Håvard Steinshamn
Research Professor
(+47) 906 82 643
havard.steinshamn@nibio.no
Place
Tingvoll
Visiting address
Gunnars veg 6, 6630 Tingvoll
Biography
Authors
Martha Irene Grøseth Linda Karlsson Håvard Steinshamn Marianne Johansen Alemayehu Kidane Sagaye Egil PrestløkkenAbstract
No abstract has been registered
Authors
Berit Marie Blomstrand Stig Milan Thamsborg Håvard Steinshamn Heidi L Enemark Inga Marie Aasen Karl-Christian Mahnert Kristin Sørheim Francesca Sheperd Jos Houdijk Spiridoula AthanasiadouAbstract
Plant secondary metabolites (PSMs) may improve gastrointestinal health by exerting immunomodulatory, anti-inflammatory and/or antiparasitic effects. Bark extracts from coniferous tree species have previously been shown to reduce the burden of a range of parasite species in the gastrointestinal tract, with condensed tannins as the potential active compounds. In the present study, the impact of an acetone extract of pine bark (Pinus sylvestris) on the resistance, performance and tolerance of genetically diverse mice (Mus musculus) was assessed. Mice able to clear an infection quickly (fast responders, BALB/c) or slowly (slow responders, C57BL/6) were infected orally with 200 infective third-stage larvae (L3) of the parasitic nematode Heligmosomoides bakeri or remained uninfected (dosed with water only). Each infection group of mice was gavaged for 3 consecutive days from day 19 post-infection with either bark extract or dimethyl sulphoxide (5%) as vehicle control. Oral administration of pine bark extract did not have an impact on any of the measured parasitological parameter. It did, however, have a positive impact on the performance of infected, slow-responder mice, through an increase in body weight (BW) and carcase weight and reduced feed intake by BW ratio. Importantly, bark extract administration had a negative impact on the fast responders, by reducing their ability to mediate the impact of parasitism through reducing their performance and tolerance. The results indicate that the impact of PSMs on parasitized hosts is affected by host's genetic susceptibility, with susceptible hosts benefiting more from bark extract administration compared to resistant ones.
Authors
Kristian Hansen Matthias Koesling Håvard Steinshamn Bjørn Gunnar Hansen Tommy Dalgaard Sissel HansenAbstract
In this study, 200 Norwegian dairy farms were analyzed over three years to compare greenhouse gas emissions, nitrogen (N) intensity, gross margin, and land use occupation between organically and conventionally managed farms. Conventionally managed farm groups were constructed based on propensity matching, selecting the closest counterparts to organically managed farms (n=15). These groups, each containing 15 farms, were differentiated by an increasing number of matching variables. The first group was matched based on geographical location, milk quota, and milking cow units. In the second match, the proportion of milking cows in the total cattle herd was added, and in the third, the ratio of milk delivered to milk produced and concentrate usage per dairy cow were included. The analysis showed that the conventionally managed farms (n=185) had higher greenhouse gas emissions (1.42 vs 0.98 kg CO2 per 2.78 MJ of edible energy from milk and meat, calculated as GWP100-AR4) and higher N intensity (6.9 vs 5.0 kg N input per kg N output) compared to the organic farms (N=15). When comparing emissions per kg of energy-corrected milk (ECM) delivered, conventional farms also emitted more CO2 (1.07 vs 0.8 kg CO2 per kg ECM). Furthermore, conventionally managed farms showed lower gross margins both in terms of NOK per 2.78 MJ edible energy delivered (5.8 vs 6.5 NOK) and per milking cow unit (30 100 vs 34 400 NOK), and they used less land (2.9 vs 3.6 m² per 2.78 MJ edible energy delivered) compared to organic farms. No differences were observed among the three conventionally managed groups in terms of emissions, N intensity, land use occupation, and gross margin.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/f9a00/f9a001316e3a2d154db793db983bcf8486791c92" alt="YeRoP project"
Division of Food Production and Society
Potential of biorefining fresh and preserved forages for year-round green protein supply in Norway
This YeRoP-project (Potential of biorefining fresh and preserved forages for
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/408ce/408ceb7f8322dcabe2c1330603412a49ed6fa7da" alt="Amazing_logo_uten_ramme"
Division of Forest and Forest Resources
#Amazing grazing - bærekraftig kjøtt og ull fra sau som beiter i norsk utmark
Kjøtt og ull fra norske sauer kommer fra gårder med ulikt ressursgrunnlag, ulike driftsopplegg og ulik ressursbruk. I dette prosjektet skal vi undersøke sauebonden sitt driftsopplegg, forbrukeren sin innsikt, og rammevilkårene som både bonden og forbrukeren må forholde seg til. Hvordan kan produksjonen forbedres, og hvordan kan forbrukeren få mer kunnskap og nærhet til hva beitebruk bidrar med gjennom produktene?
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/98250/982504f0149320fa7dc7db6321dd6156e9447dc8" alt="Cultivated landscape"
Division of Food Production and Society
Visions and the consequences - analysing visions for Norwegian agriculture and its consequences for food security
In the FOSIP project (Visions and the consequences - analysing visions for Norwegian agriculture and its consequences for food security) we will assess and evaluate the foundation, support, opportunities, and limitations for the goal of increased agri-food self-sufficiency in Norway and assess how far an increase will contribute to improved national food security.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/a9364/a9364ffa7afa3b675c19f47a7b5b2ce0c3e34c95" alt="Vestlandsk fjordfe".jpg?quality=60)
Division of Food Production and Society
Cultivating sustainable changes in livestock feed production and feeding practices (Feed&Feeding)
The project will evaluate various strategies for feed production and feeding practices to enhance the sustainability of Norway's food system and support national agricultural policy goals. These strategies include adjusting livestock diets, improving breeding and animal health, and introducing new protein sources for feed. The project will assess environmental impacts, such as land use changes, greenhouse gas emissions, soil carbon levels, nutrient balances, and biodiversity, as well as socioeconomic impacts, including food security, economic and social sustainability, and the viability of rural communities.