Prospects from agroecology and industrial ecology for animal production in the 21st century

Agroecology and industrial ecology can be viewed as complementary means for reducing the environmental footprint of animal farming systems: agroecology mainly by stimulating natural processes to reduce inputs, and industrial ecology by closing system loops, thereby reducing demand for raw materials, lowering pollution and saving on waste treatment. Surprisingly, animal farming systems have so far been ignored in most agroecological thinking. On the basis of a study by Altieri, who identified the key ecological processes to be optimized, we propose five principles for the design of sustainable animal production systems: (i) adopting management practices aiming to improve animal health, (ii) decreasing the inputs needed for production, (iii) decreasing pollution by optimizing the metabolic functioning of farming systems, (iv) enhancing diversity within animal production systems to strengthen their resilience and (v) preserving biological diversity in agroecosystems by adapting management practices. We then discuss how these different principles combine to generate environmental, social and economic performance in six animal production systems (ruminants, pigs, rabbits and aquaculture) covering a long gradient of intensification. The two principles concerning economy of inputs and reduction of pollution emerged in nearly all the case studies, a finding that can be explained by the economic and regulatory constraints affecting animal production. Integrated management of animal health was seldom mobilized, as alternatives to chemical drugs have only recently been investigated, and the results are not yet transferable to farming practices. A number of ecological functions and ecosystem services (recycling of nutrients, forage yield, pollination, resistance to weed invasion, etc.) are closely linked to biodiversity, and their persistence depends largely on maintaining biological diversity in agroecosystems. We conclude that the development of such ecology-based alternatives for animal production implies changes in the positions adopted by technicians and extension services, researchers and policymakers. Animal production systems should not only be considered holistically, but also in the diversity of their local and regional conditions. The ability of farmers to make their own decisions on the basis of the close monitoring of system performance is most important to ensure system sustainability.     

Evolution of virulence under intensive farming: salmon lice increase skin lesions and reduce host growth in salmon farms

Parasites rely on resources from a host and are selected to achieve an optimal combination of transmission and virulence. Human‐induced changes in parasite ecology, such as intensive farming of hosts, might not only favour increased parasite abundances, but also alter the selection acting on parasites and lead to life‐history evolution. The trade‐off between transmission and virulence could be affected by intensive farming practices such as high host density and the use of antiparasitic drugs, which might lead to increased virulence in some host–parasite systems. To test this, we therefore infected Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar) smolts with salmon lice (Lepeophtheirus salmonis) sampled either from wild or farmed hosts in a laboratory experiment. We compared growth and skin damage (i.e. proxies for virulence) of hosts infected with either wild or farmed lice and found that, compared to lice sampled from wild hosts in unfarmed areas, those originating from farmed fish were more harmful; they inflicted more skin damage to their hosts and reduced relative host weight gain to a greater extent. We advocate that more evolutionary studies should be carried out using farmed animals as study species, given the current increase in intensive food production practices that might be compared to a global experiment in parasite evolution.     

Application of genome editing in aquatic farm animals: Atlantic salmon

Gene editing offers opportunities to solve fish farming sustainability issues that presently hampers expansion of the aquaculture industry. In for example Atlantic salmon farming, there are now two major bottlenecks limiting the expansion of the industry. One is the genetic impact of escaped farmed salmon on wild populations, which is considered the most long-term negative effect on the environment. Secondly and the utmost acute problem is the fish parasite salmon lice, which is currently causing high lethality in wild salmonids due to high concentrations of the parasite in the sea owing to sea cage salmon farming. There are also sustainability issues associated with increased use of vegetable-based ingredients as replacements for marine products in fish feed. This transition comes at the expense of the omega-3 content both in fish feed and the fish filet of the farmed fish. Reduced fish welfare represents another obstacle, and robust farmed fish is needed to avoid negative stress associated phenotypes such as cataract, bone and fin deformities, precocious maturity and higher disease susceptibility. Gene editing could solve some of these problems as genetic traits can be altered positively to reach phenotype of interest such as for example disease resistance and increased omega-3 production.

