Submitted Successfully!
To reward your contribution, here is a gift for you: A free trial for our video production service.
Thank you for your contribution! You can also upload a video entry or images related to this topic.
Version Summary Created by Modification Content Size Created at Operation
1
Yane Freitas Silva
 -- 1620 2022-03-30 17:23:49 |
2 format is correct
Yvaine Wei
 -7 word(s) 1613 2022-03-31 06:06:56 |

Video Upload Options

We provide professional Video Production Services to translate complex research into visually appealing presentations. Would you like to try it?
No, upload directly Yes

Confirm

Are you sure to Delete?
Yes No
Cite
If you have any further questions, please contact Encyclopedia Editorial Office.
Silva, Y.; Vasconcelos Valadares, R.; Dias, H.; Cuadra, S.; , .; Lamparelli, R.; Moro, E.; Battisti, R.; Graziano Magalhães, P.; Figueiredo, G. Intense Pasture Management in Brazil by DayCent Model. Encyclopedia. Available online: https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/21182 (accessed on 26 December 2024).
Silva Y, Vasconcelos Valadares R, Dias H, Cuadra S,  , Lamparelli R, et al. Intense Pasture Management in Brazil by DayCent Model. Encyclopedia. Available at: https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/21182. Accessed December 26, 2024.
Silva, Yane, Rafael Vasconcelos Valadares, Henrique Dias, Santiago Cuadra,  , Rubens Lamparelli, Edemar Moro, Rafael Battisti, Paulo Graziano Magalhães, Gleyce Figueiredo. "Intense Pasture Management in Brazil by DayCent Model" Encyclopedia, https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/21182 (accessed December 26, 2024).
Silva, Y., Vasconcelos Valadares, R., Dias, H., Cuadra, S., , ., Lamparelli, R., Moro, E., Battisti, R., Graziano Magalhães, P., & Figueiredo, G. (2022, March 30). Intense Pasture Management in Brazil by DayCent Model. In Encyclopedia. https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/21182
Silva, Yane, et al. "Intense Pasture Management in Brazil by DayCent Model." Encyclopedia. Web. 30 March, 2022.
Intense Pasture Management in Brazil by DayCent Model
Edit
This entry is adapted from the peer-reviewed paper 10.3390/su14063517

Process-based models (PBM) are important tools for understanding the benefits of Integrated Crop-Livestock Systems (ICLS), such as increasing land productivity and improving environmental conditions. PBM can provide insights into the contribution of agricultural production to climate change and help identify potential greenhouse gas (GHG) mitigation and carbon sequestration options. Rehabilitation of degraded lands is a key strategy for achieving food security goals and can reduce the need for new agricultural land.

