Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-q99xh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T20:13:36.308Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Comparison of an integrated crop–livestock system with soybean only: Economic and production responses in southern Brazil

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 November 2013

Carlos Alberto Oliveira de Oliveira ,
Carolina Bremm ,
Ibanor Anghinoni ,
Anibal de Moraes ,
Taise Robinson Kunrath  and
Paulo César de Faccio Carvalho
Carlos Alberto Oliveira de Oliveira*
Affiliation:
Agricultural and Livestock Research Foundation (FEPAGRO), Porto Alegre, RS 90130-060, Brazil
Carolina Bremm
Affiliation:
Agricultural and Livestock Research Foundation (FEPAGRO), Porto Alegre, RS 90130-060, Brazil
Ibanor Anghinoni
Affiliation:
Department of Soil Science, Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, RS 91501-970, Brazil
Anibal de Moraes
Affiliation:
Department of Crop Sciences, Federal University of Paraná, Curitiba, PR 80035-050, Brazil
Taise Robinson Kunrath
Affiliation:
Grazing Ecology Research Group, Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, RS 91540-000, Brazil
Paulo César de Faccio Carvalho
Affiliation:
Grazing Ecology Research Group, Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, RS 91540-000, Brazil
*
*Corresponding author: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In Brazil, as well as globally, land use has been increasingly addressed for environmental impacts and economic improvements. Integrated crop–livestock systems (ICLSs) are a potential strategy to optimize use of land, increase total production and reduce economic risk through diversification. We compared production and economic outcomes of a soybean-only system with ICLS differing in sward management. The study area was managed since 2001 using no-till in southern Brazil. Soybean [Glycine max (L.) Merr.] was rotated with a mixture of black oat (Avena strigosa Schreb) and ryegrass (Lolium multiflorum Lam) either for: (i) grazing (ICLS) or (ii) cover crops as cropping system only (CS) with no livestock grazing. Four sward height management methods (10, 20, 30 or 40 cm) were evaluated under put-and-take stocking. Across years, soybean yield (2516±103 kg ha−1) was not affected by treatment, but was affected by year (P<0.001), due to rainfall during crop development. Cattle average daily gain, gain per hectare (GPH) and gross margin were affected by treatments (P<0.001). Average daily gain was lower when pasture was managed at 10 cm than between 20 and 40 cm. With increasing sward height, a gradual reduction in cattle GPH was observed (P<0.05). Overall gross margin was lower in CS than in ICLS. Economic return with ICLS was greatest when sward height management was between 10 and 20 cm. Our study indicates that ICLS could be considered an alternative management strategy that improves economic performance and promotes balanced production in the long term.

Keywords

mixed systemssward managementfinancial analysisno-tillage
Type
Themed Content: Integrated Crop–Livestock Systems
Information
Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems , Volume 29 , Issue 3: Special Section: Themed Content: Integrated Crop-Livestock Systems , September 2014 , pp. 230 - 238
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2013 

