7 ms·
Little-known leguminous plant can increase beef production by 60% (2022)
- littlexsparkee 1y agoDue to direct benefit to herders, this is easier to reinforce than methane reductions with supplement e.g. seaweed as has been posted here before, since those benefits are not captured (without a carbon market or climate-friendly consumer branding to command a premium). Even if beef was methane-free, it would still have a larger impact than chicken (without regenerative agriculture, silviculture etc) but projections show that consumption is going to grow steadily as the global middle class grows so adopting these efficiencies will be important.
- stefantalpalaru 1y ago[dead]
- kazinator 1y ago> Legume improves bovine digestion and reduces methane emissions. For people too---but you have to pass it through a cow first and eat it in the form of beef. Otherwise ...
- Aromasin 1y agoGut biome is important for legume consumption. The first few months I went to a plant based diet my digestion was hell. At some point I reached a turning point though, and my gut health became even better than before. My flatulence was so much worse when I was eating meat regularly - often room clearing.
- teaearlgraycold 1y agoI changed to being mostly vegetarian a few years ago and the gas only lasted about a month.
- markdown 1y agoWhat is "mostly vegetarian"?
- shinryuu 1y agoI'm also mostly vegetarian, meaning about five times a year or so I like to eat salmon sushi.
- teaearlgraycold 1y agoFor me it means I reduced my meat consumption by about 95%. As far as I see it that’s 95% as good as being completely vegetarian, which is a pretty good score! I usually like the tongue in cheek term “fake vegetarian”.
- kazinator 1y ago> Gut biome is important for legume consumption. Not to mention being a ruminant with multiple stomach compartments and a long gut.
- Aromasin 1y agoHumans are quite capable of digesting a diet rich in legumes just like all our other close relatives in the great ape kingdom. They subsist on a 85-99% plant based diet, primarily of fruits, nuts, and seeds. We have clearly adapted to eat more meat as our bodies changed to master running and throwing for hunting, but we are still a variant of great apes at the end of the day.
- metalman 1y agodouble digit improvements across the board from a perenial pasture mix is realy impressive and likely to spur intrest in finding other combos that give similar results in dairy feed. nitrogen is the key ingredient required for the digestion of all sorts of otherwise waste plant matter by cattle, so if this new pasture cover can be harvested as hay and mixed with other dryed plant matter, it would then be of use in dairy. Hay is still the worlds largest crop.....
- zahlman 1y agoIf this has been known for years and nobody's trying to implement it, surely there's a catch?
- wetpaws 1y ago[dead]
- 0cf8612b2e1e 1y agoAgreed. Farming is incredibly data driven/cost conscious. For the entire industry to not make this an overnight priority says something about the analysis is missing.
- littlexsparkee 1y agoAdoption is growing in Brazil but it takes a while for a practice to become mainstream.
- danielheath 1y ago“Worked once in a specific tropical pasture”. AFAIK, most beef production is not in the tropics.
- Izikiel43 1y agoSouth of Brazil is in the tropic of capricorn and it's a beef producing region
- Loughla 1y ago100% accurate. Livestock feed is (like most agriculture) hyper optimized. If they could increase production by 60% with any additive at all, it would immediately see widespread use. People still have this weird view of farming that it's like Johnny Goodguy and his family taking care of a small herd. While that exists still, Johnny is also tracking every input and outcome and optimizing daily. The data collection and use in Ag would astound people.
- aaron695 1y ago[dead]
- wonderwonder 1y ago"There is resistance among farmers not only because the seeds are expensive, but also because the species used so far, especially Stylosanthes, do not persist when associated with Brachiaria grasses", Boddey explains. After some time in the field the leguminous plant wanes or dies, and it is necessary to renew the pasture, which entails further costs and work." So the farmers did the math and the money doesn't work. Scientists in this article seem very focused on the climate aspect of it while the farmers themselves are going to be focused on the bottom line. Farmers are not going to entail extra costs if they don't have to much the same as any other business owner.
- imoverclocked 1y agoYou might underestimate the ability to market lower-carbon beef though. Where you see a disincentive, others may see the next "organic."
- wonderwonder 1y agoI certainly don't speak for everyone but I don't see that catching on at the individual level. People eat the organic because its objectively healthier. I don't think most people that eat beef would care if its low carbon. I eat a good deal of beef, probably 3 steaks a week personally and another 3 in total for my wife and kids. I'm not going to pay x% more for low carbon. With that said I could absolutely see Europe mandating this and forcing everyone to just pay more for beef. So you're right, if they can target this at governments then they could force it to catch on.
- aurelien_gasser 1y ago> People eat the organic because its objectively healthier What makes you say it is objectively healthier?
- wonderwonder 1y agoIts a fair question, not sure why you are being downvoted. I don't buy organic. The primary reason for me to consider it healthier is just that the animals are fed (supposedly) on pesticide free feed. My opinion rests on that. If you are speaking from a pure nutrition perspective I would say nothing. There are others that I am sure would argue for other reasons such as the reduction of drug resistant bacteria for the good of all but I'm not sure that really plays out. It only works if the amount of organic sold far outstrips non organic. It also means intentionally paying more for the good of the commons while the majority don't.
- fuzztester 1y agolow contrast text site - barely readable. https://pasteboard.co/DO3NDAWRwLc4.png https://pasteboard.co/DO3NDAWRwLc4.png closed asap. when the fuck will people learn?
- wffurr 1y agoDidn’t look like that for me, plenty of contrast and much sturdier letter forms. https://pasteboard.co/Xmg4tUPP9Cal.png https://pasteboard.co/Xmg4tUPP9Cal.png iOS 18.5 in app browser
- fuzztester 1y agowow, interesting, and thanks for the feedback. android 13 here. I am not sure what the reason is, then. I tried increasing the brightness of my screen, but there seems to be no change. but a lot of people, including on hn, do say that this low contrast thing is a disturbing trend, and from quite sometime now. it's a pita.
- zdragnar 1y agoAndroid 16 / mobile Chrome here, it displays a dark font like the iOS paste above. It looks more like the browser is rendering the font color incorrectly than anything.
- fuzztester 1y agoforgot to mention that it is mobile Firefox. I had checked the settings earlier, nothing seemed applicable. interestingly, just now I tried it on mobile Chrome, on the same phone, and it rendered okay. https://pasteboard.co/pPrVKF3dyyhz.png https://pasteboard.co/pPrVKF3dyyhz.png (didn't think of that earlier somehow, dumb me, maybe because the page wasn't that important to me.) so it may be a mobile Firefox issue.
- binary132 1y agoYeah, renders fine on my device too (ios 18.5 safari)
- 1y ago
- ungreased0675 1y agoIs this plant an invasive species?
- varenc 1y agoAs said in the article, it's Asian in origin. Probably wouldn't call it invasive since it needs renewal on a regular basis.