Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-m6dg7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-03T08:56:54.607Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Is intensification of reproduction rhythm sustainable in an organic sheep production system? A 4-year interdisciplinary study

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 May 2009

M. Benoit ,
H. Tournadre ,
J. P. Dulphy ,
G. Laignel ,
S. Prache  and
J. Cabaret
M. Benoit*
Affiliation:
Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique, INRA, UR506 Économie de l’élevage, Site de Theix, F-63122 Saint-Genès-Champanelle, France
H. Tournadre
Affiliation:
Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique, INRA, UR1213 Herbivores, Site de Theix, F-63122 Saint-Genès-Champanelle, France
J. P. Dulphy
Affiliation:
Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique, INRA, UR1213 Herbivores, Site de Theix, F-63122 Saint-Genès-Champanelle, France
G. Laignel
Affiliation:
Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique, INRA, UR506 Économie de l’élevage, Site de Theix, F-63122 Saint-Genès-Champanelle, France
S. Prache
Affiliation:
Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique, INRA, UR1213 Herbivores, Site de Theix, F-63122 Saint-Genès-Champanelle, France
J. Cabaret
Affiliation:
Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique, INRA, UR1282 Infectiologie Animale et Santé Publique, F-37380 Nouzilly, France
*
E-mail: [email protected]
Get access

Abstract

A 4-year interdisciplinary study was performed to compare two organically managed sheep production systems, using 118 ewes and 24 ha each. The systems differed in the ewes’ reproduction rhythm: one lambing per ewe per year (1L/1Y), with the aim of balancing feed self-sufficiency and lamb marketing periods v. three lambings over 2 years (3L/2Y), with the aim of maximising ewes’ productivity. The sustainability was evaluated through ewes’ reproductive performance, lamb growth rate, carcass characteristics and quality, animal health, forage and feed self-sufficiency, soil mineral balance and gross margin. General animal health was assessed by recording ewe and lamb mortality and putative cause of death. Nematode digestive-tract strongyles parasitism was studied using faecal egg counts and necropsies. Carcass quality was assessed by recording carcass weight, conformation and fatness, and colour and firmness of subcutaneous fat. Thirty-three percent of 3L/2Y ewes lambed twice a year against 4% of 1L/1Y. Mean ewe productivity was 161.3% and 151.0% in 3L/2Y and 1L/1Y, respectively, and it was more variable between years in 3L/2Y. Average concentrate feed consumption and the corresponding cost per ewe were higher in 3L/2Y than in 1L/1Y (156 v. 121 kg, and €49.5 v. €39.3, respectively). Finally, average gross margin was lower in 3L/2Y than in 1L/1Y (€59 v. €65 per ewe, respectively). Even in year 2002, when ewe productivity was highest in 3L/2Y (193%), gross margin was not different between systems (€90 v. €86 per ewe in 3L/2Y and 1L/1Y, respectively), because of higher concentrate costs in 3L/2Y. The 3L/2Y animals presented a lower health status, with a higher lamb mortality (P < 0.05) and a higher digestive-tract strongyles and coccidia parasitism level (P < 0.05). Lamb carcass conformation, fatness and fat colour were not different between systems, but carcass weight and subcutaneous dorsal fat firmness were lower in 3L/2Y lambs than in 1L/1Y lambs (P < 0.05 and < 0.001, respectively). Intensification in an organically managed sheep system, through an increased reproduction rhythm, thus did not lead to better economic results and proved riskier, more variable and more difficult to manage, and so less sustainable. The less intensive system (1L/1Y) was both highly efficient from the animal standpoint and highly feed self-sufficient. The technical and economic results of this system were better than those of organic private farms in the same area and matched those of non-organic farms.

Keywords

sheeporganicsystemsustainabilityreproduction
Type
Full Paper
Information
animal , Volume 3 , Issue 5 , May 2009 , pp. 753 - 763
Copyright
Copyright © The Animal Consortium 2009

