Livestock water productivity: feed resourcing, feeding and coupled feed-water resource data bases
Michael Blümmel A F , Amare Haileslassie B D , Anandan Samireddypalle C , Vincent Vadez D and An Notenbaert EA International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI), c/o ICRISAT, Patancheru 502324, AP, India.
B International Livestock Research Institute and International Crops Research Institute for the Semi Arid Tropics (ICRISAT), Patancheru 502324, AP, India.
C International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI), c/o IITA, Ibadan, Nigeria.
D International Crops Research Institute for the Semi Arid Tropics (ICRISAT), Patancheru 502324, AP, India.
E International Centre for Tropical Agriculture (CIAT), PO Box 823, 00621 Nairobi, Kenya.
F Corresponding author. Email: m.blummel@cgiar.org
Animal Production Science 54(10) 1584-1593 https://doi.org/10.1071/AN14607
Submitted: 29 May 2014 Accepted: 30 June 2014 Published: 19 August 2014
Abstract
While water requirement for livestock is widely perceived as daily drinking water consumption, ~100 times more water is required for daily feed production than for drinking water. Increasing livestock water productivity can be achieved through increasing the water-use efficiency (WUE) of feed production and utilisation. The current paper briefly reviews water requirements for meat and milk production and the extent of, and reason for, variations therein. Life-cycle analysis (LCA) can reveal these variations in WUE but LCA are not tools that can be employed routinely in designing and implementing water-use-efficient feed resourcing and feeding strategies. This can be achieved by (1) choosing agricultural by-products and crop residues where water applications are partitioned over several products for example grain and straw (or food and fodder) contrary to planted forage production where water and land have to be exclusively allocated to fodder production, (2) select and breed WUE crops and forages and exploit cultivar variations, (3) increase crop productivity by closing yield gaps; and (4) increase per animal productivity to reduce the proportion of feed (and therefore water) allocated for maintenance requirement rather than productive purposes. Feed-mediated WUE of dairy buffalo production on almost completely (94%) by-product-based feeding systems could be reduced from 2350 to 548 L of water per kg of milk by the combined effect of increasing basal ration quality in a total mixed ration, which resulted in increased milk yield of ~30%, and by increasing crop productivity from 1 t (actual crop yield) to 3 t (potential crop yield). Exemplary, multi-dimensional sorghum improvement using staygreen quantitative trait loci (QTL) introgression for concomitant improvement of WUE of grain and stover production and stover fodder quality showed opportunities for further linked improvement in WUE of crop and livestock production. Metabolisable energy (ME) yield under water stress conditions measured in lysimeters, (which measure crop water transpired) ranged QTL dependent from 16.47 to 23.93 MJ ME per m3 H2O. This can be extrapolated to 8.23–11.97 MJ ME per m3 H2O evapotranspired under field conditions. To mainstream improvement in WUE of feed resourcing and feeding, the paper suggests the combination of feed resource databases with crop–soil–meteorological data to calculate how much water is required to produce the feed at the available smallest spatial scale of crop–soil–meteorological data available. A framework is presented of how such a tool can be constructed from secondary datasets on land use, cropping patterns and spatially explicit crop–soil–meteorological datasets.
Additional keywords: agricultural by-products, environmental sustainability, resource-use efficiencies.
References
ACIAR (2014) Final report of CIM/2007/120 project (Improving post-rainy sorghum varieties to meet the growing grain and fodder demand in India) – ICRISAT, 2014.Allen RG, Pereira LS, Raes D, Smith M (1998) ‘Crop evapotranspiration. Guidelines for computing crop water requirements.’ FAO irrigation and drainage paper 56. (FAO: Rome)
Anandan S, Khan AA, Ravi D, Reddy J, Blümmel M (2010) A comparison of sorghum stover based complete deed blocks with a conventional feeding practice in a peri urban dairy. Animal Nutrition and Feed Technology 10S, 23–28.