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

1Boval, M. and Dixon, R.M. 2012. The importance of grasslands for animal production and other functions: A review on management and methodological progress in the tropics. Animal 6:748–762.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
2Brummer, E.C. 1998. Diversity, stability, and sustainable American agriculture. Agronomy Journal 90:1–2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3Hendrickson, J.R., Hanson, J.D., Tanaka, D.L., and Sassenrath, G.F. 2008. Principles of integrated agricultural systems: Introduction to processes and definition. Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems 23:265–271.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4Ryschawy, J., Choisis, N., Choisis, J.P., Joannon, A., and Gibon, A. 2012. Mixed crop–livestock systems: An economic and environmental-friendly way of farming? Animal 6:1722–1730.Google Scholar
5Jordan, V.W.L., Hutcheon, J.A., Donaldson, G.V., and Farmer, D.P. 1997. Research into and development of integrated farming systems for less-intensive arable crop production: Experimental progress (1989–1994) and commercial implementation. Agricultural Ecosystems and Environment 64:141–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6Tanaka, D.L., Karn, J.F., and Scholljegerdes, E.J. 2008. Integrated crop/livestock systems research: Practical research considerations. Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems 23:80–86.Google Scholar
7Tracy, B.F. and Zhang, Y. 2008. Soil compaction, corn yield response, and soil nutrient pool dynamics within an integrated crop–livestock system in Illinois. Crop Science 48:1211–1218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8Souza, E.D., Costa, S.E.V.G.A., Lima, C.V.S., Anghinoni, I., Meurer, E.J., and Carvalho, P.C.F. 2008. Carbono orgânico e fósforo microbiano em sistema de integração agricultura-pecuária submetido a diferentes intensidades de pastejo em plantio direto. Revista Brasileira de Ciência do Solo 32:1273–1282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9National Supply Company (CONAB). 2012. Agricultural statistics. Available at Web site http://www.conab.gov.br/ (accessed December 14, 2012).Google Scholar
10Carvalho, P.C.F., Anghinoni, I., Moraes, A., Souza, E.D., Sulc, R.M., Lang, C.R., Flores, J.P.C., Lopes, M.L.T., Silva, J.L.S., Conte, O., Wesp, C.L., Levien, R., Fontaneli, R.S., and Bayer, C. 2010. Managing grazing animals to achieve nutrient cycling and soil improvement in no-till integrated systems. Nutrient Cycling in Agroecosystems 88:259–273.Google Scholar
11Antle, J.M. 1987. Econometric estimation of producers’ risk attitudes. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 69:509–522.Google Scholar
12Chavas, J.-P. 2004. Risk Analysis in Theory and Practice. Elsevier Academic Press, San Diego, CA.Google Scholar
13Hodgson, J. 1990. Grazing Management: Science into Practice. Longman Scientific and Technical, Essex, England.Google Scholar
14Arnalds, A. and Rittenhouse, L.R. 1986. Stocking rates for northern rangelands. In Gudmundsson, O. (ed.) Grazing Research at Northern Latitudes. Plenum Press, New York, NY. p. 335–345.Google Scholar
15Carvalho, P.C.F., Bremm, C., Mezzalira, J.C., Da Trindade, J.K., and Nascimento, D. Jr 2011. How can grazing behavior research at the bite to patch scales contribute to enhance sustainability of rangeland livestock production systems? In Proceedings from the IX International Rangeland Congress – Diverse rangelands for a sustainable society, Rosario, Argentina. p. 565–571.Google Scholar
16Cruz, P., Quadros, F.L.F., Theau, J.P., Frizzo, A., Jouany, C., Duru, M., and Carvalho, P.C.F. 2010. Leaf traits as functional descriptors of the intensity of continuous grazing in native grasslands in the south of Brazil. Rangeland Ecology & Management 63:350–358.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
17Moreno, J.A. 1961. Clima do Rio Grande do Sul, secção de geografia. Secretaria da Agricultura, Porto Alegre, Brazil.Google Scholar
18Allen, V.G., Batello, C., Berretta, E.J., Hodgson, J., Kothmann, M., Li, X., McIvor, J., Milne, J., Morris, C., Peeters, A., and Sanderson, M. 2011. An international terminology for grazing lands and grazing animals. Grass and Forage Science 66:2–28.Google Scholar
19Barthram, G.T. 1986. Experimental techniques: The HFRO sward stick. Biennial Report, 1984–1985. Hill Farming Research Organisation, Penicuik, UK. p. 29–30.Google Scholar
