Publikasjoner
NIBIOs ansatte publiserer flere hundre vitenskapelige artikler og forskningsrapporter hvert år. Her finner du referanser og lenker til publikasjoner og andre forsknings- og formidlingsaktiviteter. Samlingen oppdateres løpende med både nytt og historisk materiale. For mer informasjon om NIBIOs publikasjoner, besøk NIBIOs bibliotek.
2022
Sammendrag
Det er ikke registrert sammendrag
Forfattere
Wendy Marie Waalen Anne Kjersti Uhlen Jon Arne Dieseth Vilde Gadderud Shirin Mohammadi Chloé GrieuSammendrag
Det er ikke registrert sammendrag
Sammendrag
Det er ikke registrert sammendrag
Forfattere
Malin Larsen GræsdahlSammendrag
Denne rapporten er utarbeidet som en del av prosjektet PRESIS og gir en enkel innføring i hvordan gjøre gode målinger ved bruk av drone. I PRESIS-prosjektet bruker vi dronen DJI Phantom 4 Multispectral – derfor brukes den også som referanse i denne rapporten. Prinsippene for å gjøre gode målinger vil også gjelde ved bruk av andre typer droner.
Sammendrag
Det er ikke registrert sammendrag
Forfattere
Darius Kviklys Vytautas Abukauskas Mekjell Meland Walter Guerra I. Höller N. Dallabetta T. Pantezzi J. Carbo J. Lordan A. Karlström F. Fernandez M. Brüggenwirth L. Laňar M. Mészáros T. Rühmer S. Perren S. Cia S. Codarin V. Mathieu F. Bernard P. Bielicki L. Manfrini L. Corelli Grappadelli A. Gomand Jef VercammenSammendrag
In 2017, two multi-location apple rootstock trials were established at 16 sites in 12 European countries. The evaluations are performed by members of the EUFRIN (European Fruit Research Institute Network) Apple & Pear Variety & Rootstock Testing Working Group. Two separate trials were arranged, grouping rootstocks into dwarf and semi-dwarf rootstocks according to the expected vigour; ‘Galaval’ was used as scion cultivar. The trial of dwarf rootstocks includes ‘G.11’ and ‘G.41’ (US), ‘EM_02’, ‘EM_03’, ‘EM_04’, ‘EM_05’ and ‘EM_06’ (UK), ‘62-396-B10®‘ (Russia), ‘P 67’ (Poland), ‘PFR4’ and ‘PFR5’ (New Zealand) and ‘Cepiland-Pajam®2’ as control. The trial of semi-dwarf rootstocks includes ‘G.202’ and ‘G.935’ (US), ‘PFR1’ and ‘PFR3’ (New Zealand), ‘EM_01’ (UK) and ‘G.11’ as a control for both trials. Part of the rootstocks (from dwarf and semi-dwarf rootstock trials) was planted in replanting conditions to test their tolerance to apple replant disease. All test trees came from the same nursery, and a common standardised evaluation protocol was used. Based on preliminary results averaged across sites, dwarf rootstocks can be ranked in terms of vigour in the following order: ‘EM_04’ < ‘EM_03’, ‘EM_05’ < ‘62-396-B10®’, ‘P 67’, ‘EM_02’, ‘G.11’ < ‘G.41’, ‘Cepiland-Pajam®2’ < ‘EM_06’, ‘PFR4’ < ‘PFR5’. On average, semi-dwarf rootstocks can be ranked in terms of vigour in the following order: ‘G11’ < ‘G.935’, ‘G.202’ < ‘PFR3’, ‘EM_01’ < ‘PFR1’. The highest cumulative yield in the young orchard was registered for trees on ‘PFR5’, ‘PFR4’, ‘G.11’, ‘G.41’, ‘Cepiland-Pajam®2’ and ‘EM_02’, while the lowest production was found for trees on ‘EM_04’. In the group of semi-dwarf rootstocks, the highest yield was on ‘PFR3’, ‘G.935’ and ‘PFR1’. Rootstocks also had a significant effect on fruit weight and fruit quality parameters. Results from the young orchards revealed interactions between sites and rootstock, potentially leading to site-specific rootstock choice based on the combination of rootstock, soil conditions and climate.
Sammendrag
Det er ikke registrert sammendrag
Sammendrag
Det er ikke registrert sammendrag
Sammendrag
Young children have unique nutritional requirements, and breastfeeding is the best option to support healthy growth and development. Concerns have been raised around the increasing use of milk-based infant formulas in replacement of breastfeeding, in regards to health, social, economic and environmental factors. However, literature on the environmental impact of infant formula feeding and breastfeeding is scarce. In this study we estimated the environmental impact of four months exclusive feeding with infant formula compared to four months exclusive breastfeeding in a Norwegian setting. We used life-cycle assessment (LCA) methodology, including the impact categories global warming potential, terrestrial acidification, marine and freshwater eutrophication, and land use. We found that the environmental impact of four months exclusive feeding with infant formula was 35–72% higher than that of four months exclusive breastfeeding, depending on the impact category. For infant formula, cow milk was the main contributor to total score for all impact categories. The environmental impact of breastfeeding was dependant on the composition of the lactating mother’s diet. In conclusion, we found that breastfeeding has a lower environmental impact than feeding with infant formula. A limitation of the study is the use of secondary LCA data for raw ingredients and processes.
Sammendrag
Det er ikke registrert sammendrag