Bidinger FR, Blümmel M (2007) Effects of ruminant nutritional quality of pearl millet [Pennisetum glaucum (L) R. Br.] stover. 1. Effects of management alternatives on stover quality and productivity. Field Crops Research 103, 119–128.
| Effects of ruminant nutritional quality of pearl millet [Pennisetum glaucum (L) R. Br.] stover. 1. Effects of management alternatives on stover quality and productivity.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Bidinger FR, Blümmel M, Hash CT, Choudhary S (2010) Genetic enhancement for superior food-feed traits in a Pearl Millet [Pennisetum glaucum (L.) R. Br.] variety by recurrent selection. Animal Nutrition and Feed Technology 10S, 61–68.
Bierhuizen JF, Slatyer RO (1965) Effect of atmospheric concentration of water vapor and CO2 in determining transpiration-photosynthesis relationships of cotton leaves. Agricultural Meteorology 2, 259–270.
| Effect of atmospheric concentration of water vapor and CO2 in determining transpiration-photosynthesis relationships of cotton leaves.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Blümmel M, Parthasarathy Rao P (2006) Economic value of sorghum stover traded as fodder for urban and peri-urban dairy production in Hyderabad, India. International Sorghum and Millet Newsletter 47, 97–100.
Blümmel M, Bidinger FR, Hash CT (2007) Management and cultivar effect on ruminant nutritional quality of pearl millet [Pennisetum glaucum (L) R. Br.] stover. Effects of cultivar choice on stover quality and productivity. Field Crops Research 103, 129–138.
| Management and cultivar effect on ruminant nutritional quality of pearl millet [Pennisetum glaucum (L) R. Br.] stover. Effects of cultivar choice on stover quality and productivity.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Blümmel M, Samad M, Singh OP, Amede T (2009) Opportunities and limitations of food–feed crops for livestock feeding and implications for livestock–water productivity. The Rangeland Journal 31, 207–213.
| Opportunities and limitations of food–feed crops for livestock feeding and implications for livestock–water productivity.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Blümmel M, Vishala A, Ravi D, Prasad KVSV, Ramakrishna Reddy Ch, Seetharama N (2010) Multi-environmental investigations of food-feed trait relationships in Kharif and Rabi sorghum (Sorghum bicolor (L) Moench.) over several years of cultivars testing in India. Animal Nutrition and Feed Technology 10S, 11–21.
Blümmel M, Anandan S, Wright IA (2012) Improvement of feed resources and livestock feeding in mixed cropping systems. In ‘Animal nutrition advances and development’. (Eds UR Mehra, P Singh, AK Verma) pp. 459–475. (Satish Serial Publishing House: India)
Blümmel M, Homann-Kee Tui S, Valbuena D, Duncan A, Herrero M (2013a) Biomass in crop–livestock systems in the context of the livestock revolution. Secheresse 24, 330–339.
Blümmel M, Grings EE, Erenstein O (2013b) Potential for dual-purpose maize varieties to meet changing maize demands: synthesis. Field Crops Research 153, 107–112.
| Potential for dual-purpose maize varieties to meet changing maize demands: synthesis.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Comprehensive Assessment of Water Management in Agriculture (2007) ‘Water for food, water for life: a comprehensive assessment of water management in agriculture.’ (Earthscan: London; and International Water Management Institute: Colombo)
Delgado C, Rosegrant M, Steinfeld H, Ehui S, Courbois C (1999) ‘Livestock to 2020.’ IFPRI food, agriculture and the environment discussion paper 28, Washington, DC.
Descheemaeker K, Haileslassie A, Amede T, Bossio D, Tarawali S (2010) Assessment of water productivity and entry points for improvement in mixed crop-livestock systems of the Ethiopian highlands. Advances in Animal Biosciences 1, 491–492.
| Assessment of water productivity and entry points for improvement in mixed crop-livestock systems of the Ethiopian highlands.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Descheemaeker K, Amede T, Haileslassie A, Bossio D (2011) Analysis of gaps and possible interventions for improving water productivity in crop livestock systems of Ethiopia. Advances in Experimental Agriculture 47, 21–38.
