挪威冬季舍饲系统和绵羊生产成本

IF 1.6 3区 农林科学 Q2 AGRICULTURE, DAIRY & ANIMAL SCIENCE Small Ruminant Research Pub Date : 2024-02-16 DOI:10.1016/j.smallrumres.2024.107231
Anne Strøm Prestvik , Leif Jarle Asheim , Ola Flaten
{"title":"挪威冬季舍饲系统和绵羊生产成本","authors":"Anne Strøm Prestvik ,&nbsp;Leif Jarle Asheim ,&nbsp;Ola Flaten","doi":"10.1016/j.smallrumres.2024.107231","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Housing and indoor feeding of sheep is required throughout the cold season, which can last more than half a year, in Nordic highlands and Alpine regions. This study aimed to examine and evaluate the housing costs, including labour requirements, according to type of sheep housing system and degree of mechanized feeding by investigating systems commonly used in Nordic and Alpine regions. Detailed cost data were obtained from 61 surveyed sheep farmers in Norway with sheep houses built between the years 2008 and 2015. Costs were calculated for a baseline scenario (2021-prices) as well as for five scenarios at low and high discount rates and opportunity cost of labour, and high energy prices. The median (interquartile range) flock size was 150 (100) winter-fed sheep. Houses with slatted floors were more expensive than deep-litter systems. Costs of bedding material and feed waste were however higher, and the net value of the manure were lower in houses with deep-litter systems. At the baseline assumptions, overall net housing costs per sheep was not statistically different among the main housing types studied. Multiple regression analyses showed that net housing costs per sheep were lower in larger flocks and for centrally located farms (control variables). Undertaking daily chores, such as feeding of roughages twice a day rather than once, resulted in significantly higher net housing costs. Mechanized feeding of roughages, and even more so for concentrates, were not economically justified since labour savings were not sufficient to pay for the additional capital costs. A round bale chopper lowered net housing costs, significantly at a high labour cost. None of the scenarios found slatted floors to be significantly more expensive than deep-litter systems. High costs of labour and capital favoured deep-litter systems, while slatted floor systems were more advantageous at rising prices of energy that resulted in increased values of organic manures and costs of feed wastes and bedding materials. The study was based on a decade old data from common Norwegian sheep house variants. Farmers that consider constructing a new sheep house today, still must compare these variants as their main alternatives. We encourage other researchers to include effects of housing systems and mechanized feeding on animal performance, health, and welfare. Moreover, future studies should preferably also be undertaken in other environmental or socio-economic settings to produce more general results.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":21758,"journal":{"name":"Small Ruminant Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921448824000373/pdfft?md5=0470869d37630e688e0c98aefc41e620&pid=1-s2.0-S0921448824000373-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Winter housing systems and costs of sheep production in Norway\",\"authors\":\"Anne Strøm Prestvik ,&nbsp;Leif Jarle Asheim ,&nbsp;Ola Flaten\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.smallrumres.2024.107231\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Housing and indoor feeding of sheep is required throughout the cold season, which can last more than half a year, in Nordic highlands and Alpine regions. This study aimed to examine and evaluate the housing costs, including labour requirements, according to type of sheep housing system and degree of mechanized feeding by investigating systems commonly used in Nordic and Alpine regions. Detailed cost data were obtained from 61 surveyed sheep farmers in Norway with sheep houses built between the years 2008 and 2015. Costs were calculated for a baseline scenario (2021-prices) as well as for five scenarios at low and high discount rates and opportunity cost of labour, and high energy prices. The median (interquartile range) flock size was 150 (100) winter-fed sheep. Houses with slatted floors were more expensive than deep-litter systems. Costs of bedding material and feed waste were however higher, and the net value of the manure were lower in houses with deep-litter systems. At the baseline assumptions, overall net housing costs per sheep was not statistically different among the main housing types studied. Multiple regression analyses showed that net housing costs per sheep were lower in larger flocks and for centrally located farms (control variables). Undertaking daily chores, such as feeding of roughages twice a day rather than once, resulted in significantly higher net housing costs. Mechanized feeding of roughages, and even more so for concentrates, were not economically justified since labour savings were not sufficient to pay for the additional capital costs. A round bale chopper lowered net housing costs, significantly at a high labour cost. None of the scenarios found slatted floors to be significantly more expensive than deep-litter systems. High costs of labour and capital favoured deep-litter systems, while slatted floor systems were more advantageous at rising prices of energy that resulted in increased values of organic manures and costs of feed wastes and bedding materials. The study was based on a decade old data from common Norwegian sheep house variants. Farmers that consider constructing a new sheep house today, still must compare these variants as their main alternatives. We encourage other researchers to include effects of housing systems and mechanized feeding on animal performance, health, and welfare. Moreover, future studies should preferably also be undertaken in other environmental or socio-economic settings to produce more general results.