cometadata/datacite-titles-descriptions-related-identifiers huggingface dataset:
DOI: 10.6084/m9.figshare.1011952
title: Percentage changes in GHG emissions from the default IPCC values when changing EF<sub>3</sub>,EF<sub>4</sub> and EF<sub>5</sub> to the minimum and maximum values in the reported range

description: <b>Table 10.</b> Percentage changes in GHG emissions from the default IPCC values when changing EF<sub>3</sub>,EF<sub>4</sub> and EF<sub>5</sub> to the minimum and maximum values in the reported range. (Note: RL: rangeland systems; SP: seeded pasture systems; FL: feedlot systems. EF<sub>3</sub>: emission factor of N for N<sub>2</sub>O emissions from urine and dung deposited on grazing systems; EF<sub>4</sub>: emission factor of N for N<sub>2</sub>O emissions from volatilization; EF<sub>5</sub>: emission factor of N for N<sub>2</sub>O emissions from leaching.) <strong>Abstract</strong> Carbon footprint is a key indicator of the contribution of food production to climate change and its importance is increasing worldwide. Although it has been used as a sustainability index for assessing production systems, it does not take into account many other biophysical environmental dimensions more relevant at the local scale, such as soil erosion, nutrient imbalance, and pesticide contamination. We estimated carbon footprint, fossil fuel energy use, soil erosion, nutrient imbalance, and risk of pesticide contamination for five real beef background-finishing systems with increasing levels of intensification in Uruguay, which were combinations of grazing rangelands (RL), seeded pastures (SP), and confined in feedlot (FL). Carbon footprint decreased from 16.7 (RL–RL) to 6.9 kg (SP–FL) CO<sub>2</sub> eq kg body weight<sup>−1</sup> (BW; 'eq': equivalent). Energy use was zero for RL–RL and increased up to 17.3 MJ kg BW<sup>−1</sup> for SP–FL. Soil erosion values varied from 7.7 (RL–RL) to 14.8 kg of soil kg BW<sup>−1</sup> (SP–FL). Nitrogen and phosphorus nutrient balances showed surpluses for systems with seeded pastures and feedlots while RL–RL was deficient. Pesticide contamination risk was zero for RL–RL, and increased up to 21.2 for SP–FL. For the range of systems studied with increasing use of inputs, trade-offs were observed between global and local environmental problems. These results demonstrate that several indicators are needed to evaluate the sustainability of livestock production systems.
DOI: 10.6084/m9.figshare.1011953
title: Sources of energy fossil consumption as a percentage of the total and in mega joules of five background-finishing systems of eastern Uruguay

description: <b>Table 11.</b> Sources of energy fossil consumption as a percentage of the total and in mega joules of five background-finishing systems of eastern Uruguay. (Note: RL: rangeland systems; SP: seeded pasture systems; FL: feedlot systems.) <strong>Abstract</strong> Carbon footprint is a key indicator of the contribution of food production to climate change and its importance is increasing worldwide. Although it has been used as a sustainability index for assessing production systems, it does not take into account many other biophysical environmental dimensions more relevant at the local scale, such as soil erosion, nutrient imbalance, and pesticide contamination. We estimated carbon footprint, fossil fuel energy use, soil erosion, nutrient imbalance, and risk of pesticide contamination for five real beef background-finishing systems with increasing levels of intensification in Uruguay, which were combinations of grazing rangelands (RL), seeded pastures (SP), and confined in feedlot (FL). Carbon footprint decreased from 16.7 (RL–RL) to 6.9 kg (SP–FL) CO<sub>2</sub> eq kg body weight<sup>−1</sup> (BW; 'eq': equivalent). Energy use was zero for RL–RL and increased up to 17.3 MJ kg BW<sup>−1</sup> for SP–FL. Soil erosion values varied from 7.7 (RL–RL) to 14.8 kg of soil kg BW<sup>−1</sup> (SP–FL). Nitrogen and phosphorus nutrient balances showed surpluses for systems with seeded pastures and feedlots while RL–RL was deficient. Pesticide contamination risk was zero for RL–RL, and increased up to 21.2 for SP–FL. For the range of systems studied with increasing use of inputs, trade-offs were observed between global and local environmental problems. These results demonstrate that several indicators are needed to evaluate the sustainability of livestock production systems.
DOI: 10.6084/m9.figshare.1011954.v1
title: Energy consumption of five background-finishing beef systems of eastern Uruguay and previously published results

description: <b>Table 12.</b> Energy consumption of five background-finishing beef systems of eastern Uruguay and previously published results. (Note: RL: rangeland systems; SP: seeded pasture systems; FL: feedlot systems.) <strong>Abstract</strong> Carbon footprint is a key indicator of the contribution of food production to climate change and its importance is increasing worldwide. Although it has been used as a sustainability index for assessing production systems, it does not take into account many other biophysical environmental dimensions more relevant at the local scale, such as soil erosion, nutrient imbalance, and pesticide contamination. We estimated carbon footprint, fossil fuel energy use, soil erosion, nutrient imbalance, and risk of pesticide contamination for five real beef background-finishing systems with increasing levels of intensification in Uruguay, which were combinations of grazing rangelands (RL), seeded pastures (SP), and confined in feedlot (FL). Carbon footprint decreased from 16.7 (RL–RL) to 6.9 kg (SP–FL) CO<sub>2</sub> eq kg body weight<sup>−1</sup> (BW; 'eq': equivalent). Energy use was zero for RL–RL and increased up to 17.3 MJ kg BW<sup>−1</sup> for SP–FL. Soil erosion values varied from 7.7 (RL–RL) to 14.8 kg of soil kg BW<sup>−1</sup> (SP–FL). Nitrogen and phosphorus nutrient balances showed surpluses for systems with seeded pastures and feedlots while RL–RL was deficient. Pesticide contamination risk was zero for RL–RL, and increased up to 21.2 for SP–FL. For the range of systems studied with increasing use of inputs, trade-offs were observed between global and local environmental problems. These results demonstrate that several indicators are needed to evaluate the sustainability of livestock production systems.
DOI: 10.6084/m9.figshare.1011955.v1
title: Soil erosion of five background-finishing beef systems of eastern Uruguay

description: <b>Table 13.</b> Soil erosion of five background-finishing beef systems of eastern Uruguay. (Note: RL: rangeland systems; SP: seeded pasture systems; FL: feedlot systems.) <strong>Abstract</strong> Carbon footprint is a key indicator of the contribution of food production to climate change and its importance is increasing worldwide. Although it has been used as a sustainability index for assessing production systems, it does not take into account many other biophysical environmental dimensions more relevant at the local scale, such as soil erosion, nutrient imbalance, and pesticide contamination. We estimated carbon footprint, fossil fuel energy use, soil erosion, nutrient imbalance, and risk of pesticide contamination for five real beef background-finishing systems with increasing levels of intensification in Uruguay, which were combinations of grazing rangelands (RL), seeded pastures (SP), and confined in feedlot (FL). Carbon footprint decreased from 16.7 (RL–RL) to 6.9 kg (SP–FL) CO<sub>2</sub> eq kg body weight<sup>−1</sup> (BW; 'eq': equivalent). Energy use was zero for RL–RL and increased up to 17.3 MJ kg BW<sup>−1</sup> for SP–FL. Soil erosion values varied from 7.7 (RL–RL) to 14.8 kg of soil kg BW<sup>−1</sup> (SP–FL). Nitrogen and phosphorus nutrient balances showed surpluses for systems with seeded pastures and feedlots while RL–RL was deficient. Pesticide contamination risk was zero for RL–RL, and increased up to 21.2 for SP–FL. For the range of systems studied with increasing use of inputs, trade-offs were observed between global and local environmental problems. These results demonstrate that several indicators are needed to evaluate the sustainability of livestock production systems.
DOI: 10.6084/m9.figshare.1011950
title: Greenhouse gas emissions per gas and total emissions by source of five background-finishing beef systems of eastern Uruguay

description: <b>Table 8.</b> Greenhouse gas emissions per gas and total emissions by source of five background-finishing beef systems of eastern Uruguay. (Note: RL: rangeland systems; SP: seeded pasture systems; FL: feedlot systems.) <strong>Abstract</strong> Carbon footprint is a key indicator of the contribution of food production to climate change and its importance is increasing worldwide. Although it has been used as a sustainability index for assessing production systems, it does not take into account many other biophysical environmental dimensions more relevant at the local scale, such as soil erosion, nutrient imbalance, and pesticide contamination. We estimated carbon footprint, fossil fuel energy use, soil erosion, nutrient imbalance, and risk of pesticide contamination for five real beef background-finishing systems with increasing levels of intensification in Uruguay, which were combinations of grazing rangelands (RL), seeded pastures (SP), and confined in feedlot (FL). Carbon footprint decreased from 16.7 (RL–RL) to 6.9 kg (SP–FL) CO<sub>2</sub> eq kg body weight<sup>−1</sup> (BW; 'eq': equivalent). Energy use was zero for RL–RL and increased up to 17.3 MJ kg BW<sup>−1</sup> for SP–FL. Soil erosion values varied from 7.7 (RL–RL) to 14.8 kg of soil kg BW<sup>−1</sup> (SP–FL). Nitrogen and phosphorus nutrient balances showed surpluses for systems with seeded pastures and feedlots while RL–RL was deficient. Pesticide contamination risk was zero for RL–RL, and increased up to 21.2 for SP–FL. For the range of systems studied with increasing use of inputs, trade-offs were observed between global and local environmental problems. These results demonstrate that several indicators are needed to evaluate the sustainability of livestock production systems.
DOI: 10.6084/m9.figshare.1011950.v1
title: Greenhouse gas emissions per gas and total emissions by source of five background-finishing beef systems of eastern Uruguay

description: <b>Table 8.</b> Greenhouse gas emissions per gas and total emissions by source of five background-finishing beef systems of eastern Uruguay. (Note: RL: rangeland systems; SP: seeded pasture systems; FL: feedlot systems.) <strong>Abstract</strong> Carbon footprint is a key indicator of the contribution of food production to climate change and its importance is increasing worldwide. Although it has been used as a sustainability index for assessing production systems, it does not take into account many other biophysical environmental dimensions more relevant at the local scale, such as soil erosion, nutrient imbalance, and pesticide contamination. We estimated carbon footprint, fossil fuel energy use, soil erosion, nutrient imbalance, and risk of pesticide contamination for five real beef background-finishing systems with increasing levels of intensification in Uruguay, which were combinations of grazing rangelands (RL), seeded pastures (SP), and confined in feedlot (FL). Carbon footprint decreased from 16.7 (RL–RL) to 6.9 kg (SP–FL) CO<sub>2</sub> eq kg body weight<sup>−1</sup> (BW; 'eq': equivalent). Energy use was zero for RL–RL and increased up to 17.3 MJ kg BW<sup>−1</sup> for SP–FL. Soil erosion values varied from 7.7 (RL–RL) to 14.8 kg of soil kg BW<sup>−1</sup> (SP–FL). Nitrogen and phosphorus nutrient balances showed surpluses for systems with seeded pastures and feedlots while RL–RL was deficient. Pesticide contamination risk was zero for RL–RL, and increased up to 21.2 for SP–FL. For the range of systems studied with increasing use of inputs, trade-offs were observed between global and local environmental problems. These results demonstrate that several indicators are needed to evaluate the sustainability of livestock production systems.
DOI: 10.6084/m9.figshare.1011951
title: Greenhouse gas emissions of five background-finishing beef systems of eastern Uruguay and previous published results