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Athanasiadou, S, Gray, D, Younie, D, Tzamaloukas, O, Jackson, F, Kyriazakis, I 2007. The use of chicory for parasite control in organic ewes and their lambs. Parasitology 134, 299–307.Google Scholar
Benoit, M 1998. Un outil de simulation du fonctionnement du troupeau ovin allaitant et de ses résultats économiques: une aide pour l’adaptation à des contextes nouveaux. INRA Productions Animales 11, 199–209.Google Scholar
Benoit, M, Laignel, G 2002. Constraints under organic farming on French sheep meat production: a legal and economic point of view with an emphasis on farming systems and veterinary aspects. Veterinary Research 33, 613–624.Google Scholar
Benoit, M, Laignel, G 2006. Méthodologie d’élaboration de résultats technico-économiques en élevage ovin allaitant. Illustration en France, en zone de plaine et de montagne. Options Méditerranéennes, Série A Séminaires Méditerranéens 70, 57–65.Google Scholar
Benoit, M, Laignel, G 2008. Sheep-for-meat farming systems in French semi-upland area. Adapting to new context: increased concentrates and energy prices, and new agricultural policy. Proceedings of the 8th European IFSA Symposium: Empowerment of the rural actors: a renewal of Farming Systems perspectives, 6–10 July 2008, Clermont-Ferrand, France, pp. 755–764.Google Scholar
Benoit, M, Veysset, P 2003. Conversion of cattle and sheep suckler farming to organic farming: adaptation of the farming system and its economic consequences. Livestock Production Science 80, 141–152.Google Scholar
Benoit, M, Laignel, G, Liénard, G 1999. Facteurs techniques, cohérence de fonctionnement et rentabilité en élevage ovin allaitant. Exemples du Massif Central Nord et du Montmorillonnais. Rencontres autour des Recherches sur les Ruminants 6, 19–22.Google Scholar
Bentounsi, B, Attir, B, Meradi, S, Cabaret, J 2007. Repeated treatment faecal egg counts to identify gastrointestinal nematode resistance in a context of low-level infection of sheep on farms in eastern Algeria. Veterinary Parasitology 144, 104–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berrag, B, Silvestre, A, Chartier, C, Gasnier, N, Laignel, V, Tournadre, H, Ballet, J, Cabaret, J 2001. Low frequency of anthelminthic treatments does not prevent from nematode resistance in sheep and goats: four regional examples in field conditions. Proceedings of the 18th International Conference of the World Association for the Advancement of Veterinary Parasitology, 26–30 August 2001, Stresa, Italy, p. 120.Google Scholar
Brelurut, A 1987. Productivité d’un troupeau de brebis selon le rythme de reproduction. Bulletin Technique CRZV Theix (INRA) 68, 5–10.Google Scholar
Cabaret, J, Dakkak, A, Bahaida, B 1980. On some factors influencing the output of the larvae of prostrongylids of sheep in natural infections. Veterinary Quarterly 2, 115–120.Google Scholar
Cabaret, J, Bouilhol, M, Mage, C 2002. Managing helminths of ruminants in organic farming. Veterinary Research 33, 625–640.Google Scholar
Cabaret, J, Gonnord, V, Cortet, J, Sauvé, C, Ballet, J, Tournadre, H 2005. Moniezia chez l’agneaux d’herbe: épidémiologie et tentative de contrôle par un traitement alternatif. Alter Agri 72, 4–7.Google Scholar
Cognié, Y, Schirar, A, Martinet, J, Poulin, N, Mirman, B 1984. Activité reproductrice et maîtrise de l’ovulation chez la brebis. Compte rendu des 9ème Journées de la Recherche Ovine et Caprine, Paris, France, pp. 109–133.Google Scholar
Cournut, S, Dedieu, B 2004. A discrete events simulation of flock dynamics: a management application to three lambings in two years. Animal Research 53, 383–403.Google Scholar
Dalgaard, T, Hutchings, NJ, Porter, JR 2003. Agroecology, scaling and interdisciplinarity. Agriculture Ecosystems and Environment 100, 39–51.Google Scholar
Doyle, CJ, Topp, CFE 2004. The economic opportunities for increasing the use of forage legumes in north European livestock systems under both conventional and organic management. Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems 19, 15–22.Google Scholar
Fisher, AV, Enser, M, Richardson, RI, Wood, JD, Nute, GR, Kurt, E, Sinclair, LA, Wilkinson, RG 2000. Fatty acid composition and eating quality of lamb types derived from four diverse breed × production systems. Meat Science 55, 141–147.Google Scholar
Hermansen, JE 2003. Organic livestock production systems and appropriate development in relation to public expectations. Livestock Production Science 80, 3–15.Google Scholar
Hovi, M 2002. Animal health and welfare in organic livestock production: conclusions and recommendations of a networking project. Proceedings of the 14th IFOAM Organic World Congress, Victoria, Canada, p. 75.Google Scholar
Hovi, M, Sundrum, A, Thamsborg, SM 2003. Animal health and welfare in organic livestock production in Europe: current state and future challenges. Livestock Production Science 80, 41–43.Google Scholar
