Abstract
Silvopastoral systems (SPS) offer both environmental and economic benefits, including climate change mitigation through carbon sequestration. Important features are tree density and animal stock rate. The objective of this study was to evaluate the long-term trajectory of sustainable livestock carrying capacity and carbon budget developing an Agent-Based Model (ABM) for an SPS. The ABM outputs the performance of animal growth, forage, and trees in several scenarios over 10-year periods. Rotational grazing and forestry presence in paddocks allowed the achievement of a balance among forage availability, cattle demand and trees. The model fit very well in predicting Live weight gain and Live weight (LW) for cattle. The average length of fattening cycles was 258 ± 24 days, and an annual yield of LW exported of the system of 98.7 ± 2.6 kg ha−1. A balance of carbon–neutral or marginally positive in beef production was achieved with a ratio of 380 steers at a 606-ha grazing area with 13% forested surface. Estimated carbon emission exhibited an inverse exponential relationship with weight gain. The average emission was 24.9 kg of CO2e per unit of LWG, for an average gain of 0.388 kg animal−1 day−1. The ABM is a valuable tool for understanding the complexity of these systems, generating emergent properties. The results revealed a conflict between the economic-productive and the environmental dimension. So as to achieve a neutral carbon system, it is necessary to maintain a lower number of livestock heads than the property's potential (0.72 vs 0.79 livestock units per hectare). Future research should include economic and other environmental variables in the model.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Data availability
No datasets were generated or analysed during the current study.
References
Baeza S, Lezama F, Piñeiro G, Altesor A, Paruelo J (2010) Spatial variability of above-ground net primary production in Uruguayan grasslands: a remote sensing approach. Applied Veg Sci 13:72–85. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1654-109X.2009.01051.x
Becoña G, Ledgard S, Astigarraga L, Lizarralde C, Dieguez F, Morales H (2020) EMAG- National model to evaluate environmental impacts of cattle production systems in Uruguay. Agrociencia Uruguay 24:48. https://doi.org/10.31285/AGRO.24.48
Bilotto F, Recavarren P, Vibart R, Machado C (2019) Backgrounding strategy effects on farm productivity, profitability and greenhouse gas emissions of cow-calf systems in the Flooding Pampas of Argentina. Agric Sys 179:102688. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agsy.2019.102688
Boscana M, Rachetti M, Munka C, González A, Bussoni A (2019) Recomendciones para la Integración de forestaciones en predios ganaderos y lecheros familiares. Ministerio de Ganadería Agricultura y Pesca. Proyecto +Tecnologías. Montevideo, Uruguay
Bussoni A, Estraviz L (2010) Private valuation of carbon sequestration in forest plantations. Ecol Econ 69:451–458. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2009.10.005
Bussoni A, Cubbage F, Alvarez Giambruno J (2021) Silvopastoral systems and multi-criteria optimization for compatible economic and environmental outcomes. Agric Syst 190:103118. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agsy.2021.103118
Cabrera G, Rachetti M, Condon R, Olivera B, Artigalás A, Martínez J, Inzaurralde S, Garrone I, Sánchez I, Bentancor L, Bussoni A, Munka C, Boscana M, Alvarez J, Fernandez E (2016) La integración de forestacionesen predios familiares: resultado de un estudio participativo. http://www.ainfo.inia.uy/digital/bitstream/item/15316/1/Integracion-de-forestaciones-en-predios-familiares-CNFR-2016.pdf. Accessed 6 November 2023
Cerruto Ribeiro S, BoechatSoares C, Fehrmann L, Gonçalves J, Laércio A, von Gadow K (2015) Aboveground and belowground biomass and carbon estimates for clonal Eucalyptus trees in Southeast Brazil. Revista Arvore 39:353–363
Conde R, Robledo F, López de Lacalle A (2023) Silvopastoral and agrorgoforestry systems: an integer linear programming model for investment decisions. J Dyn Games 10:304–329. https://doi.org/10.3934/jdg.2023013
