Search

Simple Summary: The environmental impacts and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions have been evaluated across studies due to global climate change. Livestock production systems may be responsible in part for the increase in GHGs and, consequently, the environmental impacts. This study analyzed the environmental inputs and outputs and economic factors of a beef cattle feedlot system. Using a partial Life Cycle Assessment approach, we provide more information for consumers, researchers, scientists, and government officials about the environmental impacts arising from the production of premium and super-premium beef. We found that feed production is the most important source of GHGs, and diesel fuel plays a minor role in the environmental impacts. Finally, increased marbling degree in meat can lead to an increase in environmental impacts. When individual purchasing power increases in society, there is a trend toward a quantitative and qualitative increase in the consumption of products. Considering the magnitude of beef production in Brazil, environmental impacts are important factors for the domestic and international markets. This study assessed a Brazilian feedlot system characterized by high animal welfare standards that produces high-quality beef that is more marbled than that produced in grass-fed systems. We assessed the environmental impacts and compared premium and super-premium beef produced in a feedlot system using a partial Life Cycle Assessment (LCA). Data were collected directly on the property analyzed, considering environmental inputs and outputs and economic factors associated with the production stages of each line (premium versus super-premium). The results show that high-quality beef has, beyond a greater financial cost, an environmental cost, with the super-premium line producing a 286% higher carbon footprint, 297% more eutrophication, and three times higher acidification potential and land use than the premium line. The results of the environmental impacts agree with the results of production costs, reflecting a 282.82% higher production cost in super-premium than in premium animals. Footprints of 5.0323 kg, 4.7746 kg, and 8.8858 kg CO2 eq./kg live weight gain at the feedlot were found in the three lines. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The objective of this article was to evaluate the effect of probiotic addition on average daily gain and feed conversion on the final piglet nursery phase. This study used a systematic review by meta-analysis to contrast the effect of piglets supplementation without antibiotics (negative control) and with antibiotics (positive control). These results archived a dichotomy that suggests a need for different statistical treatments to evaluate these outcomes obtained by articles. Because of this, a metaanalysis evaluation is justified to identify the animal performance on probiotic or antibiotic supplementation conditions. The use of probiotics improved the feed conversion in the experiments that used NC and PC, as well as improved the weight gain in those that used NC. It is concluded that the restoration of the intestinal flora by the supply of probiotics with a positive effect on the intestinal tract decreases the risk of diarrhea and causes better absorption of nutrients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]