Blog Archives

Animal rights mean no second chance for downer calves

vealcalve_406x250For the veal calf headed to market, it’s a distinction without a difference. If all goes according to plan, the animal will go to slaughter without incident, which means the producer will be happy. If the veal calf, however, falls down and cannot get up, the animal will be “promptly euthanized,” which means the Humane Society of the U.S. and other animal rights groups will be happy.

Currently veal calves that fall down and cannot get up are given time to see if they can rise from a recumbent position and walk after they’ve been given time to rest or a place to warm up. Then, if USDA veterinarians find they are free from disease, they can be sent down the chute to the “knock box” for slaughter as human food.

But the Humane Society of the U.S. (HSUS) and others have long viewed the second chance at slaughter as a “loophole” and have kept up the pressure to eliminate it. The change means any veal calves that fall down will have to be destroyed with the economic cost falling on the producer.

The annual economic impact analysis shows the cost for the veal industry will range between $ 2,368 and $ 161,404 per year. HSUS says closing the “loophole” gives producers a financial incentive to treat calves better through the slaughter process.

USDA’s Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) would save between 70.5 and 428 hours in agency time that is now going to “downer veal” re-inspections to see if the animals might get up and therefore be fit for slaughter as human food.

“FSIS is dedicated to ensuring the veal calves presented for slaughter at FSIS-inspected facilities are treated humanely,” said USDA Administrator Al Almanza. “Prohibiting the slaughter of all non-ambulatory veal calves will continue this commitment and improve compliance with the Human Methods of Slaughter Act.”

FSIS found that while cattle younger than 30 months do not present a serious risk of bovine spongiform encephalopathy or BSE, veal calves are vulnerable to “other systemic and metabolic diseases and and injury because of inadequate immunoglobulin transfer, nutritional inadequacies of an all-liquid iron-deficient diet, activity restriction and stress.”

It said veal calves are “acutely susceptible to enteritis, which is the inflammation of the small intestine caused by infection that may lead to diarrhea, abdominal pain, fever and dehydration.” FSIS said under the new rule, it will eliminate the time that was being taken to see if calves are non-ambulatory because they are tired or cold.

Animal agriculture groups said the existing system is more humane because it gives the animals time to rest and gain warmth.

Prior to 2009, FSIS used a case-by-case review to determine if a “downer” cow could be accepted for slaughter. After adult downer cows were banned, HSUS petitioned to eliminate downer veal calves, claiming the failure to require immediate euthanasia is an incentive for abusive conduct because a non-ambulatory disabled calf is worthless unless slaughtered.

(To sign up for a free subscription to Food Safety News, click here.)

Food Safety News

What would a YES vote mean for Scottish fresh produce growers?

What would a YES vote mean for Scottish fresh produce growers?

Today Scotland is voting in an historic referendum to decide whether or not to remain part of the United Kingdom. Regardless of the outcome the country will never never be the same again.

There is much uncertainty as to what will happen after the result is known, whether the Scots vote Yes or No. This uncertainty is also evident in the Fresh Produce sector. Most agree that if the vote is for the Yes camp there will most certainly follow a period of disruption.

One Scottish exporter, who believes Scotland will keep Sterling even after a Yes vote, said if the vote is for Independence the pound will drop, at least initially, and this would be good news for exports. This was indeed what happened when polls put the Yes campaign ahead last week.

Others however fear that the cost of supplying the English supermarkets with Scottish produce would increase, David Warden from Ian J Warden, who grows soft fruit among other things, said that preference would be given to English produce, which would be bad news in times of glut. Also that products such as potatoes and soft fruit would have less bargaining power.

John Smith from Strathtay Potato Company, said that the issue of currency is the biggest question. Strathtay Potato Company sends 95% of its potatoes to the English market and Smith stated that Independence would certainly throw up some barriers and most likely increase costs.

Another Scottish grower said a Yes vote would be bad for Scottish produce and the country needs to keep links with the UK. He said that what ever the decision attitudes will change and this will have an impact.

One fruit importer in Edinburgh said he didn’t think anything would change.

Most seem confident that in the event of a Yes vote Scotland will continue to use Sterling, and threats from London to disallow this are just that, threats. Similarly most agree that a Yes vote would not be positive for the Fresh Produce industry.

