GHG mitigation potential of different grazing strategies in the united states southern great plains
Open accessAbstract
The possibility of reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by ruminants using improved grazing is investigated by estimating GHG emissions for cow-calf farms under light continuous (LC), heavy continuous (HC) and rotational grazing, also known as multi-paddock (MP), management strategies in Southern Great Plain (SGP) using life cycle assessment (LCA). Our results indicated a GHG emission with these grazing treatments of 8034.90 kg·CO2e·calf−1·year−1 for cow-calf farms in SGP region, which is high, compared to that for other regions, due to the high percentage (79.6%) of enteric CH4 emissions caused by relatively lower feed quality on the unfertilized rangeland. Sensitivity analyses on MP grazing strategy showed that an increase in grass quality and digestibility could potentially reduce GHG emission by 30%. Despite higher GHG emissions on a per calf basis, net GHG emissions in SGP region are potentially negative when carbon (C) sequestration is taken into account. With net C emission rates of −2002.8, −1731.6 and −89.5 kg C ha−1·year−1 after converting from HC to MP, HC to LC and from LC to MP, our analysis indicated cow-calf farms converting from continuous to MP grazing in SGP region are likely net carbon sinks for decades.
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?
Wang et al. (2015) demonstrated that AMP grazing lands sequestered 3 Mg C ha-1 yr-1 more than land under continuous grazing.
“This is also demonstrated by Wang et al. (2015) where AMP grazing lands sequestered 3 Mg C ha -1 yr -1 more than land under 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 Wang et al. (2015)
Section 3.2 reports greater carbon sequestration after conversion from heavy continuous (HC) to multi-paddock (MP) grazing, supporting the comparison in direction. But the rate depends on the assumed transition period: it gives 1.765 Mg C ha⁻¹ yr⁻¹ for the 20-year scenario, not an unqualified 3 Mg C ha⁻¹ yr⁻¹. Section 2.3.2 explains that these rates are estimates calculated from differences in soil-carbon stocks, rather than directly measured annual rates. (LLM, conf=0.84)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredBased on the 3.53 Mg C ha-1 yr-1 of C sequestered over a 9-year period in Wang et al. (2015), we expect that our soils could continue to sequester at this rate for several years.
“Based on the 3.53 Mg C ha -1 yr -1 of C sequestered over a 9-year period in Wang et al. (2015), we expect that our soils could continue to sequester at this rate for several years.”
From Impacts of soil carbon sequestration on life cycle greenhouse gas emissions in Midwestern USA beef finishing systems (2018) · cites this paper as Wang et al. (2015)
Table 4 reports 3,530 kg C ha⁻¹ yr⁻¹ (3.53 Mg) for a modeled 10-year transition from heavy continuous to multi-paddock grazing. Section 2.3.2 describes 10-, 15-, and 20-year scenarios, not an observed nine-year period. The expectation for the citing authors’ own soils is their inference, not a finding attributed to Wang et al. (LLM, conf=0.91)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredCompared to continuous grazing systems, AMP grazing is thought to bolster SOC accrual by adaptively optimizing grazing frequency, timing, duration, and intensity, thereby increasing SOC inputs, reducing losses, and improving the efficiency of below-ground transformations.
“Compared to continuous grazing systems, AMP grazing is thought to bolster SOC accrual by adaptively optimizing grazing frequency, timing, duration, and intensity, thereby increasing SOC inputs, reducing losses, and improving the efficiency of below-ground transformations”
From Impact of 10 years of adaptive multi-paddock grazing on soil carbon and beef's greenhouse gas footprint in the US Upper Midwest (2026) · cites this paper as Wang et al., 2015
Split into 2 atoms — 1 confirmed, 1 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredWang et al. (2015) reported 3.53 Mg C ha-1 yr-1 of C sequestration for pastures transitioned from heavy continuous grazing to AMP grazing in northern Texas, U.S., a value close to our rate (3.59 Mg C ha-1 yr-1).
