ArticleNature communications2025
Costs of transitioning the livestock sector to net-zero emissions under future climates.
Article in Nature communications, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Nutritional Strategies for Methane, Nitrogen, and Phosphorus Mitigation in Ruminants: Mechanisms, Applications, and Regional Adaptations.Microorganisms · 2026Review
- Regenerative agriculture improves productivity and profitability while reducing greenhouse gas emissions on Australian sheep farms.Nature food · 2026Article
- Tailoring Australian carbon farming can realise greater co-benefits.Nature communications · 2026Article
- Animal digital twins: systems architecture for climate-smart protein production.npj veterinary sciences · 2026Review
- Stacking Interventions Enhances Carbon Removals and Profitability of Livestock Production Systems.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2025Article
- Candidate Genes, Markers, Signatures of Selection, and Quantitative Trait Loci (QTLs) and Their Association with Economic Traits in Livestock: Genomic Insights and Selection.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Land managers are challenged with the need to balance priorities in production, greenhouse gas (GHG) abatement, biodiversity and social license to operate. Here, we develop a transdisciplinary approach for prioritising land use, illustrated by co-designing pathways for transitioning farming systems to net-zero emissions. We show that few interventions enhanced productivity and profitability while reducing GHG emissions. Antimethanogenic feed supplements and planting trees afforded the greatest mitigation, while revenue diversification with wind turbines and adoption of livestock genotypes with enhanced feed-conversion efficiency (FCE) were most conducive to improving profit. Serendipitously, the intervention with the lowest social licence-continuing the status quo and purchasing carbon credits to offset emissions-was also the most costly pathway to transition to net-zero. In contrast, stacking several interventions to mitigate enteric methane, improve FCE and sequester carbon entirely negated enterprise emissions in a profitable way. We conclude that costs of transitioning to net-zero are lower when interventions are bundled and/or evoke productivity co-benefits.
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.