Publication date: 9/18/2014
Author: Nichola Watson
Copyright: www.freshplaza.com


FreshPlaza.com

Bad weather conditions mean Q1 GAAP net loss for Chiquita

Confident in ‘return to the core’ strategic plan
Bad weather conditions mean Q1 GAAP net loss for Chiquita

Chiquita Brands International, Inc. has released financial and operating results for the first quarter 2014. The company reported GAAP net loss of $ 25 million in 2014 compared to GAAP net income of $ 2 million 2013.  GAAP operating income for 2014 was $ 1 million compared to income of $ 25 million in 2013. The company also reported comparable operating income[1] of $ 7 million for 2014 compared to comparable operating income of $ 23 million for 2013.

“While we are confident in our 2014 progress toward our long term financial targets and benefits from our ‘return to the core’ strategic plan, our first quarter results did not meet expectations,” said Ed Lonergan, Chiquita’s president and chief executive officer.  “Drought conditions in Central America and winter storms in North America and over the Atlantic disrupted our value chain and market demand for our products.  While we grew our North American banana volume in excess of 5 percent compared to first quarter of 2013, shortfalls in contracted and owned farm supply required purchase of expensive weekly market fruit to serve our contracted business and resulted in inefficient shipping choices and short supply to our weekly market customers across countries.  In salads and healthy snacks, winter weather resulted in mismatched demand versus supply in both our retail and foodservice businesses, impacting service and raw product requirements.  While retail salad volume grew 5 percent compared to first quarter of 2013, our foodservice and fruit ingredient businesses volumes were substantially lower year on year due to a number of factors.”

Lonergan continued, “While weather impacts are a fact in our industry, our responsibility as leaders is to mitigate these risks.  In addition to bringing together two complementary businesses, we believe that the combination with Fyffes, which we announced on March 10, 2014, will fundamentally improve our ability to deal with weather risks and event-driven supply volatility in our bananas business due to the broader growing and shipping profiles of the combined entities.  Last week, ChiquitaFyffes filed a registration statement with the SEC in connection with the proposed combination, and we have begun the regulatory review process in both North America and Europe.  We plan to close the transaction by the end of the year and remain excited about the opportunities for the combined business.  Also last week, we began implementation of efficiency and pricing actions in our salads business, supporting our long term profitability objectives for this business.”

Please click here to view the full financial report.

http://online.wsj.com/article/HUG1784031.html

Publication date: 5/12/2014


FreshPlaza.com

Lighter California Hass avocado crop will mean more compressed shipping season

Hass avocado trees tend to be alternate bearing, so after a 505 million-pound crop in 2013, one of the larger harvests on record, it is no surprise that the 2014 California avocado crop is expected to be significantly smaller. What is, perhaps, surprising is that last year’s California crop was not lighter, inasmuch as the prior year’s crop was also extremely large, making two big crop years in a row.

The 2014 crop, while “on the lighter side, is within the range of what would be considered a normal or average size crop,” said Jan DeLyser, vice president of marketing for the California Avocado Commission in Irvine, CA.20-CalAvos-CropThe 2014 California avocado crop is lighter by 40 percent than the previous two years, and volume will be concentrated over a shorter shipping season. (Photo by Rand Green)

The commission’s pre-season estimate for this year’s crop was 325 million pounds. That figure was adjusted downward somewhat as the early harvest got under way. “The number we have agreed to use is about 300 million pounds,” although some think it may be a little shorter than that, DeLyser said March 14.

With an aggregate volume of around 1.7 billion pounds of Hass avocados expected in the United States from all sources over the course of the year, “from what the handlers are telling me, it sounds like the western regions will be the focus of their sales efforts with California fruit this year,” DeLyser said.

In contrast to last year, when the shipping season for California fruit started early and ran late, the season this year is expected to be much more condensed, with the preponderance of the crop will come off during the months of May through August. Due to the shorter marketing window, the weekly flow of California fruit to core western markets during that condensed shipping period is not expected to be significantly less than it was the prior year when the larger crop was spread out over a much longer period.

Most handlers of California fruit will supplement their California crops with fruit from one or more other sources, most notably Mexico and Peru, during the California season, with much of that fruit going to customers in the eastern part of the United States. They will assure customers of year-round supplies by offering fruit mainly from Mexico and Peru during other seven months.

For most of the year, aggregate weekly volume is expected to be similar to last year, but as demand continues to rise, most marketers expect prices to remain strong.

