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.
2011
Authors
Jutta KapferAbstract
No abstract has been registered
Abstract
No abstract has been registered
Abstract
No abstract has been registered
Authors
Shuai GuoAbstract
No abstract has been registered
Abstract
No abstract has been registered
Abstract
No abstract has been registered
Authors
Haakon Helland Per Gustav Anders Leufvén Gunnar Bengtsson Anne-Berit Wold Hanne Larsen Mette Thomsen Elin Merete Wetterhus Liv Berge Arne HermansenAbstract
No abstract has been registered
Authors
Felix Herzog Katalin Balázs Peter Dennis Tetyana Dyman Wendy Fjellstad Jürgen Friedel Salah Garchi Philippe Jeanneret Rob Jongman Maximilian Kainz Gerardo Moreno Charles Nkwiine Maurizio Paoletti Philippe Pointereau Jean-Pierre Sarthou Siyka Stoyanova Davide ViaggiAbstract
Farmland biodiversity is an important component of Europe’s biodiversity. More than half the continent is occupied by agricultural lands. They host specific habitats and species, which – in addition to the conservation values they provide – perform vital ecological functions. Indicators are needed to enable the monitoring of biodiversity at the farm level for the purpose of assessing the impacts of farming practices and of agricultural policies. Our research aims at identifying farmland biodiversity indicators which are scientifically sound, operational and relevant for stakeholders. We screened the literature for farmland biodiversity indicators and, in an iterative process with stakeholders, we identified 28 candidate indicators for genetic, species and habitat diversity. Those selected biodiversity indicators, as well as 14 management parameters that are known to relate to biodiversity, were assessed in 12 case study regions across Europe. Each case study region represents a typical production system (i.e. specialist field crops, horticulture and permanent crops; specialist grazing with cattle and other livestock types; mixed crop and livestock farming). In each region, 8 – 20 farms were randomly selected, mostly within the two groups of organic and non-organic farms, to obtain a gradient of farming intensity. Indicators were measured applying standardized sampling procedures and farm interviews. Sampling effort was recorded in order to assess the cost of indicator measurement. For each case study region, biodiversity indicators are presently being evaluated in conjunction with management indicators. Surrogate indicators will be proposed when possible and indicators will be prioritized taking into account their validity, practicality, cost and priority for stakeholders. Based on preliminary results, the presentation will focus on the relation between direct (species and habitat diversity) indicators and indirect (farm management) parameters. Part of this research was funded by the EU FP7 contract KBBE-2B-227161. For more information consult www.biobio-indicator.org
Authors
Holger LangeAbstract
Spatial dependencies among environmental variables are often quantified by spatial autocorrelation functions. The latter basically assume linearity and isotropy, requirements usually not satisfied for measured data. Typical symptoms of violated assumptions are biased parameter estimations. Relaxing the assumptions of linear dependencies and isotropy, we present a conceptual generalization of spatial analysis where locally varying anisotropies in the geographical space are uncovered by investigating nonlinear dependencies among observations. The framework is illustrated by generalizing two examples: distance decay relations and spatial filtering. The proposed alternative is based on geodesic ecological and anisotropic spatial distances.
Authors
Eirik NordhagenAbstract
We studied drying of wood chips by surplus heat from two hydroelectric plants in the western part of Norway. The wood was chipped and loaded into the dryer; a tractor-trailer and a container were used. The dryers had perforated floors where warm air from the plants was funnelled into the dryer, using an electric fan of 4 kW. Four separate trials were conducted in September and October 2009. The drying capacity of the trailer and the container was roughly 11.5 m3 and 29 m3 loose respectively. The effective height at which drying took place was 1.2 m and 1.9 m. The average temperatures of the air channelled into the dryers was 15–18 °C in the trailer and 24–26 °C in the container. The fan was operated for 139 hours (twice) for the trailer and 121.5 and 67.5 hour periods for the container. The fan used 556 kWh (twice), 486 kWh and 270 kWh of electricity respectively. The chips located at the bottom dried first, and chips located above dried later. The water content in the chip was measured to 66.1 to 52.1% (wet base) before and 9.6 to 6.9% (wet base) after drying. The amount of water removed from the container was approximately 28 kg per hour and 22 kg per hour from the trailer. For the container, drying cost roughly 9 Euro per MWh; the cost of the trailer was nearly twice as much. This indicates that the drying volume should be as high as possible. Drying determines net calorific value and hence market value of wood chip.