TY - JOUR
T1 - The use of biogeochemical models to evaluate mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions from managed grasslands
AU - Sándor, Renáta
AU - Ehrhardt, Fiona
AU - Brilli, Lorenzo
AU - Carozzi, Marco
AU - Recous, Sylvie
AU - Smith, Pete
AU - Snow, Val
AU - Soussana, Jean-François
AU - Dorich, Christopher D.
AU - Fuchs, Kathrin
AU - Fitton, Nuala
AU - Gongadze, Kate
AU - Klumpp, Katja
AU - Liebig, Mark
AU - Martin, Raphaël
AU - Merbold, Lutz
AU - Newton, Paul C. D.
AU - Rees, Robert M.
AU - Rolinski, Susanne
AU - Bellocchi, Gianni
N1 - This work was undertaken by the CN-MIP project of the Joint Programming Initiative ‘FACCE’ (https://www.faccejpi.com) under the auspices of the Global Research Alliance for Agricultural Greenhouse Gases - Integrative Research Group (http://globalresearchalliance.org/research/integrative). The project, coordinated by the French National Institute for Agricultural Research (INRA) (ANR-13-JFAC-0001), received funding by the ‘FACCE’ Multi-partner Call on Agricultural Greenhouse Gas Research through its national financing bodies. The input of PS and NF contributes to projects with support from UK-NERC (U-GRASS: NE/M016900/1) and FACCE-JPI via Defra. VS and PN were funded by the New Zealand Government to support the objectives of the Livestock Research Group of the Global Research Alliance on Agricultural Greenhouse Gases. FE acknowledges support through a grant from the French Environment and Energy Management Agency (ADEME, n° 12-60-C0023). KF and LM acknowledge funds received from the Swiss National Science Foundation (40FA40_154245/1 grant agreement) and from the Doc Mobility grant. Exchanges between French and Italian authors were supported by the Galileo programme (CLIMSOC: 39625XE for France, G18-631 for Italy).
We acknowledge Stephanie K. Jones, Kairsty Topp (Scotland's Rural College, EH9 3JG Edinburgh, United Kingdom) and Ute Skiba (Centre for Ecology and Hydrology Edinburgh, United Kingdom), who contributed to collecting the data used in this study for the G4 site. Lianhai Wu (Rothamsted Research, Sustainable Soil and Grassland Systems Department, United Kingdom) and Rich Conant (NREL, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO, USA) are also acknowledged for their contribution to the modelling work performed with SPACSYS and DayCent v4.5 2013, respectively.
PY - 2018/11/15
Y1 - 2018/11/15
N2 - Simulation models quantify the impacts on carbon (C) and nitrogen (N) cycling in grassland systems caused by changes in management practices. To support agricultural policies, it is however important to contrast the responses of alternative models, which can differ greatly in their treatment of key processes and in their response to management. We applied eight biogeochemical models at five grassland sites (in France, New Zealand, Switzerland, United Kingdom and United States) to compare the sensitivity of modelled C and N fluxes to changes in the density of grazing animals (from 100% to 50% of the original livestock densities), also in combination with decreasing N fertilization levels (reduced to zero from the initial levels). Simulated multi-model median values indicated that input reduction would lead to an increase in the C sink strength (negative net ecosystem C exchange) in intensive grazing systems: −64 ± 74 g C m−2 yr−1 (animal density reduction) and −81 ± 74 g C m−2 yr−1 (N and animal density reduction), against the baseline of −30.5 ± 69.5 g C m−2 yr−1 (LSU [livestock units] ≥ 0.76 ha−1 yr−1). Simulations also indicated a strong effect of N fertilizer reduction on N fluxes, e.g. N2O-N emissions decreased from 0.34 ± 0.22 (baseline) to 0.1 ± 0.05 g N m−2 yr−1 (no N fertilization). Simulated decline in grazing intensity had only limited impact on the N balance. The simulated pattern of enteric methane emissions was dominated by high model-to-model variability. The reduction in simulated offtake (animal intake + cut biomass) led to a doubling in net primary production per animal (increased by 11.6 ± 8.1 t C LSU−1 yr−1 across sites). The highest N2O-N intensities (N2O-N/offtake) were simulated at mown and extensively grazed arid sites. We show the possibility of using grassland models to determine sound mitigation practices while quantifying the uncertainties associated with the simulated outputs.
AB - Simulation models quantify the impacts on carbon (C) and nitrogen (N) cycling in grassland systems caused by changes in management practices. To support agricultural policies, it is however important to contrast the responses of alternative models, which can differ greatly in their treatment of key processes and in their response to management. We applied eight biogeochemical models at five grassland sites (in France, New Zealand, Switzerland, United Kingdom and United States) to compare the sensitivity of modelled C and N fluxes to changes in the density of grazing animals (from 100% to 50% of the original livestock densities), also in combination with decreasing N fertilization levels (reduced to zero from the initial levels). Simulated multi-model median values indicated that input reduction would lead to an increase in the C sink strength (negative net ecosystem C exchange) in intensive grazing systems: −64 ± 74 g C m−2 yr−1 (animal density reduction) and −81 ± 74 g C m−2 yr−1 (N and animal density reduction), against the baseline of −30.5 ± 69.5 g C m−2 yr−1 (LSU [livestock units] ≥ 0.76 ha−1 yr−1). Simulations also indicated a strong effect of N fertilizer reduction on N fluxes, e.g. N2O-N emissions decreased from 0.34 ± 0.22 (baseline) to 0.1 ± 0.05 g N m−2 yr−1 (no N fertilization). Simulated decline in grazing intensity had only limited impact on the N balance. The simulated pattern of enteric methane emissions was dominated by high model-to-model variability. The reduction in simulated offtake (animal intake + cut biomass) led to a doubling in net primary production per animal (increased by 11.6 ± 8.1 t C LSU−1 yr−1 across sites). The highest N2O-N intensities (N2O-N/offtake) were simulated at mown and extensively grazed arid sites. We show the possibility of using grassland models to determine sound mitigation practices while quantifying the uncertainties associated with the simulated outputs.
KW - GHG emission intensity
KW - Livestock density
KW - Nitrogen fertilization
KW - Process-based model
KW - Sensitivity analysis
U2 - 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.06.020
DO - 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.06.020
M3 - Article
VL - 642
SP - 292
EP - 306
JO - Science of the Total Environment
JF - Science of the Total Environment
SN - 0048-9697
ER -