“Assuming management similar to that in our study, for pastures transitioned from heavy continuous grazing to AMP grazing in northern Texas, U.S., Wang et al. (2015) reported 3.53 Mg C ha -1 yr -1 of C sequestration, a value close to our rate (3.59 Mg C ha -1 yr -1 ).”
From Impacts of soil carbon sequestration on life cycle greenhouse gas emissions in Midwestern USA beef finishing systems (2018) · cites this paper as Wang et al. (2015)
These practices explain the higher relative sequestration rates compared to some others.
“These practices explain the higher relative sequestration rates compared to some others (Wang et al., 2015;Conant et al., 2017).”
From Ecosystem Impacts and Productive Capacity of a Multi-Species Pastured Livestock System (2020) · cites this paper as Wang et al., 2015
Our estimated soil C sequestration rate lies toward the higher end of reported values, both above and below some other literature values.
“Compared to other literature, our estimated soil C sequestration rate lies toward the higher end-both above (Wang et al., 2015;Conant et al., 2017) and below (Stanley et al., 2018) reported values from others.”
From Ecosystem Impacts and Productive Capacity of a Multi-Species Pastured Livestock System (2020) · cites this paper as Wang et al., 2015
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
Full accounting of the greenhouse gas (CO2, N2O, CH4) budget of nine European grassland sites
Soussana, J. F., Allard, V., Pilegaard, K., Ambus, P., Amman, C., Campbell, C., Ceschia, E., Clifton-Brown, J., Czobel, S., Domingues, R., et al. (2007) · Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment · doi:10.1016/j.agee.2006.12.022 · Cited by 505 · cited 1× · see citing works
“[48], who reported a C sequestration rate of 2400 ± 700 kg·C·ha−1·year−1.”
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 37
- Flachowsky G.; Kamphues J. Carbon footprints for food of animal origin: What are the most preferable criteria to measure animal yields? Animal 2012, 2, 108-126.
- Zilverberg, C.J.; Johnson, P.; Weinheimer, J.; Allen, V.G. Energy and carbon costs of selected cow-calf systems. Rangel. Ecol. Manag. 2011, 64, 573-584.
- Gerrish, J. Management-Intensive Grazing, the Grassroots of Grass Farming; Green Park Press: Ridgeland, MS, USA, 2004.
- Stinner, D.H.; Stinner, B.R.; Martsolf, E. Biodiversity as an organizing principle in agroecosystem management: Case studies of holistic resource management practitioners in the USA. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 1997, 62, 199-213.
- Teague, R.; Provenza, F.; Kreuter, U.; Steffens, T.; Barnes, M. Multi-paddock grazing on rangelands: Why the perceptual dichotomy between research results and rancher experience? J. Environ. Manag. 2013, 128, 699-717.
- Teague, W.R.; Kreuter, U.P.; Grant, W.E.; Diaz-Solis, H.; Kothmann, M.M. Economic implications of maintaining rangeland ecosystem health in a semiarid savanna. Ecol. Econ. 2009, 68, 1417-1429.
- Teague, W.R.; Grant, B.; Wang, H. Assessing optimal configurations of multi-paddock grazing strategies in tallgrass prairie using a simulation model. J. Environ. Manag. 2015, 150, 262-273.
- Lupo, C.D.; Clay, D.E.; Benning, J.L.; Stone, J.J. Life-cycle assessment of the beef cattle production system for the Northern Great Plains, USA. J. Environ. Qual. 2014, 42, 1386-1394.
- Liebig, M.A.; Gross, J.R.; Kronberg, S.L.; Phillips, R.L.; Hanson J.D. Grazing management contributions to net global warming potential: A long-term evaluation in the Northern Great Plains. J. Environ. Qual. 2010, 39, 799-809.