Ertiro BT, Zeleke H, Friesen D, Blümmel M, Twumasi-Afriyie S (2013) Relationship between the performance of parental inbred lines and hybrids for food-feed traits in maize (Zea mays L.) in Ethiopia. Field Crops Research 153, 86–93.
| Relationship between the performance of parental inbred lines and hybrids for food-feed traits in maize (Zea mays L.) in Ethiopia.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
FAO (1998) Crop evapotranspiration. In ‘FAO irrigation and drainage paper no. 56’. (Eds R Allen, LA Pereira, D Raes, M Smith) (FAO: Rome)
FAO (2005) ‘Local climate estimator (New LockClim 1.06).’ (FAO: Rome)
FAO (2012) ‘Balanced feeding for improving livestock productivity – increase in milk production and nutrient use efficiency and decrease in methane emission, by MR Garg.’ FAO animal production and health paper no. 173. (FAO: Rome)
Garg MR, Sherasiaa PL, Bhanderia PM, Phondbaa BT, Shelkea SK, Makkar HPS (2013) Effects of feeding nutritionally balanced rations on animal productivity, feed conversion efficiency, feed nitrogen use efficiency, rumen microbial protein supply, parasitic load, immunity and enteric methane emissions of milking animals under field conditions. Animal Feed Science and Technology
| Effects of feeding nutritionally balanced rations on animal productivity, feed conversion efficiency, feed nitrogen use efficiency, rumen microbial protein supply, parasitic load, immunity and enteric methane emissions of milking animals under field conditions.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Gebreselassie S, Peden D, Haileslassie A (2009) The factors affecting livestock water productivity: animal scale analysis using previous cattle feeding trials in Ethiopia. Rangeland Journal 31, 251–258.
Haileslassie A, Blümmel M, Murthy MVR, Samad M, Clement F, Anandan S, Sreedhar NA, Radha AV, Ishaq S (2011) Assessment of livestock feed and water nexus across mixed crop livestock system’s intensification gradient: an example from the Indo-Ganga Basin. Experimental Agriculture 47, 113–132.
| Assessment of livestock feed and water nexus across mixed crop livestock system’s intensification gradient: an example from the Indo-Ganga Basin.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Kelley TG, Parthasarathy Rao P, Weltzien R, Purohi ML (1996) Adoption of improved cultivars of pearl millet in arid environment: straw yield and quality considerations in western Rajasthan. Experimental Agriculture 32, 161–172.
| Adoption of improved cultivars of pearl millet in arid environment: straw yield and quality considerations in western Rajasthan.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Lal R (2005) World crop residues production and implications of its use as a biofuel. Environment International 31, 575–584.
| World crop residues production and implications of its use as a biofuel.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:CAS:528:DC%2BD2MXislentro%3D&md5=cfb49291f91773ceb25ba6dcfbbdbbacCAS | 15788197PubMed |
National Institute for Animal Nutrition and Physiology (NIANP) (2003) ‘FeedBase.’ (NIANP: Bangalore, India).
Nepolean T, Blümmel M, Bhasker Raj AG, Senthilvel S, Hash CT (2006) QTLs controlling stover yield and quality traits in pearl millet. International Sorghum and Millets Newsletter 47, 149–152.