Emiliano Escobedo, executive director of the Hass Avocado Board in Irvine, CA, which represents fruit from all producing countries, told The Produce News March 24 that the month of May could “get a little tricky,” in that aggregate volume that month could be down compared to last year, but he expected that situation to “recover a little bit” in June and July.

Several factors other than market considerations will affect the timing of the harvest for some growers this year. One of those is routine cultural practices such as early size picking to reduce the load on the tree in order to give a boost to next year’s crop. As of mid-May, many California avocado groves were already in bloom with the blossoms that will produce the 2015 crop.

The biggest concern for the current season, however, is water availability, and the high cost of what water is available, as avocado growing areas are increasingly affected by a severe drought now going into its third year in California.

“We are seeing some harvesting taking place now … in a light way,” said DeLyser. Some of that is from growers who are “looking to conserve water.”

“We are very concerned with the current drought emergency,” said Ken Melban, director of issues management for the California Avocado Commission. In Riverside and San Diego counties, some avocado growers “find themselves in a situation where they are able to get water, but it just remains very costly,” at “upwards of $ 1,200 an acre-foot.” Normally, seasonal rains would have greatly reduced the necessity of buying water, but throughout the winter and spring this season there has only been one rain event with any significant amount of precipitation.

Further north, in Santa Barbara and Ventura counties, “they have their own challenges,” he said. Some growers are entirely reliant on wells with water tables that have dropped during the years of drought, and in some cases the wells have dried up. In some instances, growers have harvested early and stumped back their trees hoping there will be enough water next year for the trees to re-grow. Other growers expect to harvest early before they run out of water, or just to reduce water costs for the season.

Overall, however, “we are still expecting a good supply of California-grown avocados,” although the window will be shortened for some, he said.

If the drought continues another year, “it becomes very concerning” he said.

In general, however, most growers this year “are not in any hurry” to pick their fruit, said Rob Wedin, vice president of fresh sales at Calavo Growers Inc. in Santa Paula, CA, March 18. Waiting longer to harvest will allow the smaller fruit to size. Also, growers are hoping to realize better prizes by being patient.

Last year’s shipping season for Calavo’s California avocados was March through October, Wedin said. This year, the company is looking at shipping most of its California fruit from the latter part of April through August and expects to have “very good supplies” during that time.

Green Earth Produce Trading Inc. in Los Angeles expects a “pretty solid supply” May through August,” with “some volume available come mid-April,” according to Gahl Crane, director of avocado operations. “We will have some very good size fruit, which is going to be important for the demand that is right around the corner,” he said March 25.

Small-sized fruit, resulting from the heavy load on the trees, was a concern last year. This year, “there appears to be bigger fruit on the trees because there is less fruit per tree,” said Bob Lucy, president of Del Rey Avocado Co. Inc. in Fallbrook, CA, March 19. The drought has negatively affected size, however, “If we had had a wet winter, you would have seen a lot more big fruit. Rain water really sizes up fruit,” he said.

The Produce News | Today’s Headlines – The Produce News – Covering fresh produce around the globe since 1897.

Lighter California Hass avocado crop will mean more compressed shipping season

Hass avocado trees tend to be alternate bearing, so after a 505 million-pound crop in 2013, one of the larger harvests on record, it is no surprise that the 2014 California avocado crop is expected to be significantly smaller. What is, perhaps, surprising is that last year’s California crop was not lighter, inasmuch as the prior year’s crop was also extremely large, making two big crop years in a row.

The 2014 crop, while “on the lighter side, is within the range of what would be considered a normal or average size crop,” said Jan DeLyser, vice president of marketing for the California Avocado Commission in Irvine, CA.20-CalAvos-CropThe 2014 California avocado crop is lighter by 40 percent than the previous two years, and volume will be concentrated over a shorter shipping season. (Photo by Rand Green)

The commission’s pre-season estimate for this year’s crop was 325 million pounds. That figure was adjusted downward somewhat as the early harvest got under way. “The number we have agreed to use is about 300 million pounds,” although some think it may be a little shorter than that, DeLyser said March 14.

With an aggregate volume of around 1.7 billion pounds of Hass avocados expected in the United States from all sources over the course of the year, “from what the handlers are telling me, it sounds like the western regions will be the focus of their sales efforts with California fruit this year,” DeLyser said.

In contrast to last year, when the shipping season for California fruit started early and ran late, the season this year is expected to be much more condensed, with the preponderance of the crop will come off during the months of May through August. Due to the shorter marketing window, the weekly flow of California fruit to core western markets during that condensed shipping period is not expected to be significantly less than it was the prior year when the larger crop was spread out over a much longer period.