mixed-pasture soybean sandy soil

1. Introduction

Integrated Crop-Livestock Systems (ICLS) are defined by the diversification, rotation, consortium, and succession of agriculture and livestock inside the same area, allowing benefits between these two activities and the economic use of soil over the year [1]. The adoption of ICLS comprises 10–15 million ha (5% of total) of the area under agriculture and livestock in Brazil [2], which represents a significant opportunity to improve the sustainability of agricultural systems [3], especially in degraded areas and over sandy soils.
With the integration of soybean and mixed-pasture, ICLS impacts plant growth as the nitrogen (N) supplied by legumes (for instance, soybean) is absorbed more efficiently than that applied through mineral fertilization, stimulating plant growth and biomass quality, or both, through increased N uptake [4]. Lower dry matter production in grass monoculture pastures tends to decrease soil moisture, organic carbon (C), and total N compared to ICLS [5].
In this context, the applications of process-based ecosystem models are fundamental to evaluate and improve the level of understanding of these systems and predict processes such as plant growth, C dynamics, and carbon dioxide (CO2) flux. The advantages of using process-based ecosystem models are the possibility of extrapolation of the simulations from an experimental site to different sites and climate conditions [6], making it possible to have a consistent evaluation of other production systems [7][8][9][10].
DayCent is an ecosystem process-based model, and when properly validated by field observations is a powerful tool to investigate the effects of management practices on greenhouse gases (GHG) emissions or soil organic carbon (SOC) changes in different ecosystems, soil types, and climates [11]. Frolking et al. [12] demonstrated the ability of the DayCent model [13][14] to simulate soil water content, mineral N levels, nitrous oxide (N2O), and CO2 emissions for various systems, including a native shortgrass steppe in Colorado, a ryegrass pasture in Scotland, and perennially cropped soils in Germany.
In tropical and subtropical agriculture, simulations aiming to test the performance of DayCent in predicting SOC, biomass production, crop yield, and N2O fluxes were also performed [15]. They evaluated the model for agroecosystems under succession/rotational managements with crops such as wheat, soybean, sorghum, oat, and maize considering different management and climate scenarios in southern Brazil, and the predictive accuracy varied from poor (plant growth) to adequate (SOC and N2O fluxes) [15]. Damian et al. [16] evaluated the effects of converting poorly managed pastures to more intensive and diversified pasture management systems in Brazil, such as ICLS, on long-term soil C stocks and microbial biomass C increased with the conversion of pastures to ICLS using the DayCent model.
However, due to the diversity and complexity of ICLS, model predictions need to be adjusted and validated considering the region and system adopted. For instance, complex agroecosystem designs such as ICLS generally present the different combinations of plant species, directly impacting the soil C fluxes [17]. Additionally, after implementation, ICLS often have higher stocking rates and differences in animal trampling and excretion patterns [18] and the additional inputs with fertilization and biological N fixation [17][19]. Furthermore, the CO2 assimilated by the photosynthetic process is the basis of crop production [20]. Therefore, it is necessary to consider that the ICLS is the system that fixes the most CO2, and emits the least GHG, throughout the year. This information is essential for the current global scenario, mainly due to carbon trading, an environmental management tool for controlling carbon emissions [21].

2. Equilibrium

The replacement of natural ecosystems by agroecosystems with crops usually provides the decline in soil C content due to the reduction in the microbial C and the increase of SOM decomposition [22]. With the removal of the native vegetation and the beginning of the extensive pasture, the C stocks dropped in the soil. This may have been caused by the soil preparation (disturbing), breaking the aggregates offering protection to SOM and stimulating the biological activity [23].
In tropical ecosystems, the losses of C observed after the land clearing and cultivation of soils are more accelerated than in temperate regions [24]. Thus, the decrease of nutrients in an extensive pasture in native vegetation is due to soil revolving, even if minimal, since there is a negative effect on SOM [25][26][27]. Climatic conditions, especially temperature, also affect the decomposition rate of plant residues and the stabilization of SOM [28]. The occurrence of higher temperatures tends to accelerate the decomposition rate of SOM [29]. One alternative to increase the total C stock in the agriculture systems is by applying sustainable management practices and adopting crop systems that increase primary production and reduce C removal and soil degradation. Therefore, improved management practices affect the factors that regulate the synthesis and decomposition of SOM, contributing to the sustainable productivity of the ecosystem [30].

3. Calibrated Model

The DayCent model adequately simulated aboveground biomass, mainly for the beginning of the soybean crop and the mixed-pasture growth phases, periods that had no direct grazing effect on the simulations; even though it was an area with intensive pasture management, there were periods just after the mixed-pasture implementation where the animals were not present in some paddocks. All nine paddocks had the same altered parameters, and the behavior throughout the experiment was similar. Thus, minor model failures in predicting aboveground biomass did not influence each paddock’s overall behavior. Due to the study area being a commercial farm, minor problems with pests, diseases, and weeds may also have influenced the biomass production to some extent, all of which are not currently captured by the DayCent model unless forcing the model to reproduce the reductions of potential plant growth.
Del Grosso et al. [31] reported that most of the errors in DayCent model outputs were associated with imperfections in model algorithms and parameters instead of uncertainty in model drivers. Therefore, efforts to improve the model should compare model outputs using numerous observations for various C and N components from field experiments to identify weaknesses and rectify model shortcomings [32].
In ICLS, there is a differentiated contribution of plant residues regarding conventional grain production systems, both in the surface and soil subsurface [33]. In intensive ICLS, the often succession of crop and pasture planting contributes to the root growth of both plants and potentially increases the SOM in the deeper soil layers [34]. SOM can be investigated by detailing its behavior over time in the future. Not only the inclusion of crops in pasture areas can contribute to improving the system, but also planting pastures in crop areas can increase crop yield by improving edaphic properties, the presence of straw and pasture roots, increasing C levels and significantly ameliorating the conditions of aeration and water infiltration capacity in the soil [35]. In future, people need to investigate the GHG mitigation which ICLS can potentially offer, which farmers can use to understand their carbon footprint, encouraging management strategies to improve agricultural sustainability [36].

