IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/agisys/v115y2013icp144-154.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Predicting nitrogen dynamics in a dairy farming catchment using systems synthesis modelling

Author

Listed:
  • Smith, Andrew P.
  • Western, Andrew W.

Abstract

The intensity of milk production from pasture based dairy farming systems is often related to nitrogen (N) losses. This paper investigates dairy farming systems in the Scotts Creek catchment, an intensive farming region in south-eastern Australia, to assess aspects of productive potential and environmental footprint as a result of nutrient loss. A detailed survey of farming systems was coupled with regional data and a dairy farming systems simulation model (DairyMod) to better understand the N flows in farming systems over a range of different input and production intensities. Simulations of representative farming systems – farming system typologies – were run for 100years to provide information on the consistency and proportion of N loss in various pathways over a range of different weather and soil moisture conditions. The typologies covered a very wide range in intensity of stocking rate, inputs (e.g. concentrates, fertiliser). In general N transformations, plant and animal production and the efficiency of conversion of N into animal and plant products were related to the level of N inputs of the farming systems and milk production, or intensity. The long-term average total predicted N loss (via leaching, denitrification and volatilisation) ranged from 24(±6) to 227(±73)kgN/ha/yr and increased relative to the intensity of milk production (L/ha). Over the long term, annual average N losses by leaching ranged from 4 to 143kgN/ha/yr, volatilisation from 17 to 66kgN/ha/yr and denitrification from 2 to 18kgN/ha/yr. In an average system there were similar amounts of N exported from the farming system by leaching (44% of total N), as lost through volatilisation (47%), whereas losses by denitrification were comparatively minor (9%). The inputs were principally related to a potential milk production capacity of the farming system which was not wholly related to stocking rate. The efficiency of N utilisation for milk synthesis (L milk/kgN-consumed) increased with system intensity, however the relative loss (gN loss/kg milk N) also increased. With the current farming system typologies, improvements in animal efficiency due to intensification appear to be offset by the capacity of the system to retain surplus N. In order to meet regional production targets, there are various potential ways to further intensify the current farming systems. However the implications of achieving such targets on N losses (via leaching, denitrification and volatilisation) are important when considering the environmental implications of further intensification.