     

Evaluation of the sustainability of contrasted pig farming systems: breeding programmes

The sustainability of breeding activities in 15 pig farming systems in five European countries was evaluated. One conventional and two differentiated systems per country were studied. The Conventional systems were the standard systems in their countries. The differentiated systems were of three categories: Adapted Conventional with focus on animal welfare, meat quality or environment (five systems); Traditional with local breeds in small-scale production (three systems) and Organic (two systems). Data were collected with a questionnaire from nine breeding organisations providing animals and semen to the studied farming systems and from, on average, five farmers per farming system. The sustainability assessment of breeding activities was performed in four dimensions. The first dimension described whether the market for the product was well defined, and whether the breeding goal reflected the farming system and the farmers’ demands. The second dimension described recording and selection procedures, together with genetic change in traits that were important in the system. The third dimension described genetic variation, both within and between pig breeds. The fourth dimension described the management of the breeding organisation, including communication, transparency, and technical and human resources. The results show substantial differences in the sustainability of breeding activities, both between farming systems within the same category and between different categories of farming systems. The breeding activities are assessed to be more sustainable for conventional systems than for differentiated systems in three of the four dimensions. In most differentiated farming systems, breeding goals are not related to the system, as these systems use the same genetic material as conventional systems. The breeds used in Traditional farming systems are important for genetic biodiversity, but the small scale of these systems renders them vulnerable. It is hoped that, by reflecting on different aspects of sustainability, this study will encourage sustainable developments in pig production.     

Review: Precision livestock farming,automats and new technologies: possible applications in extensive dairy sheep farming

Precision livestock farming (PLF) technologies are becoming increasingly common in modern agriculture. They are frequently integrated with other new technologies in order to improve human–livestock interactions, productivity and economical sustainability of modern farms. New systems are constantly being developed for concentrated farming operations as well as for extensive and pasture-based farming systems. The development of technologies for grazing animals is of particular interest for the Mediterranean extensive sheep farming sector. Dairy sheep farming is a typical production system of the area linked to its historical and cultural traditions. The area provides roughly 40% of the world sheep milk, having 27% of the milk-producing ewes. Developed countries of the area (France, Italy, Greece and Spain – FIGS) have highly specialized production systems improved through animal selection, feeding techniques and intensification of production. However, extensive systems are still practiced alongside intensive ones due to their lower input costs and better resilience to market fluctuations. In the current article, we evaluate possible PLF systems and their suitability to be incorporated in extensive dairy sheep farming as practiced in the FIGS countries. Available products include: electronic identification systems (now mandatory in the EU) such as ear tags, ruminal boluses and sub-cutaneous radio-frequency identification; on-animal sensors such as accelerometers, global positioning systems and social activity loggers; and stationary management systems such as walk-over-weights, automatic drafter (AD), virtual fencing and milking parlour-related technologies. The systems were considered according to their suitability for the management and business model common in dairy sheep farming. However, adoption of new technologies does not take place immediately in small and medium scale extensive farming. As sheep farmers usually belong to more conservative technology consumers, characterized by an average age of 60 and a very transparent community, the dynamics do not favour financial risk taking involved with new technologies. Financial barriers linked to production volumes and resource management of extensive farming are also a barrier for innovation. However, future prospectives could increase the importance of technology and promote its wider adoption. Trends such as global sheep milk economics, global warming, awareness to animal welfare, antibiotics resistance and European agricultural policies could influence the farming practices and stimulate wider adoption of PLF systems in the near future.     

Forty research issues for the redesign of animal production systems in the 21st century

Agroecology offers a scientific and operational framework for redesigning animal production systems (APS) so that they better cope with the coming challenges. Grounded in the stimulation and valorization of natural processes to reduce inputs and pollutions in agroecosystems, it opens a challenging research agenda for the animal science community. In this paper, we identify key research issues that define this agenda. We first stress the need to assess animal robustness by measurable traits, to analyze trade-offs between production and adaptation traits at within-breed and between-breed level, and to better understand how group selection, epigenetics and animal learning shape performance. Second, we propose research on the nutritive value of alternative feed resources, including the environmental impacts of producing these resources and their associated non-provisioning services. Third, we look at how the design of APS based on agroecological principles valorizes interactions between system components and promotes biological diversity at multiple scales to increase system resilience. Addressing such challenges requires a collection of theories and models (concept–knowledge theory, viability theory, companion modeling, etc.). Acknowledging the ecology of contexts and analyzing the rationales behind traditional small-scale systems will increase our understanding of mechanisms contributing to the success or failure of agroecological practices and systems. Fourth, the large-scale development of agroecological products will require analysis of resistance to change among farmers and other actors in the food chain. Certifications and market-based incentives could be an important lever for the expansion of agroecological alternatives in APS. Finally, we question the suitability of current agriculture extension services and public funding mechanisms for scaling-up agroecological practices and systems.     