description: <b>Table 9.</b> Greenhouse gas emissions of five background-finishing beef systems of eastern Uruguay and previous published results. (Note: RL: rangeland systems; SP: seeded pasture systems; FL: feedlot systems.) <strong>Abstract</strong> Carbon footprint is a key indicator of the contribution of food production to climate change and its importance is increasing worldwide. Although it has been used as a sustainability index for assessing production systems, it does not take into account many other biophysical environmental dimensions more relevant at the local scale, such as soil erosion, nutrient imbalance, and pesticide contamination. We estimated carbon footprint, fossil fuel energy use, soil erosion, nutrient imbalance, and risk of pesticide contamination for five real beef background-finishing systems with increasing levels of intensification in Uruguay, which were combinations of grazing rangelands (RL), seeded pastures (SP), and confined in feedlot (FL). Carbon footprint decreased from 16.7 (RL–RL) to 6.9 kg (SP–FL) CO<sub>2</sub> eq kg body weight<sup>−1</sup> (BW; 'eq': equivalent). Energy use was zero for RL–RL and increased up to 17.3 MJ kg BW<sup>−1</sup> for SP–FL. Soil erosion values varied from 7.7 (RL–RL) to 14.8 kg of soil kg BW<sup>−1</sup> (SP–FL). Nitrogen and phosphorus nutrient balances showed surpluses for systems with seeded pastures and feedlots while RL–RL was deficient. Pesticide contamination risk was zero for RL–RL, and increased up to 21.2 for SP–FL. For the range of systems studied with increasing use of inputs, trade-offs were observed between global and local environmental problems. These results demonstrate that several indicators are needed to evaluate the sustainability of livestock production systems.
DOI: 10.6084/m9.figshare.1011952.v1
title: Percentage changes in GHG emissions from the default IPCC values when changing EF<sub>3</sub>,EF<sub>4</sub> and EF<sub>5</sub> to the minimum and maximum values in the reported range

description: <b>Table 10.</b> Percentage changes in GHG emissions from the default IPCC values when changing EF<sub>3</sub>,EF<sub>4</sub> and EF<sub>5</sub> to the minimum and maximum values in the reported range. (Note: RL: rangeland systems; SP: seeded pasture systems; FL: feedlot systems. EF<sub>3</sub>: emission factor of N for N<sub>2</sub>O emissions from urine and dung deposited on grazing systems; EF<sub>4</sub>: emission factor of N for N<sub>2</sub>O emissions from volatilization; EF<sub>5</sub>: emission factor of N for N<sub>2</sub>O emissions from leaching.) <strong>Abstract</strong> Carbon footprint is a key indicator of the contribution of food production to climate change and its importance is increasing worldwide. Although it has been used as a sustainability index for assessing production systems, it does not take into account many other biophysical environmental dimensions more relevant at the local scale, such as soil erosion, nutrient imbalance, and pesticide contamination. We estimated carbon footprint, fossil fuel energy use, soil erosion, nutrient imbalance, and risk of pesticide contamination for five real beef background-finishing systems with increasing levels of intensification in Uruguay, which were combinations of grazing rangelands (RL), seeded pastures (SP), and confined in feedlot (FL). Carbon footprint decreased from 16.7 (RL–RL) to 6.9 kg (SP–FL) CO<sub>2</sub> eq kg body weight<sup>−1</sup> (BW; 'eq': equivalent). Energy use was zero for RL–RL and increased up to 17.3 MJ kg BW<sup>−1</sup> for SP–FL. Soil erosion values varied from 7.7 (RL–RL) to 14.8 kg of soil kg BW<sup>−1</sup> (SP–FL). Nitrogen and phosphorus nutrient balances showed surpluses for systems with seeded pastures and feedlots while RL–RL was deficient. Pesticide contamination risk was zero for RL–RL, and increased up to 21.2 for SP–FL. For the range of systems studied with increasing use of inputs, trade-offs were observed between global and local environmental problems. These results demonstrate that several indicators are needed to evaluate the sustainability of livestock production systems.
DOI: 10.6084/m9.figshare.1011948
title: Coefficients and equations used in nutrient (N and P) imbalance calculations

description: <b>Table 6.</b> Coefficients and equations used in nutrient (N and P) imbalance calculations. (Note: NBF: nitrogen biological fixation; EBW: empty body weight (55% of the animal's live weight, assuming British breed steers).) <strong>Abstract</strong> Carbon footprint is a key indicator of the contribution of food production to climate change and its importance is increasing worldwide. Although it has been used as a sustainability index for assessing production systems, it does not take into account many other biophysical environmental dimensions more relevant at the local scale, such as soil erosion, nutrient imbalance, and pesticide contamination. We estimated carbon footprint, fossil fuel energy use, soil erosion, nutrient imbalance, and risk of pesticide contamination for five real beef background-finishing systems with increasing levels of intensification in Uruguay, which were combinations of grazing rangelands (RL), seeded pastures (SP), and confined in feedlot (FL). Carbon footprint decreased from 16.7 (RL–RL) to 6.9 kg (SP–FL) CO<sub>2</sub> eq kg body weight<sup>−1</sup> (BW; 'eq': equivalent). Energy use was zero for RL–RL and increased up to 17.3 MJ kg BW<sup>−1</sup> for SP–FL. Soil erosion values varied from 7.7 (RL–RL) to 14.8 kg of soil kg BW<sup>−1</sup> (SP–FL). Nitrogen and phosphorus nutrient balances showed surpluses for systems with seeded pastures and feedlots while RL–RL was deficient. Pesticide contamination risk was zero for RL–RL, and increased up to 21.2 for SP–FL. For the range of systems studied with increasing use of inputs, trade-offs were observed between global and local environmental problems. These results demonstrate that several indicators are needed to evaluate the sustainability of livestock production systems.
DOI: 10.6084/m9.figshare.1011953.v1
title: Sources of energy fossil consumption as a percentage of the total and in mega joules of five background-finishing systems of eastern Uruguay

description: <b>Table 11.</b> Sources of energy fossil consumption as a percentage of the total and in mega joules of five background-finishing systems of eastern Uruguay. (Note: RL: rangeland systems; SP: seeded pasture systems; FL: feedlot systems.) <strong>Abstract</strong> Carbon footprint is a key indicator of the contribution of food production to climate change and its importance is increasing worldwide. Although it has been used as a sustainability index for assessing production systems, it does not take into account many other biophysical environmental dimensions more relevant at the local scale, such as soil erosion, nutrient imbalance, and pesticide contamination. We estimated carbon footprint, fossil fuel energy use, soil erosion, nutrient imbalance, and risk of pesticide contamination for five real beef background-finishing systems with increasing levels of intensification in Uruguay, which were combinations of grazing rangelands (RL), seeded pastures (SP), and confined in feedlot (FL). Carbon footprint decreased from 16.7 (RL–RL) to 6.9 kg (SP–FL) CO<sub>2</sub> eq kg body weight<sup>−1</sup> (BW; 'eq': equivalent). Energy use was zero for RL–RL and increased up to 17.3 MJ kg BW<sup>−1</sup> for SP–FL. Soil erosion values varied from 7.7 (RL–RL) to 14.8 kg of soil kg BW<sup>−1</sup> (SP–FL). Nitrogen and phosphorus nutrient balances showed surpluses for systems with seeded pastures and feedlots while RL–RL was deficient. Pesticide contamination risk was zero for RL–RL, and increased up to 21.2 for SP–FL. For the range of systems studied with increasing use of inputs, trade-offs were observed between global and local environmental problems. These results demonstrate that several indicators are needed to evaluate the sustainability of livestock production systems.
DOI: 10.6084/m9.figshare.1011947
title: Coefficients to calculate energy consumption of two background and three finishing beef systems of eastern Uruguay