Suggested Citation

  • Smith, Andrew P. & Western, Andrew W., 2013. "Predicting nitrogen dynamics in a dairy farming catchment using systems synthesis modelling," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 144-154.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:agisys:v:115:y:2013:i:c:p:144-154
    DOI: 10.1016/j.agsy.2012.08.006
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0308521X12001291
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.agsy.2012.08.006?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mark A. Sutton & Oene Oenema & Jan Willem Erisman & Adrian Leip & Hans van Grinsven & Wilfried Winiwarter, 2011. "Too much of a good thing," Nature, Nature, vol. 472(7342), pages 159-161, April.
    2. Saam, H. & Mark Powell, J. & Jackson-Smith, Douglas B. & Bland, William L. & Posner, Joshua L., 2005. "Use of animal density to estimate manure nutrient recycling ability of Wisconsin dairy farms," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 84(3), pages 343-357, June.
    3. Chapman, D.F. & Kenny, S.N. & Beca, D. & Johnson, I.R., 2008. "Pasture and forage crop systems for non-irrigated dairy farms in southern Australia. 2. Inter-annual variation in forage supply, and business risk," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 97(3), pages 126-138, June.
    4. David Tilman & Kenneth G. Cassman & Pamela A. Matson & Rosamond Naylor & Stephen Polasky, 2002. "Agricultural sustainability and intensive production practices," Nature, Nature, vol. 418(6898), pages 671-677, August.
    5. Chapman, D.F. & Kenny, S.N. & Beca, D. & Johnson, I.R., 2008. "Pasture and forage crop systems for non-irrigated dairy farms in southern Australia. 1. Physical production and economic performance," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 97(3), pages 108-125, June.
    6. Bryant, J.R. & Snow, V.O. & Cichota, R. & Jolly, B.H., 2011. "The effect of situational variability in climate and soil, choice of animal type and N fertilisation level on nitrogen leaching from pastoral farming systems around Lake Taupo, New Zealand," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 104(3), pages 271-280, March.
    7. Wilcock, Robert J. & Monaghan, Ross M. & Thorrold, Bruce S. & Meredith, Adrian S. & Betteridge, Keith & Duncan, Maurice J., 2007. "Land-water interactions in five contrasting dairying catchments: issues and solutions," Land Use and Water Resources Research, University of Newcastle upon Tyne, Centre for Land Use and Water Resources Research, vol. 7, pages 1-10.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Doole, Graeme J. & Kingwell, Ross, 2015. "Efficient economic and environmental management of pastoral systems: Theory and application," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 133(C), pages 73-84.
    2. Mack, Gabriele & Huber, Robert, 2017. "On-farm compliance costs and N surplus reduction of mixed dairy farms under grassland-based feeding systems," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 154(C), pages 34-44.
    3. Christie, Karen M. & Smith, Andrew P. & Rawnsley, Richard P. & Harrison, Matthew T. & Eckard, Richard J., 2018. "Simulated seasonal responses of grazed dairy pastures to nitrogen fertilizer in SE Australia: Pasture production," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 166(C), pages 36-47.
    4. Thayalakumaran, T. & Roberts, A. & Beverly, C. & Vigiak, O. & Norng, S. & Stott, K., 2016. "Assessing nitrogen fluxes from dairy farms using a modelling approach: A case study in the Moe River catchment, Victoria, Australia," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 178(C), pages 37-51.
    5. Christie, K.M. & Smith, A.P. & Rawnsley, R.P. & Harrison, M.T. & Eckard, R.J., 2020. "Simulated seasonal responses of grazed dairy pastures to nitrogen fertilizer in SE Australia: N loss and recovery," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 182(C).
    6. Smith, Andrew P. & Christie, Karen M. & Rawnsley, Richard P. & Eckard, Richard J., 2018. "Fertiliser strategies for improving nitrogen use efficiency in grazed dairy pastures," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 165(C), pages 274-282.
    7. Smith, Andrew P. & Christie, Karen M. & Harrison, Matthew T. & Eckard, Richard J., 2021. "Ammonia volatilisation from grazed, pasture based dairy farming systems," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 190(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Fariña, S.R. & Alford, A. & Garcia, S.C. & Fulkerson, W.J., 2013. "An integrated assessment of business risk for pasture-based dairy farm systems intensification," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 10-20.
    2. Chapman, D.F. & Kenny, S.N. & Lane, N., 2011. "Pasture and forage crop systems for non-irrigated dairy farms in southern Australia: 3. Estimated economic value of additional home-grown feed," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 104(8), pages 589-599, October.
