The role of ruminants in reducing agriculture's carbon footprint in North America
Open accessAbstract
Owing to the methane (CH4) produced by rumen fermentation, ruminants are a source of greenhouse gas (GHG) and are perceived as a problem. We propose that with appropriate regenerative crop and grazing management, ruminants not only reduce overall GHG emissions, but also facilitate provision of essential ecosystem services, increase soil carbon (C) sequestration, and reduce environmental damage. We tested our hypothesis by examining biophysical impacts and the magnitude of all GHG emissions from key agricultural production activities, including comparisons of arable- and pastoral-based agroecosystems. Our assessment shows that globally, GHG emissions from domestic ruminants represent 11.6% (1.58 Gt C y−1) of total anthropogenic emissions, while cropping and soil-associated emissions contribute 13.7% (1.86 Gt C y−1). The primary source is soil erosion (1 Gt C y−1), which in the United States alone is estimated at 1.72 Gt of soil y−1. Permanent cover of forage plants is highly effective in reducing soil erosion, and ruminants consuming only grazed forages under appropriate management result in more C sequestration than emissions. Incorporating forages and ruminants into regeneratively managed agroecosystems can elevate soil organic C, improve soil ecological function by minimizing the damage of tillage and inorganic fertilizers and biocides, and enhance biodiversity and wildlife habitat. We conclude that to ensure long-term sustainability and ecological resilience of agroecosystems, agricultural production should be guided by policies and regenerative management protocols that include ruminant grazing. Collectively, conservation agriculture supports ecologically healthy, resilient agroecosystems and simultaneously mitigates large quantities of anthropogenic GHG emissions.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Utilization of AMP grazing as a regenerative agriculture management system can improve soil ecological function, lessening damage from tillage and inorganic fertilizers and can improve biodiversity and wildlife habitat.
“Utilization of AMP grazing as a regenerative agriculture management system can improve soil ecological function, lessening damage from tillage and inorganic fertilizers and can improve biodiversity and wildlife habitat (Teague et al., 2016).”
From Impacts of soil carbon sequestration on life cycle greenhouse gas emissions in Midwestern USA beef finishing systems (2018) · cites this paper as Teague et al., 2016
The Table 1 passage says regenerative AMP grazing aims to restore the ecological function of degraded grasslands, and the Conclusions say appropriate grazing management can improve biodiversity and wildlife habitat. The Table 2 passage links eliminating tillage damage and reducing nitrogen fertilizer use to broader soil-management practices, not to AMP grazing alone. The claim therefore overattributes those benefits to AMP grazing by itself. (LLM, conf=0.84)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredStudies using adaptive multi-paddock grazing indicate that it can result in more ideal pasture species composition (more digestible forages with greater digestible energy content) due to prevention of consistent species selection and overgrazing, providing pasture recovery, and re-grazing before lignification.
“Studies using AMP grazing indicate that it can result in more ideal pasture species composition (more digestible forages with greater digestible energy content) due to prevention of consistent species selection and overgrazing, providing pasture recovery, and re-grazing before lignification”
From Impacts of soil carbon sequestration on life cycle greenhouse gas emissions in Midwestern USA beef finishing systems (2018) · cites this paper as Teague et al., 2016
Split into 2 atoms — 0 confirmed, 2 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredTeague et al. (2016) estimated that AMP grazing could induce SOC sequestration rates 10 times greater than the commonly used default value of 0.41 Mg C ha-1 yr-1 proposed by Conant et al. (2003).
“For instance, Teague et al. (2016) estimated that AMP grazing could induce SOC sequestration rates 10 times greater than the commonly used default value of 0.41 Mg C ha -1 yr -1 proposed by Conant et al. (2003).”
From Impacts of soil carbon sequestration on life cycle greenhouse gas emissions in Midwestern USA beef finishing systems (2018) · cites this paper as Teague et al. (2016)
In the discussion accompanying Table 2 (page not available in our copy), Teague et al. estimate that AMP grazing sequestered 3 t C ha⁻¹ yr⁻¹ more than heavy continuous grazing in the comparison they describe. Our copy does not give the claimed Conant et al. default of 0.41 Mg C ha⁻¹ yr⁻¹ or make a tenfold comparison with it; 3 divided by 0.41 is about 7.3, not 10. (LLM, conf=0.88)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredTeague et al. (2016) provides a cadre of tools to improve ecosystem services in both cropping and grazing systems, which can be implemented by farms and ranches of all production types.
“Teague et al. (2016) provides a cadre of tools to improve ecosystem services in both cropping and grazing systems, which can be implemented by farms and ranches of all production types.”