20Fehr, W.E., Cavines, C.E., Burmood, D.T., and Pennington, J.S. 1971. Stage of development descriptions for soybeans, Glycine max (L.) Merrill. Crop Science 11:929–931.Google Scholar
21Veysset, P., Bebin, D., and Lherm, M. 2005. Adaptation to agenda 2000 (CAP reform) and optimization of the farming system of French suckler cattle farms in the Charolais area: A model-based study. Agricultural Systems 83:179–202.Google Scholar
22Hanley, N., Acs, S., Dallimer, M., Gatson, K.J., Graves, A., Morris, J., and Armsworth, P.R. 2012. Farm-scale ecological and economic impacts of agricultural change in the uplands. Land Use Policy 29:587–597.Google Scholar
23Carvalho, P.C.F., Anghinoni, I., Moraes, A., Trein, C.R., Flores, J.P.C., Cepik, C.T.C., Levien, R., Lopes, M.T., Baggio, C., Lang, C.R., Sulc, R.M., and Pelissari, A. 2005. The state of the art in integrated crop–livestock. In Gottschall, C.S., Silva, J.L.S. and Rodrigues, N.C. (eds). Proceedings from the 10th Lecture series in cattle production and management, Canoas, Brazil. p. 7–44.Google Scholar
24Flores, J.P.C., Anghinoni, I., Cassol, L.C., Carvalho, P.C.F., Leite, J.G.D.B., and Fraga, T.I. 2007. Soil physical attributes and soybean yield in an integrated livestock-crop system with different pasture heights in no-tillage. Revista Brasileira de Ciência do Solo 31:771–780.Google Scholar
25Clark, J.T., Russell, J.R., Karlen, D.L., Singleton, P.L., Busby, W.D., and Peterson, B.C. 2004. Soil surface property and soybean yield response to corn stover grazing. Agronomy Journal 96:1364–1371.Google Scholar
26Vega, C.R., Sadras, V.O., Andrade, F.H., and Uhart, S.A. 2000. Reproductive allometry in soybean, maize and sunflower. Annals of Botany 85:461–468.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
27Bacigaluppo, S., Bodrero, M.L., Balzarini, M., Gerster, G.R., Andriani, J.M., Enrico, J.M., and Dardanelli, J.L. 2011. Main edaphic and climatic variables explaining soybean yield in Argiudolls under no-tilled systems. European Journal of Agronomy 35:247–254.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
28Mott, G.O. 1960. Grazing pressure and the measurement of pasture production. In Proceedings from the 8th International Grassland Congress, Reading, England. p. 606–611.Google Scholar
29Diaz-Solis, H., Kothmann, M.M., Grant, W.E., and Luna-Villarreal, R. 2006. Use of irrigated pastures in semi-arid grazinglands: A dynamic model for stocking rate decisions. Agricultural Systems 88:316–331.Google Scholar
30Bement, R.E. 1969. A stocking rate guide for beef production on bluegrama range. Journal of Range Management 22:83–86.Google Scholar
31Derner, J.D. 2008. Long-term cattle gain responses to stocking rate and grazing systems in northern mixed-grass prairie. Livestock Science 117:60–69.Google Scholar
32Rocha, L.M., Carvalho, P.C.F., Baggio, C., Anghinoni, I., Lopes, M.L.T., Macari, S., and Silva, J.L.S. 2011. Performance and carcass characteristics of yearling bulls on winter pastures subjected to grazing intensities. Pesquisa Agropecuária Brasileira 46:1379–1384.Google Scholar
33.Griffiths, W.M. 1999. Sward structural characteristics and selective foraging behaviour in dairy cows. PhD thesis, Massey University, New Zealand.Google Scholar
34Cary, J.W. and Wilkinson, R.L. 1997. Perceived profitability and farmers' conservation behavior. Journal of Agricultural Economics 48:13–21.Google Scholar
35Wilkins, R.J. 2008. Eco-efficient approaches to land management: A case for increased integration of crop and animal production systems. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 363:517–525.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
36Eltun, R., Korsæth, A., and Nordheim, O. 2002. A comparison of environmental, soil fertility, yield, and economical effects in six cropping systems based on an 8-year experiment in Norway. Agriculture Ecosystems and Environment 90:155–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
37Schiere, J.B., Ibrahim, M.N.M., and van Keulen, H. 2002. The role of livestock for sustainability in mixed farming: Criteria and scenario studies under varying resource allocation. Agriculture Ecosystem and Environment 90:139–153.Google Scholar
38Manley, W.A., Hart, R.H., Samuel, M.J., Smith, M.A., Waggoner, J.W. Jr, and Manley, J.T. 1997. Vegetation, cattle, and economic responses to grazing strategies and pressures. Journal of Range Management 50:638–646.Google Scholar
39Kemp, D.R. and Michalk, D.L. 2007. Towards sustainable grassland and livestock management. Journal of Agricultural Science 145:543–564.Google Scholar