Quantifying biodiversity impacts of livestock using life‐cycle perspectives

Biodiversity impacts are rarely included in systems analyses of livestock production. We piloted two approaches toward quantifying biodiversity impacts, pressure‐state‐response (PSR) and potential species loss (PSL), at a cow–calf operation in Florida for which extensive environmental data were avai...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Frontiers in ecology and the environment 2023-08, Vol.21 (6), p.275-281
Hauptverfasser: McClelland, Shelby C, Haddix, Jill D, Azad, Shefali, Boughton, Elizabeth H, Boughton, Raoul K, Miller, Ryan S, Swain, Hilary M, Dillon, Jasmine A
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 281
container_issue 6
container_start_page 275
container_title Frontiers in ecology and the environment
container_volume 21
creator McClelland, Shelby C
Haddix, Jill D
Azad, Shefali
Boughton, Elizabeth H
Boughton, Raoul K
Miller, Ryan S
Swain, Hilary M
Dillon, Jasmine A
description Biodiversity impacts are rarely included in systems analyses of livestock production. We piloted two approaches toward quantifying biodiversity impacts, pressure‐state‐response (PSR) and potential species loss (PSL), at a cow–calf operation in Florida for which extensive environmental data were available. Using these approaches, we compared livestock production on two vegetation types, semi‐native pasture (SNP) and improved pasture (IMP), and we found fewer deleterious effects on biodiversity associated with SNP (characterized by low stocking rates and no fertilizer) than with IMP, as evidenced by a lower PSL and greater biotic integrity under PSR. Both approaches agreed in the direction of the outcome, but we argue that, when possible, they should be applied complementarily to inform both absolute and per‐unit product biodiversity impacts of livestock production. This research demonstrates how to incorporate biodiversity into life‐cycle perspectives of livestock sustainability assessments when data availability varies, supporting the expansion of multi‐metric, holistic evaluations that are absent from most livestock system analyses.
doi_str_mv 10.1002/fee.2636
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2847076307</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2847076307</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3276-8879b43b35ea2679ac7c1e3505bc10fb0d8fb1daf298d6c7d3584dc3aa408d463</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp10M1Kw0AQB_BFFKxV8BECXryk7kf2I0cpbRUqIuh52eyHbE2buJsoufkIPqNP4sbq0dMMw4-Z4Q_AOYIzBCG-ctbOMCPsAEwQLWBeElge_vW4pMfgJMZNkgRTMgF3D73add4NfvecVb4x_s2G6Lsh89tW6S5mjcvqNIxdo1-yPo6u9s5-fXzqQdc2a5Nvre5GcwqOnKqjPfutU_C0XDzOb_L1_ep2fr3ONcGc5ULwsipIRahVmPFSaa6RJRTSSiPoKmiEq5BRDpfCMM0NoaIwmihVQGEKRqbgYr-3Dc1rn36Tm6YPu3RSYlFwyBmBPKnLvdKhiTFYJ9vgtyoMEkE5hiVTWHIMK9F8T999bYd_nVwuFj_-G5RqbLQ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2847076307</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Quantifying biodiversity impacts of livestock using life‐cycle perspectives</title><source>Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete</source><creator>McClelland, Shelby C ; Haddix, Jill D ; Azad, Shefali ; Boughton, Elizabeth H ; Boughton, Raoul K ; Miller, Ryan S ; Swain, Hilary M ; Dillon, Jasmine A</creator><creatorcontrib>McClelland, Shelby C ; Haddix, Jill D ; Azad, Shefali ; Boughton, Elizabeth H ; Boughton, Raoul K ; Miller, Ryan S ; Swain, Hilary M ; Dillon, Jasmine A</creatorcontrib><description>Biodiversity impacts are rarely included in systems analyses of livestock production. We piloted two approaches toward quantifying biodiversity impacts, pressure‐state‐response (PSR) and potential species loss (PSL), at a cow–calf operation in Florida for which extensive environmental data were available. Using these approaches, we compared livestock production on two vegetation types, semi‐native pasture (SNP) and improved pasture (IMP), and we found fewer deleterious effects on biodiversity associated with SNP (characterized by low stocking rates and no fertilizer) than with IMP, as evidenced by a lower PSL and greater biotic integrity under PSR. Both approaches agreed in the direction of the outcome, but we argue that, when possible, they should be applied complementarily to inform both absolute and per‐unit product biodiversity impacts of livestock production. This research demonstrates how to incorporate biodiversity into life‐cycle perspectives of livestock sustainability assessments when data availability varies, supporting the expansion of multi‐metric, holistic evaluations that are absent from most livestock system analyses.