From Ecosystem Impacts and Productive Capacity of a Multi-Species Pastured Livestock System (2020) · cites this paper as Teague et al., 2016
The Table 2 passage (page not specified) lists regenerative practices for improving ecological function in both cropping and grazing systems. The Development and Adoption of Regenerative Management section says practices should suit local biophysical conditions; it does not establish that the tools can be implemented by farms and ranches of all production types. (LLM, conf=0.84)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredAdaptive multi-paddock grazing can improve animal and forage productivity and potentially sequester more soil organic carbon than continuous grazing.
“By managing for more optimal forage growth and recovery, adaptive multi-paddock (AMP) grazing can improve animal and forage productivity, potentially sequestering more soil organic carbon (SOC) than continuous grazing.”
From Impacts of soil carbon sequestration on life cycle greenhouse gas emissions in Midwestern USA beef finishing systems (2018) · cites this paper as Teague et al., 2016
Livestock-induced soil C changes can have large impacts on the GHG balance of production systems.
“Recent studies show that livestock-induced soil C changes can have large impacts on the GHG balance of these production systems (Beauchemin et al., 2011;Teague et al., 2016;Stanley et al., 2018).”
From Ecosystem Impacts and Productive Capacity of a Multi-Species Pastured Livestock System (2020) · cites this paper as Teague et al., 2016
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
Aguilera, E., Lassaletta, L., Gattinger, A., & Gimeno, B. S. (2013) · Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment · doi:10.1016/j.agee.2013.02.003 · Cited by 482 · see citing works
Ruminants, climate change and climate policy
Ripple, W. J., Smith, P., Haberl, H., Montzka, S. A., McAlpine, C., & Boucher, D. H. (2014) · Nature Climate Change · doi:10.1038/nclimate2081 · Cited by 390 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 23
- Butterfield, J., S. Bingham, and A. Savory. 2006. Holistic management: A new framework for decision making. Washington, DC: Island Press.
- Carberry, P.S., R.L. McCown, R.C. Muchow, J.P. Dimes, M.E. Probert, P.L. Poulton, and N.P. Dalgliesh. 1996. Simulation of a legume ley farming system in northern Australia using the Agricultural Production Systems Simulator. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture 36:1037-1048.
- Czarnecki, O., J. Yang, D.J. Weston, G.A. Tuskan, and J.G. Chen. 2013. A dual role of strigolactones in phosphate acquisition and utilization in plants. International Journal of Molecular Science 14:7681-7701.
- Copyright © 2016 Soil and Water Conservation Society. All rights reserved. www.swcs.org 71(2):156-164 Journal of Soil and Water Conservation
- Daley, C.A., A. Abbott, P.S. Doyle, G.A. Nader, and S. Larson. 2010. A review of fatty acid profiles and antioxidant content in grass-fed and grain-fed beef. Nutrition Journal 9:1-12.
- Delgado, J.A., P.M., Groffman, M.A. Nearing, T. Goddard, D. Reicosky, R. Lal, N.R. Kitchen, C.W. Rice, D. Towery, and P. Salon. 2011. Conservation practices to mitigate and adapt to climate change. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation 66:118A-129A, doi:10.2489/ jswc.66.4.118A. · DOI
- DeRamus, H.A., T.C. Clement, D.D. Giampola, and P.C. Dickison. 2003. Methane emissions of beef cattle on forages: efficiency of grazing management systems. Journal of Environmental Quality 32:269-277.
- Gattinger, A., A. Muller, M. Haeni, C. Skinner, A. Fliessbach, N. Buchmann, P. Mäder, M. Stolze, P. Smith, N. El-Hage Scialabba, and U. Niggli. 2012. Enhanced top soil carbon stocks under organic farming. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 109:18226-18231.
- Gerrish, J. 2004. Management-intensive grazing: The grassroots of grass farming. Ridgeland, MS: Green Park Press.
- Hatfield, J.L., and R.T. Venterea. 2014. Enhanced efficiency fertilizers: A multi-site comparison of the effects on nitrous oxide emissions and agronomic performance. Agronomy Journal 106:679-680.
- Herrero, M., and P.K. Thornton. 2013. Livestock and global change: Emerging issues for sustainable food systems. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 110:20878-20881.
- IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change). 2013. Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, eds. T.F.Stocker, et al. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press.
- Khan, S.A., R.L. Mulvaney, T.R. Ellsworth, and C.W. Boast. 2007. The myth of nitrogen fertilization for soil carbon sequestration. Journal of Environmental Quality 36:1821-1832.
- Kimble, J., C.W. Rice, D. Reed, S. Mooney, R.F. Follett, and R. Lal. 2007. Soil Carbon Management: Economic, Environmental, and Societal Benefits. Boca Raton: CRC Press.