4. Validated Model

In the validation stage, the DayCent model performed well in representing the ICLS, with the model results reflecting the dynamic phases of such a system (e.g., soybean replaced by mixed-pasture with a rotational and intensive grazing system) and management operations (e.g., sowing, harvesting, mowing, fertilization, grazing events). Even though three different soybean varieties were sowing in the area in both seasons, the model presented consistent aboveground biomass and yield simulation results. Perhaps the difference between the rainfall distribution and the difference in the average air temperature among cycles have not influenced the differentiation of aboveground biomass production.
The VWC and its dynamics are of utmost importance since it affects plant growth, SOM mineralization, and, therefore, the C fluxes in the model. Moreover, in crops such as soybean, water stress impacts not only direct the plant growth but also triggers morpho-physiological responses mainly in the reproductive phase, demonstrated by premature senescence of leaves and flowers, death of pods and, consequently, grain yield reduction [37]. 
DayCent has received little assessment of CO2 predicted in tropical and ICLS conditions. This model was previously tested in Brazil in its capabilities to predict SOC changes [38], crop yield for common succession/rotation systems, N2O [15], and flows of CH4 [39], but not yet for CO2 fluxes, despite its importance in accurately simulating the conditions of a more intensive and complex system. DayCent overestimates the GHG over different environments [11][39][40].
A long-term ICLS implemented on sandy soil in a farm of western São Paulo state (SP) in Brazil, using a scheme of two years of soybean in the rainy season followed by pasture (dry season) and two years of only pasture, showed soybean yields ranging from 2.9 to 4.3 Mg ha−1, with the lowest values obtained under severe dry spells conditions [40]. These were considerably higher soybean yields than other farms in the same region in the conventional system (average of 1.8 Mg ha−1) [41], indicating that the increment in agricultural outputs may benefit from ICLSs.

5. Conclusions

With the simulation of two pastures grown simultaneously, it was possible to fill in a gap that had not yet been addressed with DayCent, especially when using a system as complex and intense as the ICLS. By using the aboveground biomass data to calibrate DayCent parameters, it was demonstrated that the model could be simplified according to the amount of data available, and it was possible to simulate plant growth, grain biomass, soil VWC, total SOC and CO2 fluxes, considering spatio-temporal evaluation and precision and accuracy metrics. Consistent simulations of grain biomass and plant growth data for other ICLSs were also found. 