INRA 1989. Ruminant nutrition. Recommended allowances and Feed Tables. INRA, Paris, France.Google Scholar
Laignel, G, Benoit, M 2004. Production de viande ovine en agriculture biologique comparée à l’élevage conventionnel: Résultats technico-économiques d’exploitations de plaine et de montagne du nord du Massif central. INRA Productions Animales 17, 133–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MAFF (Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food) 1986. Manual of veterinary parasitology laboratory techniques, MAFF Reference Book 418. Her Majesty’s Stationery Office, London, UK.Google Scholar
Mogensen, L, Kristensen, T, Danfaer, A 2007. Prototyping of organic dairy production systems self-sufficient with feed. Consequences on productivity, economy and nutrient balance. Biological Agriculture and Horticulture 25, 13–35.Google Scholar
Nardone, A, Zervas, G, Ronchi, B 2004. Sustainability of small ruminant organic systems of production. Livestock Production Science 90, 27–39.Google Scholar
Nauta, WJ, Baars, T, Saatkamp, H, Weenink, D, Roep, D 2008. Farming strategies in organic dairy farming: effects on breeding goal and choice of breed. An explorative study. Livestock Science 10.1016/j.livsci.2008.06.011.Google Scholar
Park, J, Seaton, RAF 1996. Integrative research and sustainable agriculture. Agricultural Systems 50, 81–100.Google Scholar
Prache, S, Brelurut, A, Thériez, M 1986. L’élevage de l’agneau à l’herbe I. Effets de l’âge au sevrage sur les performances d’agneaux élevés à l’herbe puis engraissés en bergerie. Annales de Zootechnie 35, 231–254.Google Scholar
Prache, S, Thériez, M, Béchet, G 1992. Complémentation des agneaux au pâturage pendant la phase d’allaitement. Interaction entre le niveau de complémentation et la quantité d’herbe offerte et effet sur le niveau de parasitisme. INRA Productions Animales 5, 137–148.Google Scholar
Priolo, A, Micol, D, Agabriel, J, Prache, S, Dransfield, E 2002. Effect of grass or concentrate feeding systems on lamb carcass and meat quality. Meat Science 62, 179–185.Google Scholar
Salette, J, Huché, L 1991. Diagnostic de l’état de nutrition minérale d’une prairie par l’analyse du végétal: principes, mise en oeuvre, exemples. Fourrages 125, 3–18.Google Scholar
Salette, J, Lemaire, G 1981. Sur la variation de la teneur en azote des graminées fourragères pendant leur croissance: formulation d’une loi de dilution. Comptes Rendus de l’Académie des Sciences - Séries III - Sciences de la Vie 292, 875–878.Google Scholar
Signoret, JP 1990. The influence of the ram effect on breeding activity of ewes and its underlying physiology. In Reproductive physiology of Merino Sheep. Concepts and Consequences (ed. CM Oldham, GB Martin and IW Purvis), pp. 59–70. The University of Western Australia, Nedlands, Perth.Google Scholar
Speedy, AW, FitzSimons, J 1977. The reproductive performance of Finnish Landrace × Dorset Horn and Border Leicester × Scottish Blackface ewes mated three times in two years. Animal Production 24, 189–196.Google Scholar
Statistical Analysis Systems Institute 1999. SAS/STAT User’s Guide, Version 8. SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC, USA.Google Scholar
Sundrum, A 1999. Preconditions of organic livestock farming to improve animal health and welfare. Proceedings of the 5th international symposium on livestock farming systems, 19–20 August 1999, Posieux, Fribourg, Switzerland, pp. 81–88.Google Scholar
Thériez, M, Brelurut, A, Pailleux, JY, Benoit, M, Lienard, G, Louault, F, De Montard, FX 1997. Extensification en élevage ovin viande par agrandissement des surfaces fourragères. Résultats zootechniques et économiques de 5 ans d’expérience dans le Massif Central Nord. INRA Productions Animales 10, 141–152.Google Scholar
Thimonier, J, Cognié, Y, Lassoued, N, Khaldi, G 2000. L’effet mâle chez les ovins: une technique actuelle de maîtrise de la reproduction. INRA Productions Animales 13, 223–231.Google Scholar
Tournadre, H, Bocquier, F, Petit, M, Thimonier, J, Benoit, M 2002. Efficacité de l’effet bélier chez la brebis Limousine à différents moments de l’anoestrus saisonnier et selon la durée de l’intervalle tarissement - mise en lutte. Rencontres autour des Recherches sur les Ruminants 9, 143–146.Google Scholar
Tournadre, H, Dulphy, JP, Jailler, R 2006. En agriculture biologique, réduire la part des concentrés dans la ration d’agneaux de bergerie sevrés: conséquences sur les quantités ingérées et les croissances. Rencontres autour des Recherches sur les Ruminants 13, p. 140.Google Scholar
Walrave, Y, Cantin, P, Desvignes, A, Thimonier, J 1975. Variations saisonnières de l’activité sexuelle des races ovines du Massif Central. Compte Rendu des 1ères Journées de la Recherche Ovine et Caprine, Paris, France, pp. 261–271.Google Scholar
Yilma, JM, Dorchies, P 1991. Epidemiology of Oestrus ovis in southwest France. Veterinary Parasitology 40, 315–323.Google Scholar