Congio G, Bannink A, Mayorga O, Rodrigues J, Bougouin A, Kebreab E, Carvalho P, Berchielli T, Mercadante M, Valadares-Filho S, Borges A, Berndt A, Rodrigues P, Ku-Vera J, Molina-Botero I, Arango J, Reis R, Posada-Ochoa S, Tomich T, Castelán-Ortega O, Marcondes M, Gómez C, Ribeiro-Filho H, Gere J, Ariza-Nieto C, Giraldo L, Gonda H, Cerón-Cucchi M, Hernández O, Ricci P, Hristov A (2023) Improving the accuracy of beef cattle methane inventories in Latin America and Caribbean countries. Sci Total Env 856:159128. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2022.159128
Dieguez F, Fort H (2017) Towards scientifically based management of extensive livestock farming in terms of ecological predator-prey modeling. Agric Sys 153:127–137. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agsy.2017.01.021
Do Carmo M, Soca P, Cardozo G, Balzarini M (2015) Ajuste de carga animal en base a la oferta de forraje. Cartilla técnica. Proyecto Ganadería Familiar y Cambio Climático, DGDR, Ministerio de Ganadería Agricultura y Pesca, Montevideo, Uruguay, http://www.inia.uy/Documentos/Privados/INIA%20Tacuaremb%C3%B3/Dia%20de%20campo%20manejo%20de%20carga%20en%20Basalto%20oct%202015/protocolo%20estimacion%20forraje%20y%20ajuste%20de%20carga%20Laura_Maxi.pdf. Accessed 6 November 2023
Doldán J, Fariña I, Tarigo F (2008) Utilización de Eucalyptus spp, alternativas de plantaciones uruguayas para pulpa Kraft. INNOTEC 3:30–34. https://doi.org/10.26461/03.04
Dube F, Thevathasan N, Zagal E, Gordon A, Stolpe N, Espinosa M (2011) C sequestration potential of silvopastoral and other land use systems in the Chilean Patagonia. In: Kumar B and Nair P (eds). Carbon sequestration potentials of agroforestry systems: opportunities and challenges. Advances in agroforestry. Vol. 8, Springer, The Netherlands, pp 307
Eufrade-Junior H, Leonello EC, Spadim ER, Rodrigues SA, de Acevedo GB, Guerra SP (2020) Stump and coarse root biomass from eucalypt forest plantations in a commercial scale operation for bioenergy. Biomass Bioenergy 142:105784
FAO (2021) Food and agriculture organization.Emissions due to agriculture. Global, regional and country trends 2000–2018. https://www.fao.org/3/cb3808en/cb3808en.pdf. Accessed 6 November 2023
Fischer A, Vasseur L (2002) Smallholder perceptions of agroforestry projects in Panama. Agroforestry Sys 54:103–113. https://doi-org.proxy.timbo.org.uy/10.1023/A:1015047404867
Fuentes-Pila J, DeLorenzo M, Beede D, Staples C, Holter J (1996) Evaluation of equations based on animal factors to predict intake of lactating Holstein cows. J Dairy Sci 79:1562–1571
Ghelfi M, Molina C (2022) Síntesis de resultados del Programa de Monitoreo de Empresas Ganaderas. Instituto Plan Agropecuario. https://www.planagropecuario.org.uy/uploads/monitoreos/37_Monitoreo_Empresas_Ganaderas_21_22.pdf. Accessed 6 November 2023
Grimm V, Polhill G, Touza J (2013) Documenting social simulation models: the ODD protocol as a standard. In: Edmonds B, Meyer R (eds) Simulating social complexity. Understanding complex systems. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp 117–133
Grimm V, Revilla E, Berger U, Jeltsch F, Mooij W, Raislback S, Thulke H, Weiner J, Wiegand T, DeAngelis D (2005) Pattern-oriented modeling of agent-based complex systems: lessons from ecology. Science 310:987–991. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1116681
Hanisch A, Negrelle R, AraújoBonatto R, Nimmo E, BiscaiaLacerda A (2019) Evaluating sustainability in traditional silvopastoral systems (Caívas): looking beyond the impact of animals on biodiversity. Sustainability 11:3098. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11113098
Hirigoyen A, Resquin F, Cerrillo R, Franco J (2021) Stand biomass estimation methods for Eucalyptus grandis and Eucalyptus dunnii in Uruguay. Bosque 42. https://doi.org/10.4067/S0717-92002021000100053
Hirigoyen A, Rachid C (2014) Sistema de apoyo a la gestión forestal. Modelos de simulación de crecimiento y análisis económico. Revista INIA 68:69–74
