Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32077492›Full record

ReviewJournal of the science of food and agriculture2020

Prospects for sustainability of pig production in relation to climate change and novel feed resources.

Wendy M Rauw, Lotta Rydhmer, Ilias Kyriazakis, Margareth Øverland, Hélène Gilbert, Jack Cm Dekkers, Susanne Hermesch, Alban Bouquet, Emilio Gómez Izquierdo, Isabelle Louveau and 1 more

Open access · hybridAbstract readEvaluation StudyReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of the science of food and agriculture, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 39 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
39citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
10.3field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

39 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 116 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors at 9 institutions in 7 countries.

Wendy M RauwDepartamento de Mejora Genética Animal, INIA, Madrid, Spain.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2885-1961
Lotta RydhmerDepartment of Animal Breeding and Genetics, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Uppsala, Sweden.
Ilias KyriazakisInstitute for Global Food Security, Queen's University, Belfast, UK.
Margareth ØverlandDepartment of Animal and Aquacultural Sciences, Norwegian University of Life Sciences, Ås, Norway.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1142-6624
Hélène GilbertGenPhySE, Université de Toulouse, INRAE, Castanet Tolosan, France.
Jack Cm DekkersDepartment of Animal Science, Iowa State University, Ames, IA, USA.
Susanne HermeschAnimal Genetics and Breeding Unit (a joint venture of NSW Department of PrimaryIndustries and University of New England), University of New England, Armidale, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9647-5988
Alban BouquetIFIP-Institut du Porc, Le Rheu, Cedex, France.
Emilio Gómez IzquierdoCentro de Pruebas de Porcino, ITACyL, Hontalbilla, Spain.
Isabelle LouveauPEGASE, INRAE, Agrocampus Ouest, Saint-Gilles, France.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9684-6294
Luis Gomez-RayaDepartamento de Mejora Genética Animal, INIA, Madrid, Spain.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1875-3951
Institut Agro Rennes-Angers · FRInstitut du Porc · FRInstituto Tecnológico Agrario de Castilla y León · ESIowa State University · USNorwegian University of Life Sciences · NOQueen's University Belfast · GBSwedish University of Agricultural Sciences · SEUniversité Fédérale de Toulouse Midi-Pyrénées · FRUniversity of New England · AU

Funding

ERA-NET SusAn SusPig
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Pig production systems provide multiple benefits to humans. However, the global increase in meat consumption has profound consequences for our earth. This perspective describes two alternative scenarios for improving the sustainability of future pig production systems. The first scenario is a high input-high output system based on sustainable intensification, maximizing animal protein production efficiency on a limited land surface at the same time as minimizing environmental impacts. The second scenario is a reduced input-reduced output system based on selecting animals that are more robust to climate change and are better adapted to transform low quality feed (local feeds, feedstuff co-products, food waste) into meat. However, in contrast to the first scenario, the latter scenario results in reduced predicted yields, reduced production efficiency and possibly increased costs to the consumer. National evaluation of the availability of local feed and feedstuff co-product alternatives, determination of limits to feed sourced from international markets, available land for crop and livestock production, desired production levels, and a willingness to politically enforce policies through subsidies and/or penalties are some of the considerations to combine these two scenarios. Given future novel sustainable alternatives to livestock animal protein, it may become reasonable to move towards an added general premium price on 'protein from livestock animals' to the benefit of promoting higher incomes to farmers at the same time as covering the extra costs of, politically enforced, welfare of livestock animals in sustainable production systems. © 2020 The Authors. Journal of The Science of Food and Agriculture published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Society of Chemical Industry.

Indexed as

Animal HusbandryAnimal FeedAnimalsClimate ChangeFood SupplyHumansMeatSwineanimal robustnessclimate changelocal feed resourcespig productionsustainable agriculture

Identifiers

PMID32077492
PMCPMC7318173
OpenAlexW3007864963

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.