Most handlers of California fruit will supplement their California crops with fruit from one or more other sources, most notably Mexico and Peru, during the California season, with much of that fruit going to customers in the eastern part of the United States. They will assure customers of year-round supplies by offering fruit mainly from Mexico and Peru during other seven months.

For most of the year, aggregate weekly volume is expected to be similar to last year, but as demand continues to rise, most marketers expect prices to remain strong.

Emiliano Escobedo, executive director of the Hass Avocado Board in Irvine, CA, which represents fruit from all producing countries, told The Produce News March 24 that the month of May could “get a little tricky,” in that aggregate volume that month could be down compared to last year, but he expected that situation to “recover a little bit” in June and July.

Several factors other than market considerations will affect the timing of the harvest for some growers this year. One of those is routine cultural practices such as early size picking to reduce the load on the tree in order to give a boost to next year’s crop. As of mid-May, many California avocado groves were already in bloom with the blossoms that will produce the 2015 crop.

The biggest concern for the current season, however, is water availability, and the high cost of what water is available, as avocado growing areas are increasingly affected by a severe drought now going into its third year in California.

“We are seeing some harvesting taking place now … in a light way,” said DeLyser. Some of that is from growers who are “looking to conserve water.”

“We are very concerned with the current drought emergency,” said Ken Melban, director of issues management for the California Avocado Commission. In Riverside and San Diego counties, some avocado growers “find themselves in a situation where they are able to get water, but it just remains very costly,” at “upwards of $ 1,200 an acre-foot.” Normally, seasonal rains would have greatly reduced the necessity of buying water, but throughout the winter and spring this season there has only been one rain event with any significant amount of precipitation.

Further north, in Santa Barbara and Ventura counties, “they have their own challenges,” he said. Some growers are entirely reliant on wells with water tables that have dropped during the years of drought, and in some cases the wells have dried up. In some instances, growers have harvested early and stumped back their trees hoping there will be enough water next year for the trees to re-grow. Other growers expect to harvest early before they run out of water, or just to reduce water costs for the season.

Overall, however, “we are still expecting a good supply of California-grown avocados,” although the window will be shortened for some, he said.

If the drought continues another year, “it becomes very concerning” he said.

In general, however, most growers this year “are not in any hurry” to pick their fruit, said Rob Wedin, vice president of fresh sales at Calavo Growers Inc. in Santa Paula, CA, March 18. Waiting longer to harvest will allow the smaller fruit to size. Also, growers are hoping to realize better prizes by being patient.

Last year’s shipping season for Calavo’s California avocados was March through October, Wedin said. This year, the company is looking at shipping most of its California fruit from the latter part of April through August and expects to have “very good supplies” during that time.

Green Earth Produce Trading Inc. in Los Angeles expects a “pretty solid supply” May through August,” with “some volume available come mid-April,” according to Gahl Crane, director of avocado operations. “We will have some very good size fruit, which is going to be important for the demand that is right around the corner,” he said March 25.

Small-sized fruit, resulting from the heavy load on the trees, was a concern last year. This year, “there appears to be bigger fruit on the trees because there is less fruit per tree,” said Bob Lucy, president of Del Rey Avocado Co. Inc. in Fallbrook, CA, March 19. The drought has negatively affected size, however, “If we had had a wet winter, you would have seen a lot more big fruit. Rain water really sizes up fruit,” he said.

The Produce News | Today’s Headlines – The Produce News – Covering fresh produce around the globe since 1897.

What does ‘whole grain’ really mean? European definition published

The most comprehensive definition of whole grain termed to date has been published this week in the journal Food and Nutrition Research. The effort to create the definition, which is intended to assist in the production and labeling of foods rich in whole grains, was born of the HEALTHGRAIN EU project, the largest project ever focusing on cereals and health; and was led by a multi-disciplinary team from some of Europe’s leading universities and food research institutes.

Historically, there’s been no complete, legally endorsed definition of whole grain flour and products,” explains Jan-Willem van der Kamp, corresponding author of the paper and Senior Officer of International Projects at TNO Food and Nutrition. “Most supermarkets today are stocked with foods that originate from many different countries. When you read ’25% whole grain flour’ on one product label; the same claim on a different label could mean something quite different nutritionally. If use of this definition is adopted broadly, this inconsistency eventually would cease.”

The HEALTHGRAIN definition is the next step in reaching a precise, common understanding of what constitutes whole grain in food products — from breads to pasta to breakfast cereals — regardless of where they originate, adds van der Kamp.

Almost universally, the term whole grain indicates inclusion of all three components of the cereal grain kernel — endosperm (this is the largest part of the grain and provides mostly starch), germ (comprises only a small part of the grain; this is where sprouting begins) and bran (the grain’s protective outer layer; it is rich in dietary fiber). Variances, however, arise around the particular grains considered “whole,” precise combination of the three components once processed, and processing practices which can affect the resulting flour’s nutritional value. The HEALTHGRAIN definition addresses all three of these issues detailing a permitted list of grains and “pseudo grains” (such as quinoa and amaranth) and processing guidelines that take into account current milling practices.

The need for developing a more comprehensive, detailed whole grain definition was identified during the course of the HEALTHGRAIN EU project, an initiative intended to increase the use of whole grains and their health protecting constituents in food products for improved nutrition and health benefits. The expansive project has involved everything from research to better understand specific health benefits of whole grains to exploration of new ways to get products high in their healthy compounds onto the market.

The HEALTHGRAIN definition was developed by a committee led by van der Kamp, representatives of the Swedish Nutrition Foundation; DPR Nutrition Ltd., UK; and VTT and University of Eastern Finland; in cooperation with a multidisciplinary group of nutrition scientists, cereal scientists and technologists, plant breeders, flour milling specialists and experts in regulatory affairs from throughout Europe.

The article with the complete HEALTHGRAIN definition, including the permitted grains, can be accessed in the current volume of Food and Nutrition Research (http://www.foodandnutritionresearch.net/index.php/fnr/article/view/22100).

Story Source:

The above story is based on materials provided by Co-Action Publishing. Note: Materials may be edited for content and length.

Agriculture and Food News — ScienceDaily

Wheat research indicates rise in mean temperature would cut yields

Sep. 4, 2013 — Any producer will tell you, growing a healthy, high-yielding wheat crop takes skill and hard work. Quality drought-tolerant varieties that are resistant to pests and disease are important. And cooperation from Mother Nature in terms of temperature and precipitation doesn’t hurt, either.

To quantify the impact of genetic improvement in wheat, disease and climate change over a 26-year period, a team of researchers at Kansas State University examined wheat variety yield data from Kansas performance tests, along with location-specific weather and disease data.

Their results showed that from 1985 through 2011, wheat breeding programs boosted average wheat yields by 13 bushels per acre, or 0.51 bushel each year, for a total increase of 26 percent.

Simulations also found that a 1 degree Celsius increase (1.8 degrees Fahrenheit) in projected mean temperature was found to decrease wheat yields by 10.64 bushels per acre or nearly 21 percent.

“Kansas wheat producers are challenged by weather, pests and disease,” said Andrew Barkley professor of agricultural economics and lead researcher of a multi-disciplinary team that included agronomists and plant pathologists. “Fortunately, the Kansas wheat breeding program produces new varieties of wheat that increase yields over time.

“Given weather trends in recent years, climate change is expected to increase temperatures, and this is likely to lower wheat yields in Kansas,” Barkley said. “Diseases such as fungi and viruses can attack wheat and lower yields. This research quantifies the impact of weather, diseases and new wheat varieties on yields. So far, genetic improvement has allowed wheat yields to increase significantly over time, but there are challenges ahead to keep up with potential increases in temperature.”

The study, funded by the Kansas Agricultural Experiment Station, is the first to quantify all of these impacts (climate change, disease and genetic improvement) using a unique data set, and state-of-the-art statistical methods, Barkley said. The results update and expand previous research to identify and quantify the impact of the Kansas wheat breeding program.

From Tribune in the western part of the state to Ottawa in the east, and Parsons in the south to Belleville in the north, the data came from 11 locations across the state. All yield data are for dryland (non-irrigated) hard red winter wheat, including 245 varieties.

Daily temperature was collected at the specific location of each variety trial, resulting in a location-specific match between variety yield and weather data. That made the study’s approach unique in this branch of climate change literature, which typically relies on weather estimates over broad geographical areas.

“We don’t know what the future holds,” Barkley said. “The research does not predict climate change, or forecast future weather conditions. Instead, it shows the predicted change in Kansas wheat yields if we were to experience a 1 degree (C) increase (1.8 degrees F) in temperature. If the average temperature does increase, this research helps us to understand the potential impact on wheat production.”

Further information: http://www.ksre.ksu.edu/bookstore/Item.aspx?catId=299&pubId=16559

ScienceDaily: Agriculture and Food News

Pest-eating birds mean money for coffee growers

Sep. 5, 2013 — This is the first time scientists have assigned a monetary value to the pest-control benefits rainforest birds can provide to agriculture. Their study could provide the framework for pest management that helps both farmers and biodiversity.

In recent years, Stanford biologists have found that coffee growers in Costa Rica bolster bird biodiversity by leaving patches of their plantations as untouched rainforest.

The latest finding from these researchers suggests that the birds are returning the favor to farmers by eating an aggressive coffee bean pest, the borer beetle, thereby improving coffee bean yields by hundreds of dollars per hectare.

The study is the first to put a monetary value on the pest-control benefits rainforest can provide to agriculture, which the researchers hope can inform both farmers and conservationists.

“The benefits that we might get are huge,” said Daniel Karp, a graduate student in biology and lead author of the study. “There’s lots of unrealized value in these small patches of rainforest. This looks like a sustainable, win-win opportunity for pest management.”

The researchers hope that the work will improve conservation efforts in heavily farmed areas by illustrating to farmers the financial benefits of leaving some land in its natural state, while also guiding governments toward the best conservation methods.

Worldwide scourge

By some accounts, coffee is the world’s most economically profitable crop, and its harvest supports the livelihoods of some 100 million people globally. Coffee beans around the world, however, are threatened by the pervasive beetle.

The insect burrows into the beans and eats its way out, ruining the beans. It originated in Africa and has made its way into nearly every major coffee-producing country. It arrived in Hawaii two years ago, and coffee plantations there are already experiencing 50 to 75 percent less yield.

“It’s the only insect that competes with us for coffee beans,” Karp said. “It’s the most damaging insect pest by far, causing some $ 500 million in damage per year.”

Stanford biologists have been studying the intersection of nature and agriculture in Costa Rica since the 1990s, in part because of the vast amounts of land in that country dedicated to coffee production. The borer beetle arrived in the past few years, and Karp’s group began to investigate whether farms with protected forests, and thus a greater biodiversity of insect-eating birds, fared better under attack from the insects.

A ‘not-so-glamorous’ experiment

To quantify the benefit birds provide to plantations, the researchers first calculated coffee bean yield — the amount of healthy, beetle-free beans that could be harvested — of infected plants that were housed in bird-proof cages versus yield from infected plants in the open, where birds were eating the beetles.

Next, they needed to confirm which species of birds were eating the beetles, and whether the birds required forest to survive. This required a more unorthodox approach.

“We had the not-so-glamorous task of collecting the birds’ poop, and then taking it back to Stanford and looking through the DNA within it to learn which birds were the pest preventers,” Karp said.

Five species of birds contributed to cutting infestation rates in half, and these birds were more abundant on farms featuring more forests.

“Depending on the season, the birds provide $ 75 to $ 310 increases in yield per hectare of farmland,” Karp said. The birds’ activity could become even more valuable if the beetle infestation worsens.

The scientists found that the closer the forests were to the farms, the greater benefit the birds provided. Specifically, smaller stands of trees — roughly the size of a few football fields — situated throughout crop fields provided better levels of beetle protection than the much larger forest preserves set on the outskirts of farms.

By differentiating the financial gains of different conservation strategies — large but distant preserves versus small, local stands of trees — Karp thinks the study could provide a framework for introducing similar efforts in agricultural zones around the world.

“This work suggests that it might be economically advantageous to not farm in certain areas of a plantation,” Karp said. “We’re going to start trying to generalize these results so that farmers, conservationists, land managers and governments can use them anywhere to make simple estimates of what they might gain in pest protection by protecting certain patches of the landscape.”

The study was published in the online edition of the peer-reviewed journal Ecology Letters. The work was co-authored by Stanford biology Professors Gretchen Daily, Paul Ehrlich and Elizabeth Hadly; biology graduate student Chase Mendenhall; Nicolas Chaumont, a software engineer at the Natural Capital Project; and Randi Figueroa Sandi, a field assistant in Copal de Agua Buena in Costa Rica.

ScienceDaily: Agriculture and Food News