Dataset Information

Where is the Planetary Boundary for freshwater being exceeded because of livestock farming?

ABSTRACT: Livestock production has significant impacts on the environment, including due to the use of water. In this study, we provide a spatially explicit estimation of livestock blue water use, by analyzing feed crop water use and livestock drinking water. For the past four decades, livestock water use has increased from 145 km³/year in 1971 to 270 km³/year in 2012 with an increasing trend of 1.36%/year. The proportion of livestock drinking water use has remained relatively stable at around 10% of total water use attributable to livestock production. Several hotspots of water use, including eastern China, northern India, US high plains, are identified in terms of the long-term averages, while South America and Central Africa show the most rapidly increasing trends. In USA, climate change is found to contribute most to the changes in water use attributable to livestock, while feed cropping intensity and land use change are the dominant driver in China and India, respectively. Though, in total, livestock water use makes a relatively modest contribution to the Planetary Boundary (PB) that has been proposed for anthropogenic water use (4000 km³/year), we argue that this aggregate number is not particularly meaningful, so we identify places where livestock is a major contributor to the unsustainable use of water, in northern India, part of the Middle East, Northern China and Central US. 7% of rivers where excessive water withdrawals mean that there is insufficient residual flow to sustain the aquatic environment (which we take to be the local manifestation of a PB) have been tipped over that boundary because of livestock farming, whilst in a further 34% of rivers, livestock farming on its own exceeds the water PB. Our results provide new and more geographically specific evidence about the impact that the meat industry makes on the PB for water.

SUBMITTER: Leng G

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8155394 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Agricultural intensification is a leading threat to bird conservation. Highly diversified farming systems that integrate livestock and crop production might promote a diversity of habitats useful to native birds foraging across otherwise-simplified landscapes. At the same time, these features might be attractive to nonnative birds linked to a broad range of disservices to both crop and livestock production. We evaluated the influence of crop-livestock integration on wild bird richness and density along a north-south transect spanning the U.S. West Coast. We surveyed birds on 52 farms that grew primarily mixed vegetables and fruits alone or integrated livestock into production. Crop-livestock systems harbored higher native bird density and richness relative to crop-only farms, a benefit more pronounced on farms embedded in nonnatural landscapes. Crop-livestock systems bolstered native insectivores linked to the suppression of agricultural pest insects but did not bolster native granivores that may be more likely to damage crops. Crop-livestock systems also significantly increased the density of nonnative birds, primarily European Starlings (Sturnus vulgaris) and House Sparrows (Passer domesticus) that may compete with native birds for resources. Models supported a small, positive correlation between nonnative density and overall native bird density as well as between nonnative density and native granivore density. Relative to crop-only farms, on average, crop-livestock systems exhibited 1.5 times higher patch richness, 2.4 times higher density of farm structures, 7.3 times smaller field sizes, 2.4 times greater integration of woody crops, and 5.3 times greater integration of pasture/hay habitat on farm. Wild birds may have responded to this habitat diversity and/or associated food resources. Individual farm factors had significantly lower predictive power than farming system alone (change in C statistic information criterion (?CIC) = 80.2), suggesting crop-livestock systems may impact wild birds through a suite of factors that change with system conversion. Collectively, our findings suggest that farms that integrate livestock and crop production can attract robust native bird communities, especially within landscapes devoted to intensified food production. However, additional work is needed to demonstrate persistent farm bird communities through time, ecophysiological benefits to birds foraging on these farms, and net effects of both native and nonnative wild birds in agroecosystems.

Project description:Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is a major public health threat, and inappropriate antimicrobial use (AMU) in food animal production can contribute to the global burden of AMR in humans. This study was conducted to understand knowledge, attitude, and practice (KAP) of smallholder livestock owners regarding antimicrobial use, residue, and resistance in three agro-ecological zones and production systems in Ethiopia. A cross-sectional study based on structured interviews was conducted. Twenty-one items were used to assess farmers' KAP. Item response theory (IRT) model and Cronbach's alpha were used to assess the KAP measurement scales. Inferential analyses were used to compare the differences in the practices in terms of the farm and socio-economic characteristics. There was a difference in the type of antimicrobials reported use between agro-ecological zones and production systems. Pastoralists most commonly used antibiotics (86.7%) followed by anthelminthics (70.8%). Overall, tetracyclines (36.4%), aminoglycosides (31.3%), and trimethoprim-sulfonamides (6.2%) were the most frequently used classes of antibiotics across the study sites. Human preparation antibiotics (tetracyclines) were also being used for veterinary purposes by 18.5% of pastoralist households. About 81.6% of livestock owners surveyed reported to have access to veterinary drugs although access varied between agro-ecological zones and production system. About 72.3% of pastoralists administered antibiotics by not following through the full treatment course. Moreover, 70% of respondents were not aware of the recommended withdrawal periods of milk and meat after antibiotic treatment. It was noticed that around 80 and 70% of respondents had a tendency to give doses higher or lower than recommended of antimicrobials, respectively. The study confirms the need for interventions to increase knowledge among smallholder farmers to improve the way antimicrobials in general and antibiotics in particular are used in these settings. In addition, professional involvement, supervision, and guidance can also lead to more efficient antimicrobial use by smallholder livestock owners. The study also highlights the need for research into the development of usable tools that measure antibiotic knowledge and attitudes.

Dataset Information

Where is the Planetary Boundary for freshwater being exceeded because of livestock farming?

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets