The Effect of Cropping Systems on Environmental Impact Associated with Winter Wheat Production—An LCA “Cradle to Farm Gate” Approach
The demand for wheat production is increasing and is associated with environmental effects. To sustain the increased demand, there is a need to find sustainable methods of wheat production. The choice of cropping system can significantly affect the environmental burden of agricultural production sys...
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
MDPI AG
2023-10-01
|
| Series: | Agriculture |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0472/13/11/2068 |
| _version_ | 1797460563106725888 |
|---|---|
| author | Chisenga Emmanuel Mukosha Jan Moudrý Magdaléna Lacko-Bartošová Lucia Lacko-Bartošová Festus Onyebuchi Eze Reinhard W. Neugschwandtner Elnaz Amirahmadi Jiří Lehejček Jaroslav Bernas |
| author_facet | Chisenga Emmanuel Mukosha Jan Moudrý Magdaléna Lacko-Bartošová Lucia Lacko-Bartošová Festus Onyebuchi Eze Reinhard W. Neugschwandtner Elnaz Amirahmadi Jiří Lehejček Jaroslav Bernas |
| author_sort | Chisenga Emmanuel Mukosha |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | The demand for wheat production is increasing and is associated with environmental effects. To sustain the increased demand, there is a need to find sustainable methods of wheat production. The choice of cropping system can significantly affect the environmental burden of agricultural production systems. This study presents the results of monitoring emission loads resulting from winter wheat cultivation under different cropping systems: organic unfertilized (ORG), organic fertilized (ORG-F), conventional unfertilized (CON), and conventional fertilized (CON-F). The system boundaries include all the processes from “cradle to farm gate” and the functional unit was 1 kg of wheat grain. The primary data were obtained from experimental field trials and secondary data from Ecoinvent v3.5, WFLDB, and Agri-footprint v5.0 databases. The results of this study are related to eight impact categories. The SimaPro 9.2.0.1 software and ReCiPe Midpoint (H) V1.13/Europe Recipe H were used for calculation. The results show that fertilized variants recorded higher environmental impacts compared to the unfertilized variants. The results indicate that ORG-F was more environmentally friendly compared to the CON-F variant at the expense of lower yields. Overall, ORG imposes the lowest environmental impact and is deemed to be more environmentally friendly. |
| first_indexed | 2024-03-09T17:07:50Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-d6fe72aa7a3c463c88efba3888d66576 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 2077-0472 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-03-09T17:07:50Z |
| publishDate | 2023-10-01 |
| publisher | MDPI AG |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Agriculture |
| spelling | doaj.art-d6fe72aa7a3c463c88efba3888d665762023-11-24T14:23:02ZengMDPI AGAgriculture2077-04722023-10-011311206810.3390/agriculture13112068The Effect of Cropping Systems on Environmental Impact Associated with Winter Wheat Production—An LCA “Cradle to Farm Gate” ApproachChisenga Emmanuel Mukosha0Jan Moudrý1Magdaléna Lacko-Bartošová2Lucia Lacko-Bartošová3Festus Onyebuchi Eze4Reinhard W. Neugschwandtner5Elnaz Amirahmadi6Jiří Lehejček7Jaroslav Bernas8Department of Agroecosystems, Faculty of Agriculture and Technology, University of South Bohemia in Ceske Budejovice, Branišovská 1645/31A, 370 05 Ceske Budejovice, Czech RepublicDepartment of Agroecosystems, Faculty of Agriculture and Technology, University of South Bohemia in Ceske Budejovice, Branišovská 1645/31A, 370 05 Ceske Budejovice, Czech RepublicInstitute of Agronomic Sciences, Faculty of Agrobiology and Food Resources, Slovak University of Agriculture in Nitra, Tr. A. Hlinku 2, 94976 Nitra, SlovakiaInstitute of Agronomic Sciences, Faculty of Agrobiology and Food Resources, Slovak University of Agriculture in Nitra, Tr. A. Hlinku 2, 94976 Nitra, SlovakiaDepartment of Agroecosystems, Faculty of Agriculture and Technology, University of South Bohemia in Ceske Budejovice, Branišovská 1645/31A, 370 05 Ceske Budejovice, Czech RepublicInstitute of Agronomy, Department of Crop Sciences, University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences Vienna, Konrad-Lorenz-Straße 24, 3430 Tulln, AustriaDepartment of Agroecosystems, Faculty of Agriculture and Technology, University of South Bohemia in Ceske Budejovice, Branišovská 1645/31A, 370 05 Ceske Budejovice, Czech RepublicDepartment of Environmental Security, Faculty of Logistics and Crisis Management, Tomas Bata University in Zlin, Studentské nám. 1532, Mařatice, 686 01 Uherské Hradiště, Czech RepublicDepartment of Agroecosystems, Faculty of Agriculture and Technology, University of South Bohemia in Ceske Budejovice, Branišovská 1645/31A, 370 05 Ceske Budejovice, Czech RepublicThe demand for wheat production is increasing and is associated with environmental effects. To sustain the increased demand, there is a need to find sustainable methods of wheat production. The choice of cropping system can significantly