Nitrogen in global animal production and management options for improving nitrogen use efficiency

Animal production systems convert plant protein into animal protein. Depending on animal species, ration and management, between 5% and 45 % of the nitrogen (N) in plant protein is converted to and deposited in animal protein. The other 55%–95% is excreted via urine and feces, and can be used as nutrient source for plant (= often animal feed) production. The estimated global amount of N voided by animals ranges between 80 and 130 Tg N per year, and is as large as or larger than the global annual N fertilizer consumption. Cattle (60%), sheep (12%) and pigs (6%) have the largest share in animal manure N production.The conversion of plant N into animal N is on average more efficient in poultry and pork production than in dairy production, which is higher than in beef and sheep production. However, differences within a type of animal production system can be as large as differences between types of animal production systems, due to large effects of the genetic potential of animals, animal feed and management. The management of animals and animal feed, together with the genetic potential of the animals, are key factors to a high efficiency of conversion of plant protein into animal protein.The efficiency of the conversion of N from animal manure, following application to land, into plant protein ranges between 0 and 60%, while the estimated global mean is about 15%. The other 40%–100% is lost to the wider environment via NH₃ volatilization, denitrification, leaching and run-off in pastures or during storage and/or following application of the animal manure to land. On a global scale, only 40%–50% of the amount of N voided is collected in barns, stables and paddocks, and only half of this amount is recycled to crop land. The N losses from animal manure collected in barns, stables and paddocks depend on the animal manure management system. Relative large losses occur in confined animal feeding operations, as these often lack the land base to utilize the N from animal manure effectively. Losses will be relatively low when all manure are collected rapidly in water-tight and covered basins, and when they are subsequently applied to the land in proper amounts and at the proper time, and using the proper method (low-emission techniques).There is opportunity for improving the N conversion in animal production systems by improving the genetic production potential of the herd, the composition of the animal feed, and the management of the animal manure. Coupling of crop and animal production systems, at least at a regional scale, is one way to high N use efficiency in the whole system. Clustering of confined animal production systems with other intensive agricultural production systems on the basis of concepts from industrial ecology with manure processing is another possible way to improve N use efficiency.     

Towards an agroecological assessment of dairy systems: proposal for a set of criteria suited to mountain farming

Ruminant production systems have been facing the sustainability challenge, namely, how to maintain or even increase production while reducing their environmental footprint, and improving social acceptability. One currently discussed option is to encourage farmers to follow agroecological principles, that is, to take advantage of ecological processes to reduce inputs and farm wastes, while preserving natural resources, and using this diversity to increase system resilience. However, these principles need to be made more practical. Here, we present the procedure undertaken for the collaborative construction of an agroecological diagnostic grid for dairy systems with a focus on the mountain farming relying on the use of semi-natural grasslands. This diagnosis will necessarily rely on a multicriteria evaluation as agroecology is based on a series of complementary principles. It requires defining a set of criteria, based on practices to be recommended, that should be complied with to ensure agroecological production. We present how such agroecological criteria were identified and organized to form the architecture of an evaluation model. As a basis for this work, we used five agroecological principles already proposed for animal production systems. A group of five experts of mountain production systems and of their multicriteria evaluation was selected, with a second round of consultation with five additional experts. They first split up each principle into three to four generic sub-principles. For each principle, they listed three to eight categories of state variables on which the fulfilment of the principle should have a positive impact (e.g. main health disorders for the integrated health management principle). State variables are specific for a given production, for example, dairy farms. Crossing principles with state variables enabled experts to build five matrices, with 75 cells relevant for dairy systems. In each cell, criteria are specific to the local context, for example, mountain dairy systems in this study. Finally, we discuss the opportunities offered by our methodology, and the steps remaining for the construction of the evaluation model.     