    3. Vogeler, Iris & Vibart, Ronaldo & Cichota, Rogerio, 2017. "Potential benefits of diverse pasture swards for sheep and beef farming," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 154(C), pages 78-89.
    4. Berger, Horacio & Bilotto, Franco & Bell, Lindsay W. & Machado, Claudio F., 2017. "Feedbase intervention in a cow-calf system in the flooding pampas of Argentina: 2. Estimation of the marginal value of additional feed," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 158(C), pages 68-77.
    5. Bilotto, Franco & Recavarren, Paulo & Vibart, Ronaldo & Machado, Claudio F., 2019. "Backgrounding strategy effects on farm productivity, profitability and greenhouse gas emissions of cow-calf systems in the Flooding Pampas of Argentina," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 176(C).
    6. Ojeda, J.J. & Pembleton, K.G. & Islam, M.R. & Agnusdei, M.G. & Garcia, S.C., 2016. "Evaluation of the agricultural production systems simulator simulating Lucerne and annual ryegrass dry matter yield in the Argentine Pampas and south-eastern Australia," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 143(C), pages 61-75.
    7. Elisa Morri & Riccardo Santolini, 2021. "Ecosystem Services Valuation for the Sustainable Land Use Management by Nature-Based Solution (NbS) in the Common Agricultural Policy Actions: A Case Study on the Foglia River Basin (Marche Region, It," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(1), pages 1-23, December.
    8. Liu, Duan & Tang, Runcheng & Xie, Jun & Tian, Jingjing & Shi, Rui & Zhang, Kai, 2020. "Valuation of ecosystem services of rice–fish coculture systems in Ruyuan County, China," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 41(C).
    9. Shen Yuan & Shaobing Peng, 2017. "Exploring the Trends in Nitrogen Input and Nitrogen Use Efficiency for Agricultural Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(10), pages 1-15, October.
    10. Katarina Arvidsson Segerkvist & Helena Hansson & Ulf Sonesson & Stefan Gunnarsson, 2021. "A Systematic Mapping of Current Literature on Sustainability at Farm-Level in Beef and Lamb Meat Production," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(5), pages 1-14, February.
    11. Vainio, Annukka & Tienhaara, Annika & Haltia, Emmi & Hyvönen, Terho & Pyysiäinen, Jarkko & Pouta, Eija, 2021. "The legitimacy of result-oriented and action-oriented agri-environmental schemes: A comparison of farmers’ and citizens’ perceptions," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 107(C).
    12. Hualin Xie & Yingqian Huang & Qianru Chen & Yanwei Zhang & Qing Wu, 2019. "Prospects for Agricultural Sustainable Intensification: A Review of Research," Land, MDPI, vol. 8(11), pages 1-27, October.
    13. Smith, Helen F. & Sullivan, Caroline A., 2014. "Ecosystem services within agricultural landscapes—Farmers' perceptions," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 72-80.
    14. Aude Ridier & Caroline Roussy & Karim Chaib, 2021. "Adoption of crop diversification by specialized grain farmers in south-western France: evidence from a choice-modelling experiment," Review of Agricultural, Food and Environmental Studies, Springer, vol. 102(3), pages 265-283, September.
    15. Paul L. G. Vlek & Asia Khamzina & Hossein Azadi & Anik Bhaduri & Luna Bharati & Ademola Braimoh & Christopher Martius & Terry Sunderland & Fatemeh Taheri, 2017. "Trade-Offs in Multi-Purpose Land Use under Land Degradation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(12), pages 1-19, November.
    16. Diriba Shiferaw G., 2017. "Water-Nutrients Interaction: Exploring the Effects of Water as a Central Role for Availability & Use Efficiency of Nutrients by Shallow Rooted Vegetable Crops - A Review," Journal of Agriculture and Crops, Academic Research Publishing Group, vol. 3(10), pages 78-93, 10-2017.
    17. Sheng Gong & Jason.S. Bergtold & Elizabeth Yeager, 2021. "Assessing the joint adoption and complementarity between in-field conservation practices of Kansas farmers," Agricultural and Food Economics, Springer;Italian Society of Agricultural Economics (SIDEA), vol. 9(1), pages 1-24, December.
    18. Seufert, Verena & Ramankutty, Navin & Mayerhofer, Tabea, 2017. "What is this thing called organic? – How organic farming is codified in regulations," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 10-20.
    19. Ghebremichael, Lula T. & Watzin, Mary C., 2011. "Identifying and controlling critical sources of farm phosphorus imbalances for Vermont dairy farms," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 104(7), pages 551-561, September.
    20. Jónsson, Jón Örvar G. & Davíðsdóttir, Brynhildur & Nikolaidis, Nikolaos P. & Giannakis, Georgios V., 2019. "Tools for Sustainable Soil Management: Soil Ecosystem Services, EROI and Economic Analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 157(C), pages 109-119.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:agisys:v:115:y:2013:i:c:p:144-154. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/agsy .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.