Suppr超能文献

基于现场测量的八家奶牛养殖场的水足迹和经济用水生产力评估。

Water footprint and economic water productivity assessment of eight dairy cattle farms based on field measurement.

机构信息

Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique de Tunisie (INRAT), Laboratoire des Productions Animale et Fourragère, Université de Carthage, rue Hédi Karray, 2049 Ariana, Tunisia.

出版信息

Animal. 2020 Jan;14(1):180-189. doi: 10.1017/S1751731119001526. Epub 2019 Jul 9.

Abstract

Water scarcity prevailing in the drylands is threatening the sustainability of livestock production systems. The water footprint (WF) indicator was proposed as a metric of water use. This study aimed to determine the WF and the economic water productivity (EWP) of 1 kg of fat and protein-corrected milk (FPCM) in eight dairy farms (n = 8; animals = 117 ± 62; area = 198 ± 127; 95% confidence level) in northern Tunisia. Then, to assess the effects of three simulation scenarios targeting the reduction of the WF of milk production (scenario A: using triticale silage to replace, on DM basis, the silage of maize, sorghum or ray-grass; scenario B: reducing by 56% the wastage of water devoted to milking, cooling, cleaning and servicing; scenario C: using concentrate feeds imported from Brazil and Argentina instead of that imported from France). A year-round monitoring of on-farm practices was performed using water-meters and recording equipment installed in key locations in the target dairy farms: (i) water used for feed production, (ii) cow watering, (iii) servicing water, (v) crop and forage production and (iv) economic and production performance were controlled by water source (green and blue). Over the eight farms evaluated, milk production consumed on average 1.36 ± 0.41 m3/kg FPCM, of which 0.93 ± 0.40 m3/kg FPCM was green water and 0.42 ± 0.30 m3/kg FPCM was blue water. However, virtual water of 1 kg FPCM averaged 43% ± 14.3%. Water used for feed production for lactating cows represents approximately 87% ± 6% of the total WF of milk production. However, drinking and servicing water contributed by 3.75% ± 2% and 9% ± 5% to the total WF of milk, respectively. The EWP assessment revealed that the selected dairy farms had a relatively small gross margin per m3 of water averaging US$ 0.05 ± 0.04. The variation in WF of milk was mainly associated with diets' ingredients, which affected milk productivity and water consumption. Scenario analysis indicated that using feed with less water requirements or importing feeds from countries where its water consumption is low could reduce consumptive water use for milk production by up to 16%. The efficient use of servicing water could reduce blue WF of milk by up to 4%. The implementation of these measures would lead to potential total water savings in the Tunisian dairy sector of 646 million m3 per year (30%).

摘要

旱地普遍存在水资源短缺问题,这对畜牧业生产系统的可持续性构成了威胁。水足迹(WF)指标被提出作为衡量水资源利用的一种方法。本研究旨在确定突尼斯北部 8 个奶牛场(n=8;动物=117±62;面积=198±127;95%置信水平)每生产 1 公斤脂肪和蛋白质校正乳(FPCM)的 WF 和经济水生产力(EWP)。然后,评估三个模拟方案对牛奶生产 WF 的影响(方案 A:用黑麦青贮饲料代替青贮饲料中玉米、高粱或黑麦的干物质基础;方案 B:将用于挤奶、冷却、清洁和服务的用水量减少 56%;方案 C:用从巴西和阿根廷进口的浓缩饲料代替从法国进口的浓缩饲料)。通过在目标奶牛场的关键位置安装水表和记录设备,对农场的实践进行了全年监测:(i)饲料生产用水,(ii)奶牛用水,(iii)服务用水,(iv)作物和饲料生产,(v)经济和生产性能按水源(绿和蓝)进行控制。在所评估的 8 个农场中,每生产 1 公斤 FPCM 平均消耗 1.36±0.41 立方米水,其中 0.93±0.40 立方米水为绿水,0.42±0.30 立方米水为蓝水。然而,1 公斤 FPCM 的虚拟水平均占 43%±14.3%。用于泌乳奶牛饲料生产的水约占牛奶生产总 WF 的 87%±6%。然而,奶牛的饮用水和服务用水分别占牛奶总 WF 的 3.75%±2%和 9%±5%。EWP 评估显示,所选奶牛场每立方米水的毛利润相对较小,平均为 0.05±0.04 美元。牛奶 WF 的变化主要与日粮成分有关,这影响了牛奶产量和水的消耗。情景分析表明,使用需水量较少的饲料或从水消耗较低的国家进口饲料,可将牛奶生产的耗水量减少 16%。有效利用服务用水可使牛奶的蓝水 WF 减少 4%。实施这些措施将使突尼斯乳业每年潜在节水 6.46 亿立方米(30%)。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验