Nitrogen in global animal production and management options for improving nitrogen use efficiency

Animal production systems convert plant protein into animal protein. Depending on animal species, ration and management, between 5% and 45 % of the nitrogen (N) in plant protein is converted to and deposited in animal protein. The other 55%-95% is excreted via urine and feces, and can be used as nutrient source for plant (= often animal feed) production. The estimated global amount of N voided by animals ranges between 80 and 130 Tg N per year, and is as large as or larger than the global annual N fertilizer consumption. Cattle (60%), sheep (12%) and pigs (6%) have the largest share in animal manure N production.The conversion of plant N into animal N is on average more efficient in poultry and pork production than in dairy production, which is higher than in beef and sheep production. However, differences within a type of animal production system can be as large as differences between types of animal production systems, due to large effects of the genetic potential of animals, animal feed and management. The management of animals and animal feed, together with the genetic potential of the animals, are key factors to a high efficiency of conversion of plant protein into animal protein.The efficiency of the conversion of N from animal manure, following application to land, into plant protein ranges between 0 and 60%, while the estimated global mean is about 15%. The other 40%- 100% is lost to the wider environment via NH3 volatilization, denitrification, leaching and run-off in pastures or during storage and/or following application of the animal manure to land. On a global scale, only 40%-50% of the amount of N voided is collected in barns, stables and paddocks, and only half of this amount is recycled to crop land. The N losses from animal manure collected in barns, stables and paddocks depend on the animal manure management system. Relative large losses occur in confined animal feeding operations, as these often lack the land base to utilize the N from animal manure effectively.Losses will be relatively low when all manure are collected rapidly in water-tight and covered basins, and when they are subsequently applied to the land in proper amounts and at the proper time, and using the proper method (low-emission techniques).There is opportunity for improving the N conversion in animal production systems by improving the genetic production potential of the herd, the composition of the animal feed, and the management of the animal manure. Coupling of crop and animal production systems, at least at a regional scale, is one way to high N use efficiency in the whole system. Clustering of confined animal production systems with other intensive agricultural production systems on the basis of concepts from industrial ecology with manure processing is another possible way to improve Nuse efficiency.     

Nitrogen in global animal production and management options for improving nitrogen use efficiency

Animal production systems convert plant protein into animal protein. Depending on animal species, ration and management, between 5% and 45 % of the nitrogen (N) in plant protein is converted to and deposited in animal protein. The other 55%-95% is excreted via urine and feces, and can be used as nutrient source for plant (= often animal feed) production. The estimated global amount of N voided by animals ranges between 80 and 130 Tg N per year, and is as large as or larger than the global annual N fertilizer consumption. Cattle (60%), sheep (12%) and pigs (6%) have the largest share in animal manure N production. The conversion of plant N into animal N is on average more efficient in poultry and pork production than in dairy production, which is higher than in beef and sheep production. However, differences within a type of animal production system can be as large as differences between types of animal production systems, due to large effects of the genetic potential of animals, animal feed and management. The management of animals and animal feed, together with the genetic potential of the animals, are key factors to a high efficiency of conversion of plant protein into animal protein. The efficiency of the conversion of N from animal manure, following application to land, into plant protein ranges between 0 and 60%, while the estimated global mean is about 15%. The other 40%-100% is lost to the wider environment via NH3 volatilization, denitrification, leaching and run-off in pastures or during storage and/or following application of the animal manure to land. On a global scale, only 40%-50% of the amount of N voided is collected in barns, stables and paddocks, and only half of this amount is recycled to crop land. The N losses from animal manure collected in barns, stables and paddocks depend on the animal manure management system. Relative large losses occur in confined animal feeding operations, as these often lack the land base to utilize the N from animal manure effectively. Losses will be relatively low when all manure are collected rapidly in water-tight and covered basins, and when they are subsequently applied to the land in proper amounts and at the proper time, and using the proper method (low-emission techniques). There is opportunity for improving the N conversion in animal production systems by improving the genetic production potential of the herd, the composition of the animal feed, and the management of the animal manure. Coupling of crop and animal production systems, at least at a regional scale, is one way to high N use efficiency in the whole system. Clustering of confined animal production systems with other intensive agricultural production systems on the basis of concepts from industrial ecology with manure processing is another possible way to improve N use efficiency.     

