ArticleThe international journal of life cycle assessment2025
Carbon footprints of greenhouse gas mitigation measures for a grass-based beef cattle finishing system in the UK.
Article in The international journal of life cycle assessment, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Agri-food systems across the globe are faced with the challenge of reducing their supply-chain emissions of greenhouse gases (GHGs) such as nitrous oxide (N Methods: To explore such potential, first, a business-as-usual (BAU) partial cradle-to-finishing farmgate scale modelling framework was developed. The BAU systems (i.e. steady-state productivity based on primary data from the North Wyke Farm Platform) were built using ensemble modelling wherein the RothC process-based soil organic carbon (SOC) model was integrated into the life cycle assessment (LCA) framework to conduct a trade-off analysis related to mitigation measures applicable to the study system. Potential mitigation measures were applied to the BAU scenario. The interventions assessed included: (i) extensification; (ii) adopting anaerobic digestion technology; and (iii) the use of the nitrification inhibitor DCD and substitution of fertiliser nitrogen with symbiotically fixed nitrogen from legumes. Results: The partial carbon footprint for 1 kg of beef liveweight gain leaving the farmgate Conclusions: The findings highlight the importance of including emissions beyond the farmgate level to analyse the carbon footprint of different management scenarios in order to assess the sustainability of agri-food production systems. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11367-025-02428-9.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.