Publications
NIBIOs employees contribute to several hundred scientific articles and research reports every year. You can browse or search in our collection which contains references and links to these publications as well as other research and dissemination activities. The collection is continously updated with new and historical material.
2021
Authors
Matthias KoeslingAbstract
No abstract has been registered
Abstract
Grassland farmers face ever increasing demands on their production systems and the quality of their grassland yields. Estimating pasture quality using traditional field methods is limited as it is time consuming and costly, and requires some destructive sampling. The field of remote sensing offers alternative tools and techniques to overcome some of the limitations and thereby help farmers to receive spatial continuous and near real-time information about grassland quality parameters. This review gives an overview about recent developments in the remote sensing-based estimation of three aspects of grassland quality: feed quality, biological nitrogen fixation by legumes, and the identification of unwanted plant species.
Abstract
No abstract has been registered
Abstract
Pollinating insects are an inherent part of most terrestrial ecosystems as they provide a crucial service for most angiosperms, including numerous important crops. A decrease in pollinator populations can therefore have severe consequences for both natural ecosystems and agricultural yields. Pesticide usage has been pointed out as one of the drivers behind pollinator declines. Globally, neonicotinoids are one of the most commonly used insecticides and studies have shown that exposure at sub-lethal levels can alter foraging behaviour, ultimately negatively affecting survival. Using a custom-made bumblebee colony monitoring system, we examined how the number and duration of foraging bouts of bumblebees (Bombus terrestris) on an individual level, and hive growth rate, was affected by exposure to low (6.5 µg/L) and high (10.6 µg/L) sub-lethal concentrations of the neonicotinoid clothianidin via nectar. We also examined possible interaction between clothianidin exposure and abiotic factors (temperature and precipitation), and its impact on foraging bout number and duration. Exposure to sublethal concentrations of clothianidin increased foraging bout duration in bumblebees. Furthermore, the foraging bout duration decreased with increasing temperature at both exposure concentrations, whereas the unexposed control group was not affected by temperature. Neither number of foraging bouts nor the daily rhythm of foraging bout duration was affected by clothianidin exposure or temperature. The foraging bout duration decreased with increasing precipitation in both exposed and non-exposed groups. However, we did not find any interaction between precipitation and exposure, suggesting that precipitation does not affect toxicity. Our study shows the importance of semi-natural experiments and accounting for ambient factors when assessing the risk that pesticide exposure may present to pollinators. We conclude that the effect of clothianidin exposure on bumblebee foraging behaviour is temperature sensitive and that local climatic conditions and future climate change scenarios should be considered in risk assessments of clothianidin and other insecticides.
Authors
Barry Antonio Costa-Pierce Abagail Bockus Bela H. Buck Sander van den Burg Thierry Chopin João Gomes Ferreira Nils Goseberg Kevin Heasman Johan Johansen Sandra Shumway Neil A. Sims Albert G. J. TaconAbstract
recent publication by Belton et al. raises points for policy-makers and scientists to consider with respect to the future of aquaculture making recommendations on policies and investments in systems and areas of the world where aquaculture can contribute most. Belton et al. take an ‘us versus them’ approach separating aquaculture by economics, livelihood choices, and water salinity. They conclude “that marine finfish aquaculture in offshore environments will confront economic, biophysical, and technological limitations that hinder its growth and prevent it from contributing significantly to global food and nutrition security.” They argue that land-based freshwater aquaculture is a more favorable production strategy than ocean/marine aquaculture; they disagree with government and non-governmental organizations spatial planning efforts that add new aquaculture to existing ocean uses; they advocate for an open commons for wild fisheries as opposed to aquaculture; and they oppose ‘open ocean’ aquaculture and other types of industrial, capital-intensive, ‘carnivorous’ fish aquaculture. They discredit marine aquaculture rather than explain how all aquaculture sectors are significantly more efficient and sustainable for the future of food than nearly all land-based animal protein alternatives. As an interdisciplinary group of scientists who work in marine aquaculture, we disagree with both the biased analyses and the advocacy presented by Belton et al. Marine aquaculture is growing and is already making a significant contribution to economies and peoples worldwide. None of the concerns Belton et al. raise are new, but their stark statement that farming fish in the sea cannot ‘nourish the world’ misses the mark, and policy-makers would be wrong to follow their misinformed recommendations.
Authors
Jose Antonio Vazquez Carolina Hermida-Merino Daniel Hermida-Merino Manuel M. Piñeiro Johan Johansen Carmen G. Sotelo Ricardo I. Perez-Martin Jesus ValcarcelAbstract
No abstract has been registered
Authors
Leticia Regueiro Richard Newton Mohamed Soula Diego Méndez Björn Kok David C. Little Roberto Pastres Johan Johansen Martiña FerreiraAbstract
EU aquaculture produces only a small fraction of the internal demand of aquatic foods, but boosting this activity must be done in compliance with high standards of environmental protection and social benefits, as fostered by the policies on circular economy recently launched by the EU. Nevertheless, the assessment of the environmental sustainability of aquaculture and other food production systems is complex, due to the different tools and approaches available. Moreover, the current EU regulatory framework may be restricting the options to implement some circular solutions. This paper examines the controversies related to the assessment of environmental impacts of aquaculture processes and the different available circular solutions, with a focus on the best options to valorize aquaculture side streams and how current regulatory burdens and gaps should be solved.
Abstract
No abstract has been registered
Abstract
No abstract has been registered
Abstract
No abstract has been registered