanisms to deal with CC- NAMAs There are no restrictions on what project can be cataloged as NAMA Very specific projects can be classified as NAMAs as well as sectoral policies or national programs
The reduction of emissions obtained through NAMAs will not be transferred to the developed countries as a way to meet their own reduction targets González et al., 2015
http://www.fao.org/inaction/micca/resources/tools /en/
NAMA facility - 14 NAMA Support Projects are now receiving support Country Nama Support Burkina Faso Burkina Faso Biomass Energy NAMA Support Project
Project Status Appraisal, 2nd call
Chile 1st call
Chilean Self-supply Renewable Energy (SSRE) NAMA funding for implementation approved,
China
China – Integrated Waste Management NAMA
Appraisal, 3rd call
Colombia I Colombia Transit-oriented Development (TOD) NAMA approved, 1st call
funding for implementation
Colombia II Colombia – NAMA for the domestic refrigeration sector
Appraisal, 3rd call
Costa Rica
Implementation, 1st call
Costa Rica Low Carbon Coffee NAMA
Guatemala Guatemala - Efficient Use of Fuel and Alternative Fuels in Indigenous and Rural Communities Appraisal, 3rd call
http://www.nama-facility.org/
A NAMA for the buffalo production sector? Clearly there is a possibility Leadership from the sector is needed To have a clear idea of what to do is essential
Briefs words on climate change
Greenhouse gas emissions accelerate despite the reduction efforts. Most of the growth in CO2 emissions is the burning of fossil fuels
Working Group III contribution to the IPCC Fifth Assessment Report
IPCC 2014
Regional patterns of GHG emissions are changing along with changes in the global economy
Working Group III contribution to the IPCC Fifth Assessment Report
IPCC 2014
How are we today in terms of climate change? 2015 MIGHT HAVE SEEN HOTTEST SUMMER IN 4,000 YEARS – JOE SUTTON, CNN
2015 SETS A NEW RECORD FOR CATEGORY 4 AND 5 HURRICANES AND TYPHOONS - BY CHRIS DOLCEPUBLISHED OCT 22 2015 07:20 PM EDT - - WEATHER.COM
Planet Earth has definitely experienced its hottest summer since detailed records have been kept, and according to scientists, it might have been the hottest in more than 4,000 years.
A record 22 hurricanes or typhoons have reached Category 4 or 5 strength in the Northern Hemisphere this year.
The meteorological summer of June-July-August in the Northern Hemisphere saw its highest globally averaged temperature since records began in 1880, ….
The record was broken on Oct. 17 when Koppu became the nineteenth storm to reach this intensity prior to slamming into the Philippines as a super typhoon. Since then, Super Typhoon Champi, Hurricane Olaf and Hurricane Patricia added to the total.
Hurricane Joaquin on Oct. 3 when it became a Category 4 for the second time. Joaquin is the only Atlantic storm to reach Category 4 status this season. (NASA)
17
Food security and climate change
http://www.fao.org/inaction/micca/resources/tools /en/
Our role in the face of climate change? Faced with the current situation of emissions, "nonaction" is not a defensible position - we must all participate - the task can not be in the hands of some, while others observe. Actions to mitigate and adapt to climate change should be initiated as soon as possible - any delay reduces our chances of avoiding catastrophic changes
GHG emissions in animal production systems
Main sources of GHG emission and removal in managed ecosystems (IPCC, 2007)
GHG emissions in animal production systems The livestock sector is responsible for 14.5% of total global greenhouse gas – GHG – emissions (Gerber et al., 2013) Methane (CH4)
Nitrous oxide (N2O) Carbon dioxide (CO2) www.fao.org/gleam/es/
GHG emissions in Colombian animal production systems Colombia: GHG emissions (IDEAM 2010) Agriculture 38%, 2nd sector. a) Enteric fermentation 48,5% b) Soil usage 47,5%
Global production, absolute GHG emissions and emission intensities for milk and beef
Opio et al., 2013