References

  1. Moraes, A.; Carvalho, P.C.F.; Anghinoni, I.; Lustosa, S.B.C.; Costa, S.E.V.G.A.; Kunrath, T.R. Integrated crop—Livestock systems in the Brazilian subtropics. Eur. J. Agron. 2014, 57, 4–9.
  2. Embrapa. ILPF em Número, 12. 2016. Available online: https://ainfo.cnptia.embrapa.br/digital/bitstream/item/158636/1/2016-cpamt-ilpf-em-numeros.pdf (accessed on 1 August 2021). (In Portuguese).
  3. Bonaudo, T.; Bendahan, A.B.; Sabatier, R.; Ryschawy, J.; Bellon, S.; Leger, F.; Magda, D.; Tichit, M. Agroecological principles for the redesign of integrated crop-livestock systems. Eur. J. Agron. 2014, 57, 43–51.
  4. Wruck, F.J.; Behling, M.; Antonio, D.B.A. Sistemas Integrados em Mato Grosso e Goiás. In Sistemas Agroflorestais: A Agropecuária Sustentável, 1st ed.; Alves, F.V., Laura, V.A., Almeida, R.G., Eds.; Embrapa: Brasilia, Brazil, 2015; pp. 169–194. (In Portuguese)
  5. Silva, L.S.; Laroca, J.V.S.; Coelho, A.P.; Gonçalves, E.C.; Gomes, R.P.; Pacheco, L.P.; Carvalho, P.C.F.; Pires, G.C.; Oliveira, R.L.; Souza, J.M.A.; et al. Does grass-legume intercropping change soil quality and grain yield in integrated crop-livestock systems? Appl. Soil Ecol. 2022, 170, 104257.
  6. Jones, J.W.; Hoogenboom, G.; Porter, C.H.; Boote, K.J.; Batchelor, W.D.; Hunt, L.A.; Wilkens, P.W.; Singh, U.; Gijsman, A.J.; Ritchie, J.T. The DSSAT cropping system model. Eur. J. Agron. 2003, 18, 3–4.
  7. Zhang, Y.; Hansen, N.; Trout, T.; Nielsen, D.; Paustian, K. Modeling Deficit Irrigation of Maize with the DayCent Model. Agron. J. 2018, 110, 1754–1764.
  8. Nehbandani, A.; Soltani, A.; Hajjarpoor, A.; Dadrasi, A.; Nourbakhsh, F. Comprehensive yield gap analysis and optimizing agronomy practices of soybean in Iran. J. Agric. Sci. 2020, 158, 739–747.
  9. Zhang, Y.; Gurung, R.; Marx, E.; Williams, S.; Ogle, S.M.; Paustian, K. DayCent model predictions of NPP and grain yields for agricultural lands in the contiguous U.S. J. Geophys. Res. Biogeosci. 2020, 125, e2020JG005750.
  10. Lemma, B.; Williams, S.; Paustian, K. Long term soil carbon sequestration potential of smallholder croplands in southern Ethiopia with Daycent model. J. Environ. Manag. 2021, 294, 112893.
  11. Necpálová, M.; Anex, R.P.; Fienen, M.N.; Del Grosso, S.J.; Castellano, M.J.; Sawyer, J.E.; Iqbal, J.; Pantoja, J.L.; Barker, D.W. Understanding the Daycent model: Calibration, sensitivity, and identifiability through inverse modeling. Environ. Model. Softw. 2015, 66, 110–130.
  12. Frolking, S.E.; Moiser, A.R.; Ojima, D.S.; Li, C.; Parton, W.J.; Potter, C.S.; Priesack, E.; Stenger, R.; Haberbosch, C.; Dorsch, P. Comparison of N2O Emissions from Soils at Three Temperate Agricultural Sites: Simulations of year-round measurements by four models. Nutr. Cycl. Agroecosyst. 1998, 52, 77–105.
  13. Del Grosso, S.J.; Mosier, A.R.; Parton, W.J.; Ojima, D.S. Daycent model analysis of past and contemporary soil N2O and net greenhouse gas flux for major crops in the USA. Soil Tillage Res. 2005, 83, 9–24.
  14. Parton, W.J.; Hartman, M.; Ojima, D.; Schimel, D. Daycent description and testing. Glob. Planet. Chang. 1998, 19, 35–48.
  15. Weiler, D.A.; Tornquist, C.G.; Parton, W.; Santos, H.P.; Santi, A.; Bayer, C. Crop Biomass, Soil Carbon, and Nitrous Oxide as Affected by Management and Climate: A Daycent Application in Brazil. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 2017, 81, 945–955.
  16. Damian, J.M.; Matos, E.S.; Pedreira, B.C.; Carvalho, P.C.F.; Premazzi, L.M.; Williams, S.; Paustian, K.; Cerri, C.E.P. Predicting soil C changes after pasture intensification and diversification in Brazil. Catena 2021, 202, 105238.