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":21758,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Small Ruminant Research\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-02-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921448824000373/pdfft?md5=0470869d37630e688e0c98aefc41e620&pid=1-s2.0-S0921448824000373-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Small Ruminant Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"97\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921448824000373\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"农林科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"AGRICULTURE, DAIRY & ANIMAL SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Small Ruminant Research","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921448824000373","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"AGRICULTURE, DAIRY & ANIMAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在北欧高原和阿尔卑斯地区,整个寒冷季节都需要对绵羊进行饲养和室内饲喂,时间可能长达半年以上。本研究旨在通过调查北欧和阿尔卑斯地区常用的羊舍系统,根据羊舍系统的类型和机械化饲养程度,研究和评估包括劳动力需求在内的羊舍成本。研究人员从挪威61家接受调查的养羊户那里获得了详细的成本数据,这些养羊户的羊舍建于2008年至2015年之间。计算了基线情景(2021 年价格)以及低贴现率、高贴现率、劳动力机会成本和高能源价格等五种情景下的成本。羊群规模的中位数(四分位数间距)为 150 只(100 只)冬季饲养的绵羊。使用板条地板的羊舍比使用深层粪便系统的羊舍更昂贵。然而,垫料和饲料废料的成本较高,粪便的净价值也低于深层粪便系统。根据基线假设,所研究的主要饲养类型之间每只羊的总体净饲养成本没有统计学差异。多元回归分析表明,规模较大的羊群和位于中心位置的农场(控制变量)每只羊的净饲养成本较低。承担日常杂务(如每天喂两次粗饲料而不是一次)导致净饲养成本显著增加。机械化饲喂粗饲料在经济上并不合理,精饲料更是如此,因为节省的劳动力不足以支付额外的资本成本。圆捆切碎机降低了净饲养成本,但劳动力成本很高。在所有方案中,都没有发现板条地板的成本明显高于深层粪便系统。高昂的劳动力和资本成本有利于深层粪肥系统,而在能源价格不断上涨,导致有机肥价值和饲料废料及垫料成本增加的情况下,板条地板系统更具优势。这项研究以挪威常见羊舍变体的十年前数据为基础。如今,考虑建造新羊舍的农场主仍必须将这些变体作为主要选择进行比较。我们鼓励其他研究人员将饲养系统和机械化饲喂对动物性能、健康和福利的影响纳入研究范围。此外,未来的研究最好还能在其他环境或社会经济背景下进行,以便得出更具普遍性的结果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Winter housing systems and costs of sheep production in Norway

Housing and indoor feeding of sheep is required throughout the cold season, which can last more than half a year, in Nordic highlands and Alpine regions. This study aimed to examine and evaluate the housing costs, including labour requirements, according to type of sheep housing system and degree of mechanized feeding by investigating systems commonly used in Nordic and Alpine regions. Detailed cost data were obtained from 61 surveyed sheep farmers in Norway with sheep houses built between the years 2008 and 2015. Costs were calculated for a baseline scenario (2021-prices) as well as for five scenarios at low and high discount rates and opportunity cost of labour, and high energy prices. The median (interquartile range) flock size was 150 (100) winter-fed sheep. Houses with slatted floors were more expensive than deep-litter systems. Costs of bedding material and feed waste were however higher, and the net value of the manure were lower in houses with deep-litter systems. At the baseline assumptions, overall net housing costs per sheep was not statistically different among the main housing types studied. Multiple regression analyses showed that net housing costs per sheep were lower in larger flocks and for centrally located farms (control variables). Undertaking daily chores, such as feeding of roughages twice a day rather than once, resulted in significantly higher net housing costs. Mechanized feeding of roughages, and even more so for concentrates, were not economically justified since labour savings were not sufficient to pay for the additional capital costs. A round bale chopper lowered net housing costs, significantly at a high labour cost. None of the scenarios found slatted floors to be significantly more expensive than deep-litter systems. High costs of labour and capital favoured deep-litter systems, while slatted floor systems were more advantageous at rising prices of energy that resulted in increased values of organic manures and costs of feed wastes and bedding materials. The study was based on a decade old data from common Norwegian sheep house variants. Farmers that consider constructing a new sheep house today, still must compare these variants as their main alternatives. We encourage other researchers to include effects of housing systems and mechanized feeding on animal performance, health, and welfare. Moreover, future studies should preferably also be undertaken in other environmental or socio-economic settings to produce more general results.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Small Ruminant Research
Small Ruminant Research 农林科学-奶制品与动物科学
CiteScore
3.10
自引率
11.10%
发文量
210
审稿时长
12.5 weeks
期刊介绍: Small Ruminant Research publishes original, basic and applied research articles, technical notes, and review articles on research relating to goats, sheep, deer, the New World camelids llama, alpaca, vicuna and guanaco, and the Old World camels. Topics covered include nutrition, physiology, anatomy, genetics, microbiology, ethology, product technology, socio-economics, management, sustainability and environment, veterinary medicine and husbandry engineering.
期刊最新文献
Investigating the impact of a novel GHRHR gene variant on growth traits in Damascus goats Editorial Board Effect of essential oils, monensin sodium, and calcium malate on in vitro gas production, in vivo nutrient digestibility, and growth performance of finishing lambs Greenhouse gases measurement time reduction in Portable Accumulation Chambers with grazing sheep evaluated morning and afternoon Comparison of methodologies for estimating enteric methane emission factors from sheep in smallholder systems in Africa: A case study from Ethiopia
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1