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.
2020
Forfattere
Eva Narten HøbergSammendrag
Det er ikke registrert sammendrag
Vitenskapelig – Performance of the Norwegian dairy farms: A dynamic stochastic approach
Habtamu Alem
Forfattere
Habtamu AlemSammendrag
From a theoretical perspective, it is well stated that the farm's decision on the use of inputs depends on the farmer's ability to make an efficient decision over time. The existing literature in performance analysis of the dairy farms based on static modeling and thus ignores the inter-temporal nature of production decisions. This paper aims to construct a dynamic stochastic production frontier incorporating the sluggish adjustment of inputs, to measure the performance of dairy farms in Norway. The empirical application focused on the farm-level analysis of the Norwegian dairy sector for 2000- 2018. The dynamic frontier estimated using the system Generalized Method of Moments estimator. The analysis shows that the static model in the previous studies underestimates the performance of the dairy farms.
Sammendrag
Det er ikke registrert sammendrag
Sammendrag
This paper analyses two strategies to reduce the use of pesticides in grain production. We study Norwegian farmers’ willingness to voluntarily forego income by reducing pesticide use as well as their responses to a doubling of the pesticide price (through increased pesticide taxes). We use mixed methods including an experiment, a survey and focus group discussions. The experiment shows that most farmers are willing to sacrifice some income to reduce environmental risks by using less pesticide. According to the survey, they are, at the same time, relatively insensitive to a 100% price increase on herbicides and fungicides. While the response to the price increase probably would have been stronger if differentiated between chemicals, our research indicates potential benefits from supporting voluntary action. Value orientations and agronomic conditions influence the stated responses in both circumstances. Respondents emphasizing environmental values are more willing to voluntarily reduce pesticide use and show a greater response to the economic incentive than farmers emphasizing economic outcome and issues such as clean fields. A hypothesized willingness to reduce pesticide use voluntarily to strengthen the reputation of the sector was, however, rejected. Farmers appear to have few alternatives to pesticides, but increased knowledge about the alternatives that do exist, seems able to promote some change. Our findings suggest that the extension service should put greater emphasis on these options, even if they may have negative effects on income.
Forfattere
Tor J. Johansen Anne-Marie Cortesero Michael T. Gaffney Richard Meadow Quentin Schorpp Rosemary CollierSammendrag
Det er ikke registrert sammendrag
Sammendrag
Det er ikke registrert sammendrag
Sammendrag
Phosphorus retention and bank erosion was investigated in two types of buffer zones in cereal fields in Norway: zones used for grass production and zones with natural vegetation. Farmers’ views on the two types of buffer zones were collected through questionnaires and indepth interviews. Our results indicate that the grassed buffer zones had higher levels of plant-available phosphorus and lower infiltration rates than the natural ones. Bank erosion was higher in zones with grass production than those with trees. Interviews with farmers revealed diverging opinions on the zones. Most farmers were sceptical to natural vegetation with trees, whereas farmers who had already planted trees in the riparian zones were generally satisfied. Buffer zones can have many different functions, and we conclude that a holistic approach is needed when assessing the usefulness of this measure, taking into account water quality, biodiversity and the production of food, fodder and biomass.