description: <b>Table 5.</b> Coefficients to calculate energy consumption of two background and three finishing beef systems of eastern Uruguay. <strong>Abstract</strong> Carbon footprint is a key indicator of the contribution of food production to climate change and its importance is increasing worldwide. Although it has been used as a sustainability index for assessing production systems, it does not take into account many other biophysical environmental dimensions more relevant at the local scale, such as soil erosion, nutrient imbalance, and pesticide contamination. We estimated carbon footprint, fossil fuel energy use, soil erosion, nutrient imbalance, and risk of pesticide contamination for five real beef background-finishing systems with increasing levels of intensification in Uruguay, which were combinations of grazing rangelands (RL), seeded pastures (SP), and confined in feedlot (FL). Carbon footprint decreased from 16.7 (RL–RL) to 6.9 kg (SP–FL) CO<sub>2</sub> eq kg body weight<sup>−1</sup> (BW; 'eq': equivalent). Energy use was zero for RL–RL and increased up to 17.3 MJ kg BW<sup>−1</sup> for SP–FL. Soil erosion values varied from 7.7 (RL–RL) to 14.8 kg of soil kg BW<sup>−1</sup> (SP–FL). Nitrogen and phosphorus nutrient balances showed surpluses for systems with seeded pastures and feedlots while RL–RL was deficient. Pesticide contamination risk was zero for RL–RL, and increased up to 21.2 for SP–FL. For the range of systems studied with increasing use of inputs, trade-offs were observed between global and local environmental problems. These results demonstrate that several indicators are needed to evaluate the sustainability of livestock production systems.
DOI: 10.6084/m9.figshare.1011949
title: Solubility (Ksp), adsorption (Koc), time for 50% decomposition (<em>T</em><sup>1/2</sup>) and lethal dose-50 (LD-50) for pesticides used in two background and three beef-finishing systems of eastern Uruguay

description: <b>Table 7.</b> Solubility (Ksp), adsorption (Koc), time for 50% decomposition (<em>T</em><sup>1/2</sup>) and lethal dose-50 (LD-50) for pesticides used in two background and three beef-finishing systems of eastern Uruguay. Values used to calculate the pesticide contamination risk (PPDB 2009). <strong>Abstract</strong> Carbon footprint is a key indicator of the contribution of food production to climate change and its importance is increasing worldwide. Although it has been used as a sustainability index for assessing production systems, it does not take into account many other biophysical environmental dimensions more relevant at the local scale, such as soil erosion, nutrient imbalance, and pesticide contamination. We estimated carbon footprint, fossil fuel energy use, soil erosion, nutrient imbalance, and risk of pesticide contamination for five real beef background-finishing systems with increasing levels of intensification in Uruguay, which were combinations of grazing rangelands (RL), seeded pastures (SP), and confined in feedlot (FL). Carbon footprint decreased from 16.7 (RL–RL) to 6.9 kg (SP–FL) CO<sub>2</sub> eq kg body weight<sup>−1</sup> (BW; 'eq': equivalent). Energy use was zero for RL–RL and increased up to 17.3 MJ kg BW<sup>−1</sup> for SP–FL. Soil erosion values varied from 7.7 (RL–RL) to 14.8 kg of soil kg BW<sup>−1</sup> (SP–FL). Nitrogen and phosphorus nutrient balances showed surpluses for systems with seeded pastures and feedlots while RL–RL was deficient. Pesticide contamination risk was zero for RL–RL, and increased up to 21.2 for SP–FL. For the range of systems studied with increasing use of inputs, trade-offs were observed between global and local environmental problems. These results demonstrate that several indicators are needed to evaluate the sustainability of livestock production systems.