ReviewAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI2024
Improving Human Diets and Welfare through Using Herbivore-Based Foods: 2. Environmental Consequences and Mitigations.
Review in Animals : an open access journal from MDPI, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- One Health Approaches to Ethical, Secure, and Sustainable Food Systems and Ecosystems: Plant-Based Diets and Livestock in the African Context.Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Applying Transdisciplinary Thinking to Pastoral Livelihoods and Environments.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2025Article
- Improving Human Diets and Welfare through Using Herbivore-Based Foods: 1. Human and Animal Perspectives.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Animal-sourced foods are important for human nutrition and health, but they can have a negative impact on the environment. These impacts can result in land use tensions associated with population growth and the loss of native forests and wetlands during agricultural expansion. Increased greenhouse gas emissions, and high water use but poor water quality outcomes can also be associated. Life cycle analysis from cradle-to-distribution has shown that novel plant-based meat alternatives can have an environmental footprint lower than that of beef finished in feedlots, but higher than for beef raised on well-managed grazed pastures. However, several technologies and practices can be used to mitigate impacts. These include ensuring that grazing occurs when feed quality is high, the use of dietary additives, breeding of animals with higher growth rates and increased fecundity, rumen microbial manipulations through the use of vaccines, soil management to reduce nitrous oxide emission, management systems to improve carbon sequestration, improved nutrient use efficacy throughout the food chain, incorporating maize silage along with grasslands, use of cover crops, low-emission composting barns, covered manure storages, and direct injection of animal slurry into soil. The technologies and systems that help mitigate or actually provide solutions to the environmental impact are under constant refinement to enable ever-more efficient production systems to allow for the provision of animal-sourced foods to an ever-increasing population.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.