Forfattere
Ranjana Pathak Åshild Ergon Arne Stensvand Hans Ragnar Gislerød Knut Asbjørn Solhaug Lance Cadle-Davidson Aruppillai SuthaparanSammendrag
Det er ikke registrert sammendrag
Forfattere
David M. Geiser Abdullah M. S. Al-Hatmi Takayuki Aoki Tsutomu Arie Virgilio Balmas Irene Barnes Gary C. Bergstrom Madan K. Bhattacharyya Cheryl L. Blomquist Robert L. Bowden Balázs Brankovics Daren W. Brown Lester W. Burgess Kathryn Bushley Mark Busman José F. Cano-Lira Joseph D. Carrillo Hao-Xun Chang Chi-Yu Chen Wanquan Chen Martin Chilvers Sofia Chulze Jeffrey J. Coleman Christina A. Cuomo Z. Wilhelm De Beer G. Sybren de Hoog Johanna Del Castillo-Múnera Emerson M. Del Ponte Javier Diéguez-Uribeondo Antonio Di Pietro Véronique Edel-Hermann Wade H. Elmer Lynn Epstein Akif Eskalen Maria Carmela Esposto Kathryne L. Everts Sylvia P. Fernández-Pavía Gilvan Ferreira da Silva Nora A. Foroud Gerda Fourie Rasmus J. N. Frandsen Stanley Freeman Michael Freitag Omer Frenkel Kevin K. Fuller Tatiana Gagkaeva Donald M. Gardiner Anthony E. Glenn Scott E. Gold Thomas R. Gordon Nancy F. Gregory Marieka Gryzenhout Josep Guarro Beth K. Gugino Santiago Gutierrez Kim E. Hammond-Kosack Linda J. Harris Mónika Homa Cheng-Fang Hong László Hornok Jenn-Wen Huang Macit Ilkit Adriaana Jacobs Karin Jacobs Cong Jiang María del Mar Jiménez-Gasco Seogchan Kang Matthew T. Kasson Kemal Kazan John C. Kennell Hye-Seon Kim H. Corby Kistler Gretchen A. Kuldau Tomasz Kulik Oliver Kurzai Imane Laraba Matthew H. Laurence Theresa Lee Yin-won Lee Yong-Hwan Lee John F. Leslie Edward C.Y. Liew Lily W. Lofton Antonio F. Logrieco Manuel S. López-Berges Alicia G. Luque Erik Lysøe Li-Jun Ma Robert E. Marra Frank N. Martin Sara R. May Susan P. McCormick Chyanna McGee Jacques F. Meis Quirico Migheli N. M. I. Mohamed Nor Michel Monod Antonio Moretti Diane Mostert Giuseppina Mulè Françoise Munaut Gary P. Munkvold Paul Nicholson Marcio Nucci Kerry O’Donnell Matias Pasquali Ludwig H. Pfenning Anna Prigitano Robert H. Proctor Stéphane Ranque Stephen A. Rehner Martijn Rep Gerardo Rodríguez-Alvarado Lindy Joy Rose Mitchell G. Roth Carmen Ruiz-Roldan Amgad A. Saleh Baharuddin Salleh Hyunkyu Sang María Mercedes Scandiani Jonathan Scauflaire David G. Schmale III Dylan P. G. Short Adnan Šišić Jason A. Smith Christopher W. Smyth Hokyoung Son Ellie Spahr Jason E. Stajich Emma T. Steenkamp Christian Steinberg Rajagopal Subramaniam Haruhisa Suga Brett A. Summerell Antonella Susca Cassandra L. Swett Christopher Toomajian Terry J. Torres-Cruz Anna M. Tortorano Martin Urban Lisa J. Vaillancourt Gary E. Vallad Theo A. J. van der Lee Dan Vanderpool Anne D. van Diepeningen Martha M. Vaughan Eduard Venter Marcele Vermeulen Paul E. Verweij Altus Viljoen Cees Waalwijk Emma C. Wallace Grit Walther Jie Wang Todd J. Ward Brian L. Wickes Nathan P. Wiederhold Michael J. Wingfield Ana K. M. Wood Jin-Rong Xu Xiao-Bing Yang Tapani Yli-Mattila Sung-Hwan Yun Latiffah Zakaria Hao Zhang Ning Zhang Sean X. Zhang Xue ZhangSammendrag
Scientific communication is facilitated by a data-driven, scientifically sound taxonomy that considers the end-user's needs and established successful practice. Previously (Geiser et al. 2013; Phytopathology 103:400-408. 2013), the Fusarium community voiced near unanimous support for a concept of Fusarium that represented a clade comprising all agriculturally and clinically important Fusarium species, including the F. solani Species Complex (FSSC). Subsequently, this concept was challenged by one research group (Lombard et al. 2015 Studies in Mycology 80: 189-245) who proposed dividing Fusarium into seven genera, including the FSSC as the genus Neocosmospora, with subsequent justification based on claims that the Geiser et al. (2013) concept of Fusarium is polyphyletic (Sandoval-Denis et al. 2018; Persoonia 41:109-129). Here we test this claim, and provide a phylogeny based on exonic nucleotide sequences of 19 orthologous protein-coding genes that strongly support the monophyly of Fusarium including the FSSC. We reassert the practical and scientific argument in support of a Fusarium that includes the FSSC and several other basal lineages, consistent with the longstanding use of this name among plant pathologists, medical mycologists, quarantine officials, regulatory agencies, students and researchers with a stake in its taxonomy. In recognition of this monophyly, 40 species recently described as Neocosmospora were recombined in Fusarium, and nine others were renamed Fusarium. Here the global Fusarium community voices strong support for the inclusion of the FSSC in Fusarium, as it remains the best scientific, nomenclatural and practical taxonomic option available.
Forfattere
Arne StensvandSammendrag
Det er ikke registrert sammendrag