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1540-9295</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1540-9309</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1002/fee.2636</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Washington: Ecological Society of America</publisher><subject>Availability ; Biodiversity ; Fertilizers ; Livestock ; Livestock production ; Pasture ; Stocking rates ; Sustainability</subject><ispartof>Frontiers in ecology and the environment, 2023-08, Vol.21 (6), p.275-281</ispartof><rights>2023 The Authors. published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of The Ecological Society of America.</rights><rights>Copyright Ecological Society of America Aug 2023</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3276-8879b43b35ea2679ac7c1e3505bc10fb0d8fb1daf298d6c7d3584dc3aa408d463</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3276-8879b43b35ea2679ac7c1e3505bc10fb0d8fb1daf298d6c7d3584dc3aa408d463</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002%2Ffee.2636$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002%2Ffee.2636$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,1411,27901,27902,45550,45551</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>McClelland, Shelby C</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Haddix, Jill D</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Azad, Shefali</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Boughton, Elizabeth H</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Boughton, Raoul K</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Miller, Ryan S</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Swain, Hilary M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dillon, Jasmine A</creatorcontrib><title>Quantifying biodiversity impacts of livestock using life‐cycle perspectives</title><title>Frontiers in ecology and the environment</title><description>Biodiversity impacts are rarely included in systems analyses of livestock production. We piloted two approaches toward quantifying biodiversity impacts, pressure‐state‐response (PSR) and potential species loss (PSL), at a cow–calf operation in Florida for which extensive environmental data were available. Using these approaches, we compared livestock production on two vegetation types, semi‐native pasture (SNP) and improved pasture (IMP), and we found fewer deleterious effects on biodiversity associated with SNP (characterized by low stocking rates and no fertilizer) than with IMP, as evidenced by a lower PSL and greater biotic integrity under PSR. Both approaches agreed in the direction of the outcome, but we argue that, when possible, they should be applied complementarily to inform both absolute and per‐unit product biodiversity impacts of livestock production. This research demonstrates how to incorporate biodiversity into life‐cycle perspectives of livestock sustainability assessments when data availability varies, supporting the expansion of multi‐metric, holistic evaluations that are absent from most livestock system analyses.</description><subject>Availability</subject><subject>Biodiversity</subject><subject>Fertilizers</subject><subject>Livestock</subject><subject>Livestock production</subject><subject>Pasture</subject><subject>Stocking rates</subject><subject>Sustainability</subject><issn>1540-9295</issn><issn>1540-9309</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2023</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>24P</sourceid><recordid>eNp10M1Kw0AQB_BFFKxV8BECXryk7kf2I0cpbRUqIuh52eyHbE2buJsoufkIPqNP4sbq0dMMw4-Z4Q_AOYIzBCG-ctbOMCPsAEwQLWBeElge_vW4pMfgJMZNkgRTMgF3D73add4NfvecVb4x_s2G6Lsh89tW6S5mjcvqNIxdo1-yPo6u9s5-fXzqQdc2a5Nvre5GcwqOnKqjPfutU_C0XDzOb_L1_ep2fr3ONcGc5ULwsipIRahVmPFSaa6RJRTSSiPoKmiEq5BRDpfCMM0NoaIwmihVQGEKRqbgYr-3Dc1rn36Tm6YPu3RSYlFwyBmBPKnLvdKhiTFYJ9vgtyoMEkE5hiVTWHIMK9F8T999bYd_nVwuFj_-G5RqbLQ</recordid><startdate>202308</startdate><enddate>202308</enddate><creator>McClelland, Shelby C</creator><creator>Haddix, Jill D</creator><creator>Azad, Shefali</creator><creator>Boughton, Elizabeth H</creator><creator>Boughton, Raoul K</creator><creator>Miller, Ryan S</creator><creator>Swain, Hilary M</creator><creator>Dillon, Jasmine A</creator><general>Ecological Society of America</general><scope>24P</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7SN</scope><scope>7ST</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>SOI</scope></search><sort><creationdate>202308</creationdate><title>Quantifying