Iñamagua-Uyaguari JP, Fitton N, Smith P (2023) Planting trees in livestock landscapes to protect soil and water also delivers carbon sequestration. Agroforest Syst 97:1199–1214. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10457-023-00857-9
IPCC (2006) Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories, Prepared by the National Greenhouse Gas Inventories Programme, Eggleston H, Buendia L, Miwa K, Ngara T Tanabe K (eds). Vol 4. IGES, Japan. https://www.ipcc-nggip.iges.or.jp/public/2006gl/vol4.html. Accessed 6 November 2023
IPCC (2019) Refinement to the 2006 IPCC guidelines for national greenhouse gas inventories.https://www.ipcc-nggip.iges.or.jp/public/2019rf/. Accessed 6 November 2023
Jackson J, Ash A (1998) Tree-grass relationships in open eucalypt woodlands of northern Australian: influence of trees on pasture productivity, forage quality and species distribution. Agroforestry Syst 40:159–176
Lin L (1989) A concordance correlation coefficient to evaluate reproducibility. Biometrics 45:255–268. https://doi.org/10.2307/2532051
Lin L (2000) A note on the concordance correlation coefficient. Biometrics 56:324–325. https://doi.org/10.2307/2533516
MA (2021) Ministerio de ambiente, Presidencia de la República Oriental del Uruguay. https://www.gub.uy/ministerio-ambiente/sites/ministerio-ambiente/files/documentos/publicaciones/Huella_Ambiental_Ganadera_Informe%2010-2022.pdf. Accessed 6 November 2023
Methol R (2008) SAG Eucalyptus: Sistema de Apoyo a la Gestión de Plantaciones de Eucalyptus orientadas a la Producción de Celulosa en Uruguay, Instituto Nacional de Investigación Agropecuaria. Serie Técnica INIA 173, Montevideo, Uruguay. http://www.inia.uy/Publicaciones/Documentos%20compartidos/18429240309124013.pdf. Accessed 6 Nov 2023
Mieres J, Assandri L, Cúneo M (2004) Tablas de valor nutritivo de alimentos. Guía parala alimentación de rumiantes. Serie Técnica INA 142, Instituto Nacional de Investigación Agropecuaria, Montevideo, Uruguay. http://www.inia.uy/publicaciones/documentos%20compartidos/111219240807141556.pdf. Accessed 6 Nov 2023
Miller R, Albicette M (2005) Seminario de actualización técnica en manejo de campo natural. Serie Técnica INIA 15, Instituto Nacional de Investigación Agropecuaria, Montevideo, Uruguay. http://www.inia.uy/Publicaciones/Documentos%20compartidos/15630021107142110.pdf. Accessed 6 Nov 2023
Montagnini F, Nair P (2004) Carbon sequestration: an underexploited environmental benefit of agroforestry systems. Agroforestry Sys 61:281–295
Montagnini F, Ibrahim M, MurgueitioRestrepo E (2013) Silvopastoral systems and climate change mitigation in Latin America. Bois Forêts Tropiques 316:3–11
Moriasi D, Arnold J, Van Liew M, Bingner R, Harmel R, Veith T (2007) Model evaluation guidelines for systematic quantification of accuracy in watershed simulations. Trans ASABE 50:885–900. https://doi.org/10.13031/2013.23153
Ominski K, Boadi D, Wittenberg K, Fulawka D, Bassarb (2007) Estimates of enteric methane emissions from cattle in Canada using the IPCC Tier-2 methodology. Can J Anim Sci 87:459–467. https://doi.org/10.4141/CJAS06034
Panario D (1988) Geomorfología del Uruguay. Facultad de Humanidades y Ciencias, Universidad de la República. Montevideo, Uruguay
Pastor J (2008) Mathematical ecology of populations and ecosystems. Wiley Ltd, Sussex, United Kingdom
Pastorini V (2017) Enfoques y avances en diversificación de especies forestales y forestación a pequeña escala: acciones de la Dirección general de desarrollo rural – Ministerio de ganadería, agricultura y pesca. http://www.ainfo.inia.uy/digital/bitstream/item/9158/1/SAD-774p11-14.pdf. Accessed 6 November 2023
Pérez-Rocha J (2020). El estado del campo natural en el Uruguay. Montevideo. FAO, MVOTMA y MGAP. https://doi.org/10.4060/cb0989es
Picasso V, Modernel P, Becoña G, Salvo L, Gutiérrez L, Astigarraga L (2014) Sustainability of meat production beyond carbon footprint: a synthesis of case studies from grazing systems in Uruguay. Meat Sci 98:346–354. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2014.07.005
R Core Team (2021) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria.https://www.R-project.org/. Accessed 6 November 2023