affect the environmental burden of agricultural production systems. This study presents the results of monitoring emission loads resulting from winter wheat cultivation under different cropping systems: organic unfertilized (ORG), organic fertilized (ORG-F), conventional unfertilized (CON), and conventional fertilized (CON-F). The system boundaries include all the processes from “cradle to farm gate” and the functional unit was 1 kg of wheat grain. The primary data were obtained from experimental field trials and secondary data from Ecoinvent v3.5, WFLDB, and Agri-footprint v5.0 databases. The results of this study are related to eight impact categories. The SimaPro 9.2.0.1 software and ReCiPe Midpoint (H) V1.13/Europe Recipe H were used for calculation. The results show that fertilized variants recorded higher environmental impacts compared to the unfertilized variants. The results indicate that ORG-F was more environmentally friendly compared to the CON-F variant at the expense of lower yields. Overall, ORG imposes the lowest environmental impact and is deemed to be more environmentally friendly.https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0472/13/11/2068agriculturecropping systemsLCAsustainabilitywheat production |
| spellingShingle | Chisenga Emmanuel Mukosha Jan Moudrý Magdaléna Lacko-Bartošová Lucia Lacko-Bartošová Festus Onyebuchi Eze Reinhard W. Neugschwandtner Elnaz Amirahmadi Jiří Lehejček Jaroslav Bernas The Effect of Cropping Systems on Environmental Impact Associated with Winter Wheat Production—An LCA “Cradle to Farm Gate” Approach Agriculture agriculture cropping systems LCA sustainability wheat production |
| title | The Effect of Cropping Systems on Environmental Impact Associated with Winter Wheat Production—An LCA “Cradle to Farm Gate” Approach |
| title_full | The Effect of Cropping Systems on Environmental Impact Associated with Winter Wheat Production—An LCA “Cradle to Farm Gate” Approach |
| title_fullStr | The Effect of Cropping Systems on Environmental Impact Associated with Winter Wheat Production—An LCA “Cradle to Farm Gate” Approach |
| title_full_unstemmed | The Effect of Cropping Systems on Environmental Impact Associated with Winter Wheat Production—An LCA “Cradle to Farm Gate” Approach |
| title_short | The Effect of Cropping Systems on Environmental Impact Associated with Winter Wheat Production—An LCA “Cradle to Farm Gate” Approach |
| title_sort | effect of cropping systems on environmental impact associated with winter wheat production an lca cradle to farm gate approach |
| topic | agriculture cropping systems LCA sustainability wheat production |
| url | https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0472/13/11/2068 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT chisengaemmanuelmukosha theeffectofcroppingsystemsonenvironmentalimpactassociatedwithwinterwheatproductionanlcacradletofarmgateapproach AT janmoudry theeffectofcroppingsystemsonenvironmentalimpactassociatedwithwinterwheatproductionanlcacradletofarmgateapproach AT magdalenalackobartosova theeffectofcroppingsystemsonenvironmentalimpactassociatedwithwinterwheatproductionanlcacradletofarmgateapproach AT lucialackobartosova theeffectofcroppingsystemsonenvironmentalimpactassociatedwithwinterwheatproductionanlcacradletofarmgateapproach AT festusonyebuchieze theeffectofcroppingsystemsonenvironmentalimpactassociatedwithwinterwheatproductionanlcacradletofarmgateapproach AT reinhardwneugschwandtner theeffectofcroppingsystemsonenvironmentalimpactassociatedwithwinterwheatproductionanlcacradletofarmgateapproach AT elnazamirahmadi theeffectofcroppingsystemsonenvironmentalimpactassociatedwithwinterwheatproductionanlcacradletofarmgateapproach AT jirilehejcek theeffectofcroppingsystemsonenvironmentalimpactassociatedwithwinterwheatproductionanlcacradletofarmgateapproach AT jaroslavbernas theeffectofcroppingsystemsonenvironmentalimpactassociatedwithwinterwheatproductionanlcacradletofarmgateapproach AT chisengaemmanuelmukosha effectofcroppingsystemsonenvironmentalimpactassociatedwithwinterwheatproductionanlcacradletofarmgateapproach AT janmoudry effectofcroppingsystemsonenvironmentalimpactassociatedwithwinterwheatproductionanlcacradletofarmgateapproach AT magdalenalackobartosova effectofcroppingsystemsonenvironmentalimpactassociatedwithwinterwheatproductionanlcacradletofarmgateapproach AT lucialackobartosova effectofcroppingsystemsonenvironmentalimpactassociatedwithwinterwheatproductionanlcacradletofarmgateapproach AT festusonyebuchieze effectofcroppingsystemsonenvironmentalimpactassociatedwithwinterwheatproductionanlcacradletofarmgateapproach AT reinhardwneugschwandtner effectofcroppingsystemsonenvironmentalimpactassociatedwithwinterwheatproductionanlcacradletofarmgateapproach AT elnazamirahmadi effectofcroppingsystemsonenvironmentalimpactassociatedwithwinterwheatproductionanlcacradletofarmgateapproach AT jirilehejcek effectofcroppingsystemsonenvironmentalimpactassociatedwithwinterwheatproductionanlcacradletofarmgateapproach AT jaroslavbernas effectofcroppingsystemsonenvironmentalimpactassociatedwithwinterwheatproductionanlcacradletofarmgateapproach |