biodiversity impacts of livestock using life‐cycle perspectives</title><author>McClelland, Shelby C ; Haddix, Jill D ; Azad, Shefali ; Boughton, Elizabeth H ; Boughton, Raoul K ; Miller, Ryan S ; Swain, Hilary M ; Dillon, Jasmine A</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3276-8879b43b35ea2679ac7c1e3505bc10fb0d8fb1daf298d6c7d3584dc3aa408d463</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2023</creationdate><topic>Availability</topic><topic>Biodiversity</topic><topic>Fertilizers</topic><topic>Livestock</topic><topic>Livestock production</topic><topic>Pasture</topic><topic>Stocking rates</topic><topic>Sustainability</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>McClelland, Shelby C</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Haddix, Jill D</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Azad, Shefali</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Boughton, Elizabeth H</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Boughton, Raoul K</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Miller, Ryan S</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Swain, Hilary M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dillon, Jasmine A</creatorcontrib><collection>Wiley Online Library Open Access</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Ecology Abstracts</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><jtitle>Frontiers in ecology and the environment</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>McClelland, Shelby C</au><au>Haddix, Jill D</au><au>Azad, Shefali</au><au>Boughton, Elizabeth H</au><au>Boughton, Raoul K</au><au>Miller, Ryan S</au><au>Swain, Hilary M</au><au>Dillon, Jasmine A</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Quantifying biodiversity impacts of livestock using life‐cycle perspectives</atitle><jtitle>Frontiers in ecology and the environment</jtitle><date>2023-08</date><risdate>2023</risdate><volume>21</volume><issue>6</issue><spage>275</spage><epage>281</epage><pages>275-281</pages><issn>1540-9295</issn><eissn>1540-9309</eissn><abstract>Biodiversity impacts are rarely included in systems analyses of livestock production. We piloted two approaches toward quantifying biodiversity impacts, pressure‐state‐response (PSR) and potential species loss (PSL), at a cow–calf operation in Florida for which extensive environmental data were available. Using these approaches, we compared livestock production on two vegetation types, semi‐native pasture (SNP) and improved pasture (IMP), and we found fewer deleterious effects on biodiversity associated with SNP (characterized by low stocking rates and no fertilizer) than with IMP, as evidenced by a lower PSL and greater biotic integrity under PSR. Both approaches agreed in the direction of the outcome, but we argue that, when possible, they should be applied complementarily to inform both absolute and per‐unit product biodiversity impacts of livestock production. This research demonstrates how to incorporate biodiversity into life‐cycle perspectives of livestock sustainability assessments when data availability varies, supporting the expansion of multi‐metric, holistic evaluations that are absent from most livestock system analyses.</abstract><cop>Washington</cop><pub>Ecological Society of America</pub><doi>10.1002/fee.2636</doi><tpages>7</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1540-9295
ispartof Frontiers in ecology and the environment, 2023-08, Vol.21 (6), p.275-281
issn 1540-9295
1540-9309
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_journals_2847076307
source Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete
subjects Availability
Biodiversity
Fertilizers
Livestock
Livestock production
Pasture
Stocking rates
Sustainability
title Quantifying biodiversity impacts of livestock using life‐cycle perspectives
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-12T18%3A44%3A19IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Quantifying%20biodiversity%20impacts%20of%20livestock%20using%20life%E2%80%90cycle%20perspectives&rft.jtitle=Frontiers%20in%20ecology%20and%20the%20environment&rft.au=McClelland,%20Shelby%20C&rft.date=2023-08&rft.volume=21&rft.issue=6&rft.spage=275&rft.epage=281&rft.pages=275-281&rft.issn=1540-9295&rft.eissn=1540-9309&rft_id=info:doi/10.1002/fee.2636&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2847076307%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2847076307&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true