Peden D, Tadesse G, Misra AK (2007) Water and livestock for human development. In ‘Water for food, water for life: a comprehensive assessment of water management in agriculture’. (Ed. D Molden) (Earthscan: London; and International Water Management Institute: Colombo)
Pimentel D, Houser J, Preiss E, White O, Fang H, Mesnick L, Barsky T, Tariche S, Schreck J, Alpert S (1997) Water resources: agriculture, the environment, and society. Bioscience 47, 97–106.
| Water resources: agriculture, the environment, and society.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Prasad KVSV, Khan AA, Vellaikumar S, Devulapalli R, Ramakrishna Reddy Ch, Nigam SN, Blümmel M (2010) Observations on livestock productivity in sheep fed exclusively on haulms from ten different genotypes of groundnut. Animal Nutrition and Feed Technology 10S, 121–126.
Raes D, Geerts S, Kipkorir E, Wellens J, Sahli A (2006) Simulation of yield decline as a result of water stress with a robust soil water balance model. Agricultural Water Management 81, 335–357.
| Simulation of yield decline as a result of water stress with a robust soil water balance model.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Ramachandra KS, Taneja VK, Sampath KT, Anandan S, Angadi UB (2007) ‘Livestock feed resources in different agroecosystems of India: availability requirement and their management.’ (National Institute of Animal Nutrition and Physiology: Bangalore, India)
Ravi D, Khan AA, Saibutcha Rao M, Blümmel M (2013) A note on suitable laboratory stover quality traits for multidimensional maize improvement. Field Crops Research 153, 58–62.
| A note on suitable laboratory stover quality traits for multidimensional maize improvement.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Shah L (2007) Delivering nutrition. Power point presentation delivered at the CIGAR system wide livestock program meeting 17th September 2007 at ICRISAT, Patancheru.
Sharma K, Pattanaik AK, Anandan S, Blümmel M (2010) Food–feed crop research: a synthesis. Animal Nutrition and Feed Technology 10S, 1–10.
Singh OP, Sharma A, Singh R, Shah T (2004) Virtual water trade in dairy economy. Economic and Political Weekly 39, 3492–3497.
Steinfeld H, Gerber P, Wassenaar T, Castel V, Rosales M, de Haan C (2006) ‘Livestock’s long shadow.’ (FAO: Rome)
Vadez V, Krishnamurthy L, Hash CT, Upadhyaya HD, Borrell AK (2011a) Yield, transpiration efficiency, and water use variations and their relationships in the sorghum reference collection. Crop and Pasture Science 62, 645–655.
| Yield, transpiration efficiency, and water use variations and their relationships in the sorghum reference collection.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Vadez V, Deshpande SP, Kholova J, Hammer GL, Borrell AK, Talwar HS, Hash CT (2011b) Staygreen QTL effects on water extraction and transpiration efficiency in a lysimetric system: influence of genetic background. Functional Plant Biology 38, 553–566.
| Staygreen QTL effects on water extraction and transpiration efficiency in a lysimetric system: influence of genetic background.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Vadez V, Kholova J, Medina S, Aparna K, Anderberg H (2014) Transpiration efficiency: new insights into an old story. Journal of Experimental Botany
| Transpiration efficiency: new insights into an old story.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 24600020PubMed |
van Breugel P, Herrero M, van de Steeg J, Peden D (2010) Livestock water use and productivity in the Nile Basin. Ecosystems 13, 205–221.
| Livestock water use and productivity in the Nile Basin.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Vinayan MT, Raman B, Jyothsna T, Zaidi PH, Blümmel M (2013) A note on potential candidate genomic regions with implications for maize stover fodder quality. Field Crops Research 153, 102–106.
| A note on potential candidate genomic regions with implications for maize stover fodder quality.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Zaidi PH, Vinayan MT, Blümmel M (2013) Genetic variability of tropical maize stover quality and the potential for genetic improvement of food-feed value in India. Field Crops Research 153, 94–101.
| Genetic variability of tropical maize stover quality and the potential for genetic improvement of food-feed value in India.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Zwart J, Bastiaanssen WGM (2004) Review of measured crop water productivity value for irrigated wheat, rice, cotton and maize. Agricultural Water Management 69, 115–133.
| Review of measured crop water productivity value for irrigated wheat, rice, cotton and maize.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