  17. Laroca, J.V.S.; Souza, J.M.A.; Pires, G.C.; Pires, G.J.C.; Pacheco, L.P.; Silva, F.D.; Wruck, F.J.; Carneiro, M.A.C.; Silva, L.S.; Souza, E.D. Soil quality and soybean productivity in crop-livestock integrated system in no-tillage. Pesqui. Agropecu. Bras. 2018, 53, 1248–1258.
  18. FAO. Measuring and Modelling Soil Carbon Stocks and Stock Changes in Livestock Production Systems. 2018. Available online: http://www.fao.org/3/I9693EN/i9693en.pdf (accessed on 15 September 2021).
  19. Fitton, N.; Bindi, M.; Brilli, L.; Cichota, R.; Dibari, C.; Fuchs, K.; Huguenin-elie, O.; Klumpp, K.; Lieffering, M.; Lüscher, A.; et al. Modelling biological N fixation and grass-legume dynamics with process-based biogeochemical models of varying complexity. Eur. J. Agron. 2019, 106, 58–66.
  20. Baslam, M.; Mitsui, T.; Hodges, M.; Priesack, E.; Herritt, M.T.; Aranjuelo, I.; Sanz-Sáez, Á. Photosynthesis in a changing global climate: Scaling up and scaling down in crops. Front. Plant Sci. 2020, 11, 882.
  21. Keohane, N.; Petsonk, A.; Hanafi, A. Toward a club of carbon markets. Clim. Chang. 2015, 144, 81–95.
  22. Ferreira, A.O.; Moraes Sá, J.C.; Harms, M.G.; Miara, S.; Briedis, C.; Netto, C.Q.; Santos, J.B.; Canalli, L.B. Carbon balance and crop residue management in dynamic equilibrium under a no-till system in campos gerais. Rev. Bras. Ciência Solo 2012, 36, 1583–1590.
  23. Mazurana, M.; Fink, J.R.; Camargo, E.; Schmitt, C.; Andreazza, R.; Camargo, F.A.O. Estoque de carbono e atividade microbiana em sistema de plantio direto consolidado no Sul do Brasil. Rev. Ciências Agrárias 2013, 36, 288–296. (In Portuguese)
  24. Rangel, O.J.P.; Silva, C.A.; Guimarães, P.T.G.; Melo, L.C.A.; Oliveira Junior, A.C. Carbono orgânico e nitrogênio total do solo e suas relações com os espaçamentos de plantio de cafeeiro. Rev. Bras. Ciência Solo 2008, 32, 2051–2059. (In Portuguese)
  25. Bortolon, E.S.O.; Mielniczuk, J.; Tornquist, C.G.; Lopes, F.; Bergamaschi, H. Validation of the Century model to estimate the impact of agriculture on soil organic carbon in Southern Brazil. Geoderma 2011, 167, 156–166.
  26. Sant-Anna, S.A.C.; Jantalia, C.P.; Vilela, J.M.S.L.; Marchão, R.L.; Alves, B.J.R.; Urquiaga, S.; Boddey, R.M. Changes in soil organic carbon during 22 years of pastures, cropping or integrated crop/livestock systems in the Brazilian Cerrado. Nutr. Cycl. Agroecosyst. 2016, 180, 101–120.
  27. Sarker, J.R.; Singh, B.P.; Warwick, J.; Dougherty, W.J.; Fang, Y.; Badgery, W.; Hoyle, F.C.; Dalal, R.C.; Cowie, A.L. Impact of agricultural management practices on the nutrient supply potential of soil organic matter under long-term farming systems. Soil Tillage Res. 2018, 175, 71–81.
  28. Parton, W.J.; Schimel, D.S.; Cole, C.V.; Ojima, D.S. Analysis of factors controlling soil organic levels of grasslands in the Great Plains. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 1987, 51, 1173–1179.
  29. Moinet, G.Y.K.; Moinet, M.; Hunt, J.E.; Rumpel, C.; Chabbi, A.; Millard, P. Temperature sensitivity of decomposition decreases with increasing soil organic matter stability. Sci. Total Environ. 2020, 704, 135460.
  30. Tiecher, T. Manejo e Conservação do solo e da água em Pequenas Propriedades Rurais No sul do Brasil: Práticas Alternativas de Manejo Visando a Conservação do solo e da Água; UFRGS: Porto Alegre, Brazil, 2016; 186p. (In Portuguese)