- Leake, J.R., D. Johnson, D. Donnelly, G. Muckle, L. Boddy, and D. Read. 2004. Networks of power and influence: The role of mycorrhizal mycelium in controlling plant communities and agroecosystem functioning. Canadian Journal of Botany 82:1016-1045.
- Liebig, M.A., J.R. Gross, S.L. Kronberg, R.L. Phillips, and J.D. Hanson. 2010. Grazing management contributions to net global warming potential: A long-term evaluation in the Northern Great Plains. Journal of Environmental Quality 39:799-809.
- MEA (Millennium Ecosystem Assessment). 2005. Ecosystems and Human Well-being: Synthesis. Washington, DC: Island Press.
- Mulvaney, R.L., S.A., Khan, and T.R. Ellsworth. 2009. Synthetic nitrogen fertilizers deplete soil nitrogen: Copyright © 2016 Soil and Water Conservation Society. All rights reserved. www.swcs.org 71(2):156-164 Journal of Soil and Water Conservation A global dilemma for sustainable cereal production. Journal of Environmental Quality 38:2295-2314.
- National Research Council. 2002. Riparian Areas: Functions and Strategies for Management, pp. 415. Washington, DC: National Academic Press.
- Retallack, G.J. 2013. Global cooling by grassland soils of the geological past and near future. Annual Review of Earth and Planet Sciences 41:69-86.
- Teague, W.R., F. Provenza, U.P. Kreuter, T. Steffens, and M. Barnes. 2013. Multi-paddock grazing on rangelands: Why the perceptual dichotomy between research results and rancher experience? Journal of Environmental Management 128:699-717.
- Van der Ploeg, J.D., P. Verschuren, F. Verhoeven, and J. Pepels. 2006. Dealing with novelties: A grassland experiment reconsidered. Journal of Environmental Policy and Planning 8:199-218.
- Vermeulen, S.J., B.M. Campbell, and J.S.I. Ingram. 2012. Climate change and food systems. Annual Review of Environment and Resources 37:195-222.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Stanley, P. L., Rowntree, J. E., Beede, D. K., DeLonge, M. S., & Hamm, M. W. (2018) · Agricultural Systems · doi:10.1016/j.agsy.2018.02.003 · Cited by 266 · see citing works
Self-citationGrazing management that regenerates ecosystem function and grazingland livelihoods
Teague, R., & Barnes, M. (2017) · African Journal of Range & Forage Science · doi:10.2989/10220119.2017.1334706 · Cited by 171 · see citing works
Invited Review: Methane Sources, Quantification, and Mitigation in Grazing Beef Systems
Thompson, L. R., & Rowntree, J. E. (2020) · Applied Animal Science · doi:10.15232/aas.2019-01951 · Cited by 112 · see citing works
Self-citationEcosystem Impacts and Productive Capacity of a Multi-Species Pastured Livestock System
Rowntree, J. E., Stanley, P. L., Maciel, I. C. F., Thorbecke, M., Rosenzweig, S. T., Hancock, D. W., Guzman, A., & Raven, M. R. (2020) · Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems · doi:10.3389/fsufs.2020.544984 · Cited by 110 · see citing works
Self-citation
- Authors
- Teague, W. R., Apfelbaum, S., Lal, R., Kreuter, U. P., Rowntree, J., Davies, C. A., Conser, R., Rasmussen, M., Hatfield, J., Wang, T., Wang, F., & Byck, P.
- Affiliations
- Iowa State University (US)
- Agricultural Research Service (US)
- Venue
- Journal of Soil and Water Conservation
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2016-03
- Volume
- 71
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 156-164
- ISSN
- 0022-4561 (ISSN-L)
- 1941-3300
- OpenAlex
- W2310732461
- Cited by
- 179
- References
- 2
- Citations by year
- 2026: 22 · 2025: 25 · 2024: 23 · 2023: 15 · 2022: 21 · 2021: 28 · 2020: 19 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 8
- FWCI
- 7.58
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- Journal of Soil and Water Conservation (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- U.S. Department of Agriculture
- Rice University
- Nuclear Safety and Security Commission
- Agricultural Research Service
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Agriculture Sustainability and Environmental Impact
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Soil Science › Soil Carbon and Nitrogen Dynamics
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Environmental Chemistry › Sustainable Agricultural Systems Analysis
- Keywords
- ruminants, greenhouse gas emissions, methane, regenerative agriculture, grazing management, soil carbon sequestration, soil erosion, conservation agriculture, agroecosystems, ecosystem services, forage cover, soil organic carbon, biodiversity, North America
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