Review: Towards the agroecological management of ruminants,pigs and poultry through the development of sustainable breeding programmes: I-selection goals and criteria

Agroecology uses natural processes and local resources rather than chemical inputs to ensure production while limiting the environmental footprint of livestock and crop production systems. Selecting to achieve a maximization of target production criteria has long proved detrimental to fitness traits. However, since the 1990s, developments in animal breeding have also focussed on animal robustness by balancing production and functional traits within overall breeding goals. We discuss here how an agroecological perspective should further shift breeding goals towards functional traits rather than production traits. Breeding for robustness aims to promote individual adaptive capacities by considering diverse selection criteria which include reproduction, animal health and welfare, and adaptation to rough feed resources, a warm climate or fluctuating environmental conditions. It requires the consideration of genotype×environment interactions in the prediction of breeding values. Animal performance must be evaluated in low-input systems in order to select those animals that are adapted to limiting conditions, including feed and water availability, climate variations and diseases. Finally, we argue that there is no single agroecological animal type, but animals with a variety of profiles that can meet the expectations of agroecology. The standardization of both animals and breeding conditions indeed appears contradictory to the agroecological paradigm that calls for an adaptation of animals to local opportunities and constraints in weakly artificialized systems tied to their physical environment.     

The Concept of Animal Welfare at the Interface between Producers and Scientists: The Example of Organic Pig Farming

In organic farming animal welfare is one important aspect included in the internationally agreed organic principles of health, ecology, fairness and care (IFOAM 2006), reflecting expectation of consumers and farmers. The definition of organic animal welfare includes—besides traditional terms of animal welfare—‘regeneration’ and ‘naturalness’. Organic animal welfare assessment needs to reflect this and use complex parameters, include natural behaviour and a systemic view. Furthermore, various parties with seemingly conflicting interests are involved, causing ethical dilemmas, such as the use of nose rings for outdoor sows (impaired animal welfare vs. destruction of humus). Solutions can only be found when foundational concepts are translated and applied to practical situations. On-farm animal welfare assessment and implementation of improvement strategies are increasingly relevant scientific areas. They combine on-farm welfare assessment, identification of key problem areas and connected risk factors. Constant communication between all parties is crucial for success. Animal health and welfare planning is one application of this approach, which was carried out on Austrian organic pig farms as well as organic dairy farms in seven European countries. The projects included welfare assessment, feedback and benchmarking as a tool for communication between farmers, advisors and scientists. Finally goals were set by the farmer and improvement strategies applicable to organic farming were implemented. This included prevention of disease by management strategies instead of routine treatment with pharmaceutical products. It appeared that next to problem structuring, multidisciplinary problem solving demands good communications skills to relate animal welfare science to value reflections.     

基于生态系统演变机理的生态系统脆弱性、适应性与突变理论

随着气候变化影响广度与深度的增加,生态系统脆弱性、适应性与突变理论逐渐被广泛应用到生态学研究领域中,探讨和评估各类生态系统对气候变化的敏感性、脆弱性和适应性,可谋求更好的方式来应对气候变化对区域生态系统带来的深远影响,服务于国家生态系统可持续管理及生态安全建设.虽然相关研究已获取许多进展,区分了气候敏感区和某些生态系统...     

A user's guide to animal welfare science

Here, I provide a guide for those new to the burgeoning field of animal welfare science as to what this comprehensive, relatively young discipline is all about. Drawing on all branches of biology, including behavioural ecology and neuroscience, the science of animal welfare asks three big questions: Are animals conscious? How can we assess good and bad welfare in animals? How can we use science to improve animal welfare in practice? I also provide guidelines for an evidence-based approach to welfare issues for policy makers and other users of animal welfare research.     

