/
Blog Posts
Data extracted in June 2021
Note to the reader: This general fiche summarises all the environmental and climate impacts of a set of LIVESTOCK HOUSING TECHNIQUES found in a systematic review of 13 synthesis research papers [1]. These papers were selected from an initial number of 606 obtained through a systematic literature search strategy, according to the inclusion criteria reported in section 4.
As each synthesis research paper involves a number of primary research papers ranging from 5 to 172, the assessment of impacts relies on a large number of results obtained mainly in field experiments (carried out in situations close to real farming environment), and sometimes in lab experiments or from model simulations.
1. DESCRIPTION OF THE FARMING PRACTICE
Description |
|
Key descriptors |
|
2. DESCRIPTION OF THE IMPACTS OF THE FARMING PRACTICE ON CLIMATE AND THE ENVIRONMENT
We reviewed the impacts of a livestock system with livestock housing techniques compared to the same system without the corresponding livestock housing technique.
The table below shows the number of synthesis papers reporting positive, negative or no effect, based on the statistical comparison of the intervention and the control. In addition, we include the number of synthesis papers reporting relevant results, but without statistical test of the effects (uncertain). The numbers between parentheses indicate the number of synthesis papers with a quality score of at least 50%. Details on quality criteria can be found in the methodology section of this WIKI.
Out of the 13 synthesis papers selected, 12 reported studies conducted in Europe and 11 have a quality score higher than 50%. Some synthesis papers reported more than one impact.
Impact | Intervention | Control | Positive | Negative | No effect | Uncertain* |
Decrease air pollutant emissions | Biofilters for exhaust air | No biofilters | 1 (1) | 0 | 1 (1) | 1 (0) |
Deep litter | Slatted floor | 1 (1) | 0 | 1 (1) | 0 | |
Deep litter with extra straw addition | Deep litter without extra straw addition | 0 | 0 | 1 (1) | 0 | |
Slatted floor/deep litter | Solid floor | 1 (1) | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
High frequency litter/manure removal | Low frequency litter/manure removal | 0 | 0 | 2 (2) | 1 (0) | |
Mechanical management exhaust air and manure | No mechanical management | 1 (1) | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
In house litter treatment with conditioners, additives or inhibitors | No litter treatment | 4 (4) | 0 | 3 (3) | 0 | |
Decrease GHG emissions | Biofilters for exhaust air | No biofilters | 1 (1) | 0 | 1 (1) | 1 (0) |
Slatted floor | Deep litter | 1 (1) | 1 (1) | 0 | 0 | |
High frequency manure removal | Low frequency manure removal | 1 (1) | 0 | 1 (1) | 1 (0) | |
Increase animal production** | Deep litter with alternative materials | Deep litter with wood shavings | 1 (1) | 1 (1) | 1 (1) | 0 |
Deep litter with straw | Slatted floor | 0 | 0 | 1 (1) | 0 | |
Rubber mats | Slatted floor | 0 | 0 | 1 (1) | 0 | |
Feedlot | Free range | 1 (1) | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
Loose barn | Pasture | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 (1) | |
Supplementary artificial light | No artificial light | 1 (1) | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
In house litter amendment with conditioners, additives or inhibitors | No litter amendment | 1 (1) | 0 | 1 (1) | 0 | |
Modified roofing | Conventional roofing | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 (1) | |
High space allowance | Low space allowance | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 (1) | |
Shade | No shade | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 (1) | |
Evaporative cooling | No evaporative cooling | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 (0) |
* Number of synthesis papers that report relevant results but without statistical test comparison of the intervention and the control.
**Animal production includes results measured as animal production (egg production, duration of egg production), feed conversion ratio, feed intake (feed intake, dry matter intake), fertility, and weight (average daily gain, body weight, carcass weight, final body weight, live weight, weight gain, weight loss at weaning).
3. DESCRIPTION OF THE KEY FACTORS INFLUENCING THE SIZE OF THE EFFECT
Only the factors explicitly studied in the reviewed synthesis papers with a significant effect are reported below. Details regarding the factors can be found in the summaries of the meta-analyses.