Animal agricultural productivity Agricultural productivity:
Worldwide – Increase, associated with improved animal feeding and breeding technologies Crops – Irrigation, fertilization, genetic improvement = Enormous increase Poultry, swine, specialized dairy = Enormous increase Beef = There is room for improvement
Global production, emissions and emission intensity for buffalo milk and meat
Opio et al., 2013
Relative contribution of different processes to GHG emission profile of buffalo milk
Opio et al., 2013
Relative contribution of different processes to GHG emission profile of buffalo meat
Opio et al., 2013
Key areas of intervention? Enteric methane emissions Manure nitrous oxide emissions
Promissing strategies to reduce enteric emissions? Among the many possibilities, these should receive a great deal of attention: 1. Forage nutritional quality, focused on reducing fiber content in the diet while ensuring adequate protein supply 2. Ensuring adequate forage availability throughout the whole year
The key should be on the sustainable intensification of animal production systems
Intensive Silvopastoral Systems - ISS Fodder shrubs in high densities (>5000/ha) associated to improved grasses, with intensive rotational grazing and electric fences Murgueitio et al., 2015
Land use efficiency in ISS 3000
4,4
2500
3,5
3,5
Grass
2,9
2000
Leucaena
1500 1000 500 0 April
June
August Month
November
Biomass availability – Leucaena/guinea Overall carrying capacity = 3,5 h/year Gaviria et al., 2012
Forage availability, kg DM every 45 d
Forage availability, kg DM every 45 d
Cotové Research Station, Antioquia, Colombia 3000
El Chaco, Tolima, Colombia
2500 3,1 2000
3,3
2,6
Leucaena
Grass
1500 1,7 1000 500
0 August
September January Month
February
Biomass availability – Leucaena/ stargrass Overall carrying capacity = 2,6 h/year Sierra et al., 2016 submitted
Nutrient composition of ISS diets Leucaena 23-
Leucaena 30-
Leucaena 26-
Guinea 77a
Stargrass 70b
Stargrass 76c
Proteín (%)
14,2
14,3
13,5
NDF (%)
60,0
61,8
66,3
ADF (%)
41,2
38,7
42,6
Ether extract (%)
2,24
2,07
1,16
Gross energy, Cal/g
4198
4296
4380
Calcium (%)
0,60
0,29
0,23
Phosforus (%)
0,23
0,19
0,18
Nutrient
Source: Gaviria et al., 2015; Molina et al., 2013; Angarita et al., 2015
DMI intake and selectivity in ISS Item
Cebu steers 250 kg, (Cuartas et al., 2015)
Cebu steers 360 kg, (Gaviria, 2014)
Improved
ISS
Confinement
ISS
Dry matter intake, % live weight
2.35b
2.63a
2.11
2.50
Grass intake, % live weight
2.15
1.84
1.61
1.89
Legume intake, % live weight
0.20
0.79
0.50
0.61
Dry matter digestibility, %
53.51
53.56
47.48
54.03
Crude protein digestibility, %
ND
ND
60.48
69.23
NDF digestibility, %
ND
ND
53.89
57.9
ADF digestibility, %
ND
ND
54.11
57.43
Leucaena and methane – in vitro 60
Ítem, % or g/kg
50
y = 0.1458x + 42.183 R² = 0.9144
Desaparición MS, %
40
30
Metano, g/kg de MS desaparecida 20
y = -0.1407x + 28.295 R² = 0.9724
10
0 0
20 40 60 80 Porcentaje de inclusión de L. leucocephala
100
Degradation of dry matter observed at 48 hours and methane production in ISS forages and their mixtures
Molina Botero IC, et al.. 2013. Revista CES Medicina Veterinaria y Zootecnia, Vol 8 (2): 15-31.
Leucaena and methane –Lucerna heifers
I.C. Molina et al. / Livestock Science 185 (2016) 24–29 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.livsci.2016.01.009
Leucaena and methane –Lucerna heifers Emisiones de metano, gramos por kg de MS desaparecida
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0 0
4
8 Estrella - Leucaena
12
16
20
24
Estrella 100%
I.C. Molina et al. / Livestock Science 185 (2016) 24–29 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.livsci.2016.01.009
Leucaena and methane –Lucerna heifers
Diet Tradition al ISS P
Methane, Methane, g kg- Methane, g kg-1 Ym, (%) 1 of DMI L d-1 degraded DM 243.1
26.9 a
55.7 a
9.09 a
228.5
20.6 b
37.6 b
6.74 b
0.601
0.048
0.014
0.035
Molina et al., 2015 Livestock Research for Rural Development. Volume 27, Article #96.