- Schils, R.L.M.; Olesen J.E.; del Prado, A.; Soussana, J.F. A review of a farm level modeling approach for mitigating greenhouse gas emissions from ruminant livestock systems. Livest. Sci. 2007, 112, 240-251.
- Soussana, J.F.; Tallec T.; Blanfort, V. Mitigating the greenhouse gas balance of ruminant production systems through carbon sequestration in grasslands. Animal 2010, 4, 334-350.
- Teague, W.R.; Dowhower, S.L.; Baker, S.A.; Haile, N.; DeLaune, P.B.; Conover, D.M. Grazing management impacts on vegetation, soil biota and soil chemical, physical and hydrological properties in tall grass prairie. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 2011, 141, 310-322.
- Ogino, A.; Orito, H.; Shimada, K.; Hirooka, H. Evaluating environmental impacts of the Japanese beef cow-calf system by the life cycle assessment method. J. Anim. Sci. 2007, 78, 424-432.
- Bagley, C.P.; Carpenter J.C., Jr.; Feazel J.I.; Hembry F.G.; Huffman D.C.; Koonce K.L. Influence of calving season and stocking rate on beef cow-calf productivity. J. Anim. Sci. 1987, 64, 687-694.
- Arthington, J.D.; Roka, F.M.; Mullahey, J.J.; Coleman, S.W.; Muchovej, R.M.; Lollis, L.O.; Hitchcock, D. Integrating ranch forage production, cattle performance, and economics in ranch management systems for southern Florida. Rangel. Ecol. Manag. 2007, 60, 12-18.
- Scaglia, G.; Swecker. W.S., Jr; Fontenot, J.P.; Fiske, D.; Fike, J.H.; Abaye, A.O.; Peterson, P.R.; Clapham, W.; Hall, J.B. Forage systems for cow-calf production in the Appalachian region. J. Anim. Sci. 2008, 86, 2032-2042.
- Hoveland, C.S.; McCann, M.A.; Hill, N.S. Rotational vs continuous stocking of beef cows and calves on mixed endophyte free tall fescue-bermudagrass pasture. J. Prod. Agric. 1997, 10, 245-250.
- McCann, M.A. Rotational vs. continuous grazing. In Proceedings of the Southeastern Sustainable Animal Waste Workshop; University Georgia: Tifton, GA, USA, 1997; pp. 277-280.
- Chestnut, A.B.; Fribourg, H.A.; Onks, D.O.; McLaren, J.B.; Gwinn, K.D.; Mueller, M.A. Performance of cows and calves with continuous or rotational stocking of endophyte-infested tall fescue-clover pastures. J. Prod. Agric. 1992, 5, 405-408.
- Wyatt, W.E.; Venuto, B.C.; Gillespie, J.M.; Blouin, D.C.; Redfearn, D.D. Effects of year-round stocking rates and stocking methods on performance of cow-calf pairs grazing dallisgrass-common bermudagrass pastures overseeded with annual ryegrass. Prof. Anim. Sci. 2012, 28, 417-432.
- Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Climate Change 2007: The Scientific Basis; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 2007.
- Westberg, H.; Lamb, B.; Johnson, K.A.; Huyler, M. Inventory of methane emissions from U.S. cattle. J. Geophys. Res. 2001, 106, 633-642.
- ICF Consulting. Methods for Estimating Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Manure Management. In Proceedings of the Greenhouse Gas Committee, Emission Inventory Improvement Program, U.S. EPA, Washington, DC, USA, September 1999.
- ICF Consulting. Methods for Estimating Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Agricultural Soils. In Proceedings of the Greenhouse Gas Committee, Emission Inventory Improvement Program, U.S. EPA, Washington, DC, USA, September 1999.
- Wang, T.; Park S.C.; Bevers S.; Teague, R.; Cho, J. Factors affecting cow-calf herd performance and greenhouse gas emissions. J. Agric. Resour. Econ. 2013, 38, 435-456.