Impact | Factors |
Air pollutants emissions | Litter conditioner type (ref 1) |
Animal production | Animal age (ref 2), Litter conditioner type (ref 1), Litter material (ref 5), Intensity of illumination (ref 2), Sex ratio (ref 2) |
4. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW SEARCH STRATEGY
Keywords | TS = ((stable OR bed* OR barn* OR "litter" OR "confinement" OR "outdoor system*" OR "space allowance" OR "space requirement" OR "floor type*" OR "flor characteristic*" OR "feedlot" OR "housing system*" OR "housing environment*" OR "livestock housing" OR "ventilation rate" OR "ventilation" OR "tied housing" OR "loose housing" OR "solid floor*" OR "perforated floor*" OR "litter treatment")) AND TS = (("animal*" OR "ruminant*" OR "small ruminant*" OR "cattle" OR "dairy cattle" OR "beef cattle" OR "sheep" OR "ewe*" OR "lamb*" OR "swine" OR "pig*" OR "porcine*" OR "goat*" OR "rabbit*" OR "poultry" OR "chicken*" OR "broiler*" OR "turkey*" OR "hen*" OR "horse*" OR "mule*")) AND TS = (("meta-analy*" OR "systematic* review*" OR "evidence map" OR "global synthesis" OR "evidence synthesis" OR "research synthesis")) NOT TS = (("human" OR "medicine" OR "children" OR "women" OR "men")) |
Search dates | No time restrictions |
Databases | Web of Science and Scopus, run in June 2021 |
Selection criteria | The main criteria that led to the exclusion of a synthesis paper were when the paper: 1) does not deal with any animal housing technique; 2) does not synthesise pairwise comparisons on the effect of animal housing techniques and control treatments coming from the same experiment; 3) is either a non-systematic review, a non-quantitative systematic review, o a meta-regression without mean effect sizes; 4) is not written in English. Synthesis papers that passed the relevance criteria were subject to critical appraisal carried out on a paper-by-paper basis. The search returned 599 synthesis papers plus other 7 retrieved in the search of other farming practices, potentially relevant for the practice object of our fiche. From the 606 potentially relevant synthesis papers, 545 were excluded after reading the title and abstract, and 47 after reading the full text according to the above-mentioned criteria. Finally, 13 synthesis papers were selected for livestock housing techniques. |
5. LIST OF SYNTHESIS PAPERS INCLUDED IN THE REVIEW
Ref. Num. | Author | Year | Title | Reference | doi |
1 | de Toledo, TDS; Roll, AAP; Rutz, F; Dallmann, HM; Pra, MAD; Leite, FPL; Roll, VFB | 2020 | An assessment of the impacts of litter treatments on the litter quality and broiler performance: A systematic review and meta-analysis | PLOS ONE, 86(5), 1223-1231. | 10.1371/journal.pone.0232853 |
2 | Liu, GJ; Chen, ZF; Zhao, XH; Li, MY; Guo, ZH | 2020 | Meta-analysis: Supplementary artificial light and goose reproduction | ANIMAL REPRODUCTION SCIENCE, 214, 106278. | 10.1016/j.anireprosci.2020.106278 |
3 | Mendes, MFDA; de Oliveira, DH; Cruz, FL; Mendes, MADA; Ribeiro, BPVB; Ferreira, RA | 2020 | Evaporative cooling system for gestating and lactating sows: a systematic review | CIÊNCIA RURAL, 50, e20190830. | 10.1590/0103-8478cr20190830 |
4 | Park, RM; Foster, M; Daigle, CL | 2020 | A scoping review: The impact of housing systems and environmental features on beef cattle welfare | ANIMALS, 10(4), 565. | 10.3390/ani10040565 |
5 | de Toledo, TDS; Pich, CS; Roll, AAP; Pra, MAD; Leite, FL; Xavier, EG; Roll, VFB | 2019 | The effect of litter materials on broiler performance: a systematic review and meta-analysis | BRITISH POULTRY SCIENCE, 236, 88-98. | 10.1080/00071668.2019.1639143 |
6 | Jimenez, LER; Naranjo, A; Hernandez, JCA; Ovalos, JO; Ortega, OC; Ronquillo, MG | 2019 | A meta-analysis on the effect of the feeding type and production system on the carcase quality of lambs | ITALIAN JOURNAL OF ANIMAL SCIENCE, 68, 227-239. | 10.1080/1828051X.2018.1532327 |
7 | Wang, Y; Xue, WT; Zhu, ZP; Yang, JF; Li, XR; Tian, Z; Dong, HM; Zoua, GY | 2019 | Mitigating ammonia emissions from typical broiler and layer manure management - A system analysis | WASTE MANAGEMENT, 9(3), 730-743. | 10.1016/j.wasman.2019.05.019 |
8 | Keane, MP; McGee, M; O’Riordan, EG; Kelly, AK; Earley, B | 2018 | Effect of floor type on performance, lying time and dirt scores of finishing beef cattle: A meta-analysis | LIVESTOCK SCIENCE, 212, 57-60. | 10.1016/j.livsci.2018.03.012 |
9 | Sajeev, EPM; Winiwarter, W; Amon, B | 2018 | Greenhouse gas and ammonia emissions from different stages of liquid manure management chains: Abatement options and emission interactions | JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY, 47, 30-41. | 10.2134/jeq2017.05.0199 |
10 | Ti, CP; Xia, LL; Chang, SX; Yan, XY | 2019 | Potential for mitigating global agricultural ammonia emission: A meta-analysis | ENVIRONMENTAL POLLUTION, 245, 141-148. | 10.1016/j.envpol.2018.10.124 |
11 | Wang, Y; Li, XR; Yang, JF; Tian, Z; Sun, QP; Xue, WT; Dong, HM | 2018 | Mitigating greenhouse gas and ammonia emissions from beef cattle feedlot production: A system meta-analysis | ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, 52, 11232-11242. | 10.1021/acs.est.8b02475 |
12 | Wang, Y; Dong, HM; Zhu, ZP; Gerber, PJ; Xin, HW; Smith, P; Opio, C; Steinfeld, H; Chadwick, D | 2017 | Mitigating greenhouse gas and ammonia emissions from swine manure management: A system analysis | ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, 51, 4503-4511. | 10.1021/acs.est.6b06430 |
13 | Hou, Y; Velthof, GL; Oenema, O | 2015 | Mitigation of ammonia, nitrous oxide and methane emissions from manure management chains: a meta-analysis and integrated assessment | GLOBAL CHANGE BIOLOGY, 21, 1293–1312. | 10.1111/gcb.12767 |
[1] Synthesis research papers include either meta-analysis or systematic reviews with quantitative results.