Promising strategies to reduce manure N2O emissions? At a global scale, human activity has increased the flux of N two-fold, particularly driven by large scale fertiliser manufacturing Of the total N applied to agricultural land worldwide only 5–15% is eventually transformed into human food (Erisman et al., 2012)
Gourley et al., 2014
Diminishing nitrogen use efficiency? Changes in rice production and use of nitrogen fertilizer in China between 1980 and 2010. Base year: 1980 Gourley et al., 2014
Nitrogen cycling in a livestock system Nitrogen cycling and losses in a fourcompartment livestock system: Livestock, excreta, soil and crop. Dotted Lines: Losses Oenema, 2006
Strategies to improve the efficiency of use of N • Improve N management at the farm level - replacement rate, excreta management and housing systems, mixed production systems • Improving efficiency of N use in animals - feeding, genetics • Use of excreta as fertilizers • Anaerobic digestion of excreta – Increase use of methane as fuel • Production clusters - integration, close cycles Oenema, 2006
Feeding and genetic strategies to improve the efficiency of use of N in buffaloes Conversion, kg feed/kg of gain Initial BW, kg Final BW, kg Average daily gain, kg Intake, kg/ animal/ day Maralfalfa grass Concentrate Total DMI NDF ADF CP
High 7.75 c 263.9 346.8 0.719 a
Intermediate 10.44 b 258.9 328.7 0.594 b
Low 14.46 a 271.4 330.4 0.472 c
3.79 c 1.74 a 5.52 c 2.90 c 2.10 c 0.483 c
4.42 b 1.76 a 6.18 b 3.21 b 2.40 b 0.595 b
4.93 a 1.76 a 6.69 a 3.56 a 2.63 a 0.647 a
Feeding and genetic strategies to improve the efficiency of use of N in buffaloes High
Intermediate
Low
Dry matter
2.44 a
2.42 a
2.71 a
NDF
1.53 b
1.59 b
1.84 a
ADF
1.19 a
1.17 a
1.34 a
Crude protein
0.211 b
0.221 ab
0.242 a
Fecal excretion, kg/animal/day
Feeding and genetic strategies to improve the efficiency of use of N in buffaloes Estimated emissions from feces 0.9
c
0.8 0.7 b
0.6 c
0.5 0.4
a
ab
b
0.3 0.2 0.1 0 High Fecal CO2 equiv., kg
Intermediate
Low
Fecal CO2 equiv., kg/ kg weight gain
Final thoughts Although significant, GHG emission from buffalo production systems are susceptible to reduction There are funding opportunities to allow investment towards “low carbon” buffalo production systems, benefiting both the producers and the environment
References Angarita, E., Molina, I., Villegas, G., Mayorga, O., Chará, J., Barahona, R. 2015. Quantitative analysis of rumen microbial populations by qPCR in heifers fed on Leucaena leucocephala in the Colombian Tropical Dry Forest. Acta Scientiarum. Animal Sciences, 37(2), 135-142.
Cuartas Cardona, C. A., Naranjo Ramírez, J. F., Tarazona Morales, A. M., Correa Londoño, G.A., Barahona Rosales, R. 2015. Dry matter and nutrient intake and diet composition in Leucaena leucocephala based intensive silvopastoral systems. Tropical and Subtropical Agroecosystems, 18: 303 – 311 Gaviria, X., Sossa, C. P., Chará, J., Barahona, R., Lopera, J. J., Córdoba, C. P. & Montoya, C. 2012. Producción de Carne Bovina en Sistemas Silvopastoriles Intensivos en el Trópico Bajo Colombiano. En: VII Congreso de Agroforestería. Belém, Brasil. pp 230 – 238 Gaviria-Uribe, X., Naranjo-Ramírez, J. F., Bolívar-Vergara, D. M., Barahona-Rosales, R. 2015. Consumo y digestibilidad en novillos cebuínos en un sistema silvopastoril intensivo. Arch. Zootec. 64, 21-27.