动物移动网络研究对景观生态学的贡献

景观生态学在其发展之初的20世纪80年代, 提出了关于景观网络研究(包括景观网络概念、网络结构指数和景观连接度)的基本构想, 这些构想需要在景观过程的研究中逐渐被落实和发展。动物移动过程因动物在斑块或廊道上有着独特丰富的属性特征、与周围资源环境之间存在复杂反馈而区别于无机物运移的景观过程, 则动物移动网络研究在实现关于景观网络研究的基本构想、推动景观生态学发展中贡献独特。因此, 总结动物移动网络研究的来源脉络及其对景观生态学的理论贡献对于景观网络领域和景观生态学学科的发展都具有重要意义。本文抓住景观生态学发展之初提出的关于景观网络研究的基本构想, 寻找和剖析其中所蕴含的景观生态学思想, 追踪这些思想如何被落实、发展、并形成目前的三个热点方向: 动物移动网络模拟、重要值评价和景观连接度分析; 总结这三个方向的研究进展, 指出整合动物的空间行为特征是必然发展趋势; 揭示出动物移动网络研究始终都以发掘斑块或廊道的动物有机体的属性特征(如种群数量)、以及描述这种属性在不同斑块或廊道之间的差异和联系为方向, 正是这种属性的发掘有效地落实、发展和丰富了关于景观网络研究的最初构想, 对景观生态学的贡献比其他过程更为独特。文章还总结了我国动物移动网络研究与国际研究相比较为滞后的现状, 指出其暂时尚未显示出对我国景观生态学的独特贡献; 强调发展源于跟踪定位数据的动物空间行为生态学研究是减小差距的重要、必要前提。期望本文能引发关于景观网络乃至景观生态学理论发展的方向性思考, 为研究者提供参考。     

生态学的科学概念及其演变与当代生态学学科体系之商榷

生态学既是生物学的分支学科,也是环境科学、地球系统科学的重要组成部分,其研究成果可直接服务于植物、动物、微生物的生物多样性保护、生物资源利用及生物产业管理等应用领域.生态系统概念将经典生态学或者基础生态学研究扩展到了生态系统生态学或者生态系统科学的新阶段,奠定了大尺度及全球生态环境科学研究的理论基础,促进了生物学、地理...     

Minimizing animal welfare harms associated with predation management in agro‐ecosystems

The impacts of wild predators on livestock are a common source of human–wildlife conflict globally, and predators are subject to population control for this reason in many situations. Animal welfare is one of many important considerations affecting decisions about predation management. Recent studies discussing animal welfare in this context have presented arguments emphasizing the importance of avoiding intentional harm to predators, but they have not usually considered harms imposed by predators on livestock and other animals. Efforts to mitigate predation impacts (including ‘no control’ approaches) cause a variety of harms to predators, livestock and other wildlife. Successfully minimizing the overall frequency and magnitude of harms requires consideration of the direct, indirect, intentional and unintentional harms imposed on all animals inhabiting agricultural landscapes. We review the harms resulting from the management of dingoes and other wild dogs in the extensive beef cattle grazing systems of Australia to illustrate how these negative impacts can be minimized across both wild and domestic species present on a farm or in a free‐ranging livestock grazing context. Similar to many other predator–livestock conflicts, wild dogs impose intermittent harms on beef cattle (especially calves) including fatal predation, non‐fatal attack (mauling and biting), pathogen transmission, and fear‐ or stress‐related effects. Wild dog control tools and strategies impose harms on dingoes and other wildlife including stress, pain and death as a consequence of both lethal and non‐lethal control approaches. To balance these various sources of harm, we argue that the tactical use of lethal predator control approaches can result in harming the least number of individual animals, given certain conditions. This conclusion conflicts with both traditional (e.g. continuous or ongoing lethal control) and contemporary (e.g. predator‐friendly or no‐control) predation management approaches. The general and transferable issues, approaches and principles we describe have broad applicability to many other human–wildlife conflicts around the world.     

生态系统健康研究的一些基本问题探讨

目前有关生态系统健康研究的一些基本问题尚未达成共识。本文分析了健康、系统与生态系统3个与生态系统健康关联的概念,在此基础上,对生态系统健康的概念及其内涵、研究价值、研究的内容框架、研究的合理尺度以及生态系统质量诊断与质量等级评价进行了探讨。指出生态学上的生态系统是系统科学意义上系统的一类,整体性、稳定性和可持续性是生态系统的重要特征,生态系统健康可通过它的充分必要条件给出,即具备良好的整体性,能够维持较高的稳定性,并能实现良好的可持续性。生态系统质量标准分为质量诊断标准和质量等级评价标准,质量诊断是一种是与非的事实判断,而质量等级评价是一种价值判断。生态系统质量等级评价指标可分为限制可比型和非限制可比型两类。生态系统的复杂性决定了生态系统健康研究须借助于系统科学和非线性科学的理论与方法,生态系统病变的滞后性决定了生态系统健康研究必须加强生态系统质量预测与预警,而生态系统健康的跨学科性决定了生态系统健康研究需要生态学、环境学、医学、社会学以及经济学等领域研究人员的广泛合作。