- Del Grosso J.; Walsh, M.; Duffield, J. US Agriculture and Forestry Greenhouse Gas Inventory: 1990-2005; USDA Technical Bulletin: Washington, DC, USA, 2008.
- Heitschmidt, R.K.; Dowhower, S.L.; Walker, J.W. Some effects of a rotational grazing treatment on quantity and quality of available forage and amount of ground litter. J. Range Manag. 1987, 40, 318-321.
- Potter, K.N.; Torbert, H.A.; Johnson, H.B.; Tischler, C.R. Carbon storage after long-term grass establishment on degraded soils. Soil Sci. 1999, 164, 718-725.
- Stephenson, K.; Bosch, D.; Groover, G. Carbon credit potential from intensive rotational grazing under carbon credit certification protocols. In Proceedings of the American Agricultural Economics Association Annual Meeting, Denver, CO, USA, 1-4 August 2004.
- Gascoigne, W.R.; Hoag, D.; Koontz, L.; Tangen, B.A.; Shaffer, T.L.; Gleason, R.A. Valuing ecosystem and economic services across land-use scenarios in the Prairie Pothole Region of the Dakotas, USA. Ecol. Econ. 2011, 70, 1715-1725.
- Smith, P. Do grasslands act as a perpetual sink for carbon? GCB 2014, 20, 2708-2711.
- Pelletier, N.; Pirog, R.; Rasmussen, R. Comparative life cycle environmental impacts of three beef production strategies in the upper Midwestern United States. Agric. Syst. 2010, 103, 380-389.
- DeRamus, H.A.; Clement, T.C.; Giampola, D.D.; Peter C.D. Methane emissions on beef cattle on forages: Efficiency of grazing management systems. J. Environ. Qual. 2003, 32, 269-277.
- Follett, R.F.; Reed, D.A. Soil carbon sequestration in grazing lands: Societal benefits and policy implications. Rangel. Ecol. Manag. 2010, 63, 4-15.
- Soussana, J.F.; Loiseau, P.; Vuichard, N.; Ceschia, E.; Balesdent, J.; Chevallier, J.T.; Arrouays, D. Carbon cycling and sequestration opportunities in temperate grasslands. Soil Use Manag. 2004, 20, 219-230.
- Vermeulen, S.J.; Campbell. B.M.; Ingram, J.S.I. Climate Change and Food Systems. Annu. Rev. Environ. Resour. 2012, 37, 195-222.
- Lal, R. Soil erosion and the global carbon budget. Environ. Int. 2003, 29, 437-450.
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
Ecosystem 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
Garcia, L., Stanley, P. L., Sacramento, J. P., Dillon, J. A., Thorbecke, M., Thompson, L. R., Ambike, V., Sharma, P., Xu, S., Chiavegato, M. B., et al. (2026) · Agricultural Systems · doi:10.1016/j.agsy.2026.104879 · Cited by 1 · see citing works
- Authors
- Wang, T., Teague, W., Park, S., & Bevers, S.
- Affiliations
- South Dakota State University (US)
- Texas A&M AgriLife Research, Vernon, TX 76384, USA
- Corresponding author
- Wang, Tong
- Venue
- Sustainability
- Publisher
- MDPI AG
- Published
- 2015-09-30
- Volume
- 7
- Issue
- 10
- Pages
- 13500-13521
- ISSN
- 2071-1050 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1760273476
- Cited by
- 69
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2026: 5 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 3
- FWCI
- 3.32
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Sustainability (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Agriculture Sustainability and Environmental Impact
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Environmental Chemistry › Sustainable Agricultural Systems Analysis
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Agronomy and Crop Science › Ruminant Nutrition and Digestive Physiology
- Keywords
- greenhouse gas emissions reduction, ruminant grazing, rotational grazing, continuous grazing, enteric methane, carbon sequestration, life cycle assessment, Southern Great Plains, rangeland, grass quality, feed digestibility
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