R Core Team (2022) DescTools package. Concordance correlation coefficient.https://search.r-project.org/CRAN/refmans/DescTools/html/CCC.html. Accessed 6 November 2023
Rachid-Casnati C, Mason E, Woollons R (2019) Using soil-based and physiographic variables to improve stand growth equations in Uruguayan forest plantations. iForest 12:237–245. https://doi.org/10.3832/ifor2926-012
Railsback F, Grimm V (2019) Agent-based and individual-based modeling. Princeton University Press
Row C, Phelps RB (1996) Wood carbon flow and storage after timber harvest. In: Sampson RN, Hair D (eds) Forest and global change, vol 2: forest management opportunities for mitigating carbon emissions. American Forest, Washington, DC, pp 27–58
Silva A, García D, Martínez E (2023) Silvopastoral systems ecological strategy for decreases C footprint in livestock systems of piedmont (Meta), Colombia. Braz Arch Biol Technol 66:e23220340. https://doi.org/10.1590/1678-4324-2023220340
Sarandón S, Flores C (2014) Agroecología: bases teóricas para el diseño y manejo de Agroecosistemas sustentables. Facultad de Ciencias Agrarias y Forestales. Universidad de la Plata, Argentina. https://sedici.unlp.edu.ar/bitstream/handle/10915/37280/Documento_completo.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y. Accessed 6 Nov 2023
Schinato F (2022) Evaluación de servicios ambientales en un sistema silvopastoril. Tesis Magister en Ciencias Agracias, Facultad de Agronomía, UdelaR. https://www.colibri.udelar.edu.uy/jspui/bitstream/20.500.12008/35851/1/SchinatoFranco.pdf. Accessed 6 November 2023
Scoz R (2015) Sistemas silvopastoriles en Uruguay; un sistema productivo que no se adopta con solo promocionarlo. 3° Congreso Nacional de Sistemas Silvopastoriles - VIII Congreso Internacional de Sistemas Agroforestales. http://www.ainfo.inia.uy/digital/bitstream/item/4511/1/Scoz-2015.pdf. . Accessed 6 November 2023
Tedeschi L (2006) Assessment of the adequacy of mathematical models. Workshop on mathematical model analysis and evaluation Sassari. http://www.cncps.cornell.edu/modeval. Accessed 6 November 2023
USEPA (2023) United States environmental protection agency. Enteric fermentation-greenhouse gases.https://www3.epa.gov/ttnchie1/ap42/ch14/final/c14s04.pdf. Accessed 6 November 2023
UPM (2010) La forestación y la ganadería en Uruguay. https://www.upm.uy/siteassets/documents/forestacion-ganaderia-uruguay.pdf Accessed 6 November 2023
Uruguay XXI (2023) Sector ganadero en Uruguay. https://www.uruguayxxi.gub.uy/uploads/informacion/b28305203e10f6d7bb3689eb619160dd922b2036.pdf. Accessed 6 November 2023
Varela F (2019) Modelo de simulación para sistemas de silvopastoreo en regiones centro sur y sureste de Uruguay. Tesis Magister en Ciencias Agrarias. Facultad de Agronomía, UdelaR. https://www.colibri.udelar.edu.uy/jspui/bitstream/20.500.12008/29153/1/VarelaCasadeyEduardoFabi%C3%A1n.pdf. Accessed 6 November 2023
Wilensky U, Stroup W (1999) HubNet - center for connected learning and computer-based modeling, Northwestern University. Evanston, IL. http://ccl.northwestern.edu/netlogo/hubnet.html. Accessed 6 November 2023.
Funding
This article is based on a previous work presented at the XII International Congress of Silvopastoral Systems held in Montevideo City, October 2023. This work had the financial support of the Comisión Sectorial de Investigación Científica of the Universidad de la República, Uruguay, by the project FAgro-CSIC 02100-500193-21.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
F.D. and A.B. wrote the main manuscript. F.D., F.V. and A.B. developed the model. M.B. and F.S. worked on field to collect dasometric data. All authors reviewed the manuscript.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Competing interests
The authors declare no competing interests.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
About this article
Cite this article
Dieguez Cameroni, F.J., Varela Casadey, F., Boscana, M. et al. Advancing carbon neutrality in Silvopastoral systems: a case study applying agent-based modeling. Agroforest Syst (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10457-024-00983-y
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10457-024-00983-y