  31. Del Grosso, S.J.; Parton, W.J.; Adler, P.R.; Davis, S.C.; Keough, C.; Marx, E. Daycent model simulations for estimating soil carbon dynamics and greenhouse gas fluxes from agricultural production systems. In Managing Agricultural Greenhouse Gases; Elsevier Inc.: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2012; pp. 241–250.
  32. Jarecki, M.; Kariyapperuma, K.; Deen, B.; Graham, J.; Bazrgar, A.B.; Vijayakumar, S.; Thimmanagari, M.; Gordon, A.; Voroney, P.; Thevathasan, N. The potential of Switchgrass and Miscanthus to Enhance Soil Organic Carbon Sequestration—Predicted by Daycent Model. Land 2020, 9, 509.
  33. Salton, J.C.; Mielniczuk, J.; Bayer, C.; Fabrício, A.C.; Macedo, M.C.M.; Broch, D.L. Teor e dinâmica do carbono no solo em sistemas de integração lavoura-pecuária. Pesqui. Agropecu. Bras. 2011, 46, 1349–1356. (In Portuguese)
  34. Martin, G.; Durand, J.L.; Duru, M.; Gastal, F.; Julier, B.; Litrico, I.; Louarn, G.; Médiène, S.; Moreau, D.; Valentin-Morison, M.; et al. Role of ley pastures in tomorrow’s cropping systems. A review. Agron. Sustain. Dev. 2020, 40, 17.
  35. Priori, S.; Pellegrini, S.; Vignozzi, N.; Costantini, E.A.C. Soil Physical-Hydrological Degradation in the Root-Zone of Tree Crops: Problems and Solutions. Agronomy 2021, 11, 68.
  36. Wiesner, S.; Duff, A.J.; Desai, A.R.; Panke-Buisse, K. Increasing Dairy Sustainability with Integrated Crop-Livestock Farming. Sustainability 2020, 12, 765.
  37. Bianco, L.F.; Trevizan, F.H.; Nicolino Filho, C.J.; Oliveira, T.B.M.; Neiverth, W.; Crusiol, L.G.T.; Rio, A.; Sibaldelli, R.N.R.; Carvalho, J.F.C.; Ferreira, L.C.; et al. Algumas características das cultivares de soja Embrapa 48 e BR 16 em diferentes regimes hídricos. In VIII Jornada Acadêmica da Embrapa Soja; Embrapa Soja, Documentos, 339; Resumos Expandidos: Londrina, Brazil, 2013; Volume 8, pp. 137–141. (In Portuguese)
  38. Oliveira, D.M.S.; Williams, S.; Cerri, C.E.P.; Paustian, K. Predicting soil C changes over sugarcane expansion in Brazil using the Daycent model. GCB Bioenergy 2017, 9, 1436–1446.
  39. Weiler, D.A.; Tornquist, C.G.; Szchomack, T.; Ogle, S.M.; Carlos, F.S.; Bayer, C. Daycent simulation of methane emissions, grain yield, and soil organic carbon in a subtropical paddy rice system. Rev. Bras. Cienc. Solo 2018, 42, 1–12.
  40. Del Grosso, S.J.; Parton, W.J.; Ojima, D.S.; Keough, C.A.; Riley, T.H.; Mosier, A.R. Daycent simulated effects of land use and climate on county level N loss vectors in the USA. Nitrogen Environ. 2008, 8, 571–595.
  41. Cordeiro, L.A.M.; Kluthcouski, J.; Silva, J.R.; Rojas, D.C.; Omote, H.S.G.; Moro, E.; Silva, P.C.G.; Tiritan, C.S.; Longen, A. Integração Lavoura-Pecuária em Solos Arenosos: Estudo de caso da Fazenda Campina No Oeste Paulista; Embrapa Cerrados-Documentos: Planaltina, Brazil, 2020. (In Portuguese)
More
© Text is available under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy.
Upload a video for this entry
Information
Subjects: Green & Sustainable Science & Technology
Contributors MDPI registered users' name will be linked to their SciProfiles pages. To register with us, please refer to https://encyclopedia.pub/register :
Yane Silva
,
Rafael Vasconcelos Valadares
,
Henrique Dias
,
Santiago Cuadra
,
,
Rubens Lamparelli
,
Edemar Moro
,
Rafael Battisti
,
Paulo Graziano Magalhães
,
Gleyce Figueiredo
View Times: 591
Entry Collection: Environmental Sciences
Revisions: 2 times (View History)
Update Date: 31 Mar 2022
Table of Contents
    1000/1000
    Hot Most Recent
    Video Production Service
    Feedback