González R, Sánchez M S, Chirinda N, Arango J, Bolívar D M, Escobar D, Tapasco J y Barahona R 2015. Limitaciones para la implementación de acciones de mitigación de emisiones de gases de efecto de invernadero (GEI) en sistemas ganaderos en Latinoamérica. Livestock Research for Rural Development. Volume 27, Article #249 Molina, I. C., Angarita, E. A., Mayorga, O. L., Chará, J., Barahona-Rosales, R. 2016. Effect of Leucaena leucocephala on methane production of Lucerna heifers fed a diet based on Cynodon plectostachyus. Livestock Science, 185, 24-29. Molina, I.C., Donney`s, G., Montoya, S., Rivera, J.E., Villegas, G., Chará, J., Barahona, R. 2015. The inclusion of Leucaena leucocephala reduces the methane production in Lucerne heifers receiving a Cynodon plectostachyus and Megathyrsus maximus diet. Livest. Res. Rural. Dev. 27, 96, http://www.lrrd.org
Molina-Botero, I. C., Cantet, J. M., Montoya, S., Londoño, G. A. C., Rosales, R. B. 2013. Producción de metano in vitro de dos gramíneas tropicales solas y mezcladas con Leucaena leucocephala o Gliricidia sepium. Revista CES Medicina Veterinaria y Zootecnia, 8(2), 15-31. Murgueitio, E., Xóchitl Flores, M., Calle, Z., Chará, J., Barahona, R., Molina, C. H., & Uribe, F. 2015. Productividad en sistemas silvopastoriles intensivos en América Latina. Sistemas agroforestales. Funciones productivas, socioeconómicas y ambientales. CATIE, Turrialba, Costa Rica. Editorial CIPAV, Cali, Colombia, ISBN, 978-958. Sierra-Montoya E, J D Chará and R Barahona-Rosales. 2016. The nutritional balance of early lactation dairy cows grazing in intensive silvopastoral systems. Submitted Ciencia Animal Brasileira
References FAO, IFAD and WFP. 2014. The State of Food Insecurity in the World 2014. Strengthening the enabling environment for food security and nutrition. Rome, FAO. Gerber, P.J., Steinfeld, H., Henderson, B., Mottet, A., Opio, C., Dijkman, J., Falcucci, A. & Tempio, G. 2013. Tackling climate change through livestock – A global assessment of emissions and mitigation opportunities. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), Rome. 115 pp. Gourley C. J. P., Dougherty W., Aarons S., Kelly K. 2014. Improving nitrogen use efficiency: from planet to dairy paddock http://www.massey.ac.nz/~flrc/workshops/14/Manuscripts/Paper_Gourley_2014.pdf
Holmgren, P. 2009. Climate Smart Agriculture. http://www.fao.org/climatechange/24167-0bebf860217f97a15e2bccafe0e687faa.ppt Instituto de Hidrología Meteorología y Estudios Ambientales (IDEAM) 2010. Segunda Comunicación Nacional ante la Convención Marco de las Naciones Unidas sobre Cambio Climático. Bogotá DC, Colombia. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change - IPCC 2007. Climate Change 2007: Synthesis Report. En: C. W. Team, R. K. Pachauri, & A. Reisinger, Edits.) http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/publications_ipcc_fourth_ assessment_ report_synthesis_ report.htm Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change - IPCC Working Group II 2014. Climate Change 2014: Mitigation of Climate Change. IPCC. Oenema, O. 2006. Nitrogen budgets and losses in livestock systems. In International Congress Series (Vol. 1293, pp. 262-271). Elsevier. Opio, C., Gerber, P., Mottet, A., Falcucci, A., Tempio, G., MacLeod, M., Vellinga, T., Henderson, B. & Steinfeld, H. 2013. Greenhouse gas emissions from ruminant supply chains – A global life cycle assessment. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), Rome.
Websites of interest Modelo GLEAM - www.fao.org/gleam/es/ NAMA facility - http://www.nama-facility.org/ The 11th World Buffalo Congress - http://www.wbc2016.net/site/index.php/es/
