Manejo sustentável de pastagens no bioma Pantanal para mitigação e adaptação climática em sistemas de produção

Santos, Sandra Aparecida; Pott, Arnildo; Rogério, Marcos Claudio Pinheiro; Soriano, Balbina Maria Araújo; Medeiros, Sérgio Raposo de

doi:10.1590/S1678-3921.pab2026.v61.04299

COP30: Animal Science/ Review • Pesq. agropec. bras. 61 • 2026 • https://doi.org/10.1590/S1678-3921.pab2026.v61.04299 linkcopiar

Manejo sustentável de pastagens no bioma Pantanal para mitigação e adaptação climática em sistemas de produção

Autoria SCIMAGO INSTITUTIONS RANKINGS

O objetivo desta revisão foi descrever as práticas de manejo para pastagens nativas e cultivadas no Pantanal que contribuem para o sequestro de carbono e a redução da emissão de metano, para apoiar e detalhar a aplicação da ferramenta Fazenda Pantaneira Sustentável (FPS), usada para avaliar o estado de conservação da pastagem e guiar o manejo climaticamente inteligente. A estrutura utilizada alinha as práticas de manejo com os principais elementos ecofisiológicos da função da pastagem e as vias de mitigação e resiliência. O sequestro de carbono é aumentado pela manutenção da pressão de pastejo moderada e por meio de estratégias de manejo que conservam diretamente os estoques existentes e aumentam a fixação de carbono. A mitigação das emissões de metano depende da composição florística e da qualidade nutricional da dieta no sistema de produção. Isso é gerenciado de forma proativa ao se utilizar o indicador valor forrageiro para guiar práticas como suplementação estratégica. Ao alinhar essas práticas direcionadas com os indicadores e os limiares ecológicos da FPS, essa abordagem permite intervenções espacialmente diferenciadas que otimizam o balanço nutricional, reduzem a fermentação entérica e fortalecem a resiliência dos sistemas de produção do Pantanal frente às mudanças climáticas.

Termos para indexação:
sequestro de carbono; ferramenta Fazenda Pantaneira Sustentável; emissão de metano; pastagem nativa.

Management practice	FPS indicator⁽³⁾	Scientific support/primary carbon pathway (V)
Adaptive grazing pressure	Grazing intensity	Replacing a fixed stocking rate with an adaptive pressure ensures an adequate regrowth, maximizes forage use, and minimizes degradation (Santos et al., 2021a). This is essential to maintain productivity (E2) and cover (E1) for an increased fixation (V1) and reduced loss (V2) of carbon.
Seasonal fencing/deferment	Forage plant cover	Strategically resting pastures (e.g. during the early rainy season) promotes biomass accumulation and root growth during the peak carbon absorption period (Santos et al., 2016). This directly increases cover (E1) for an increased carbon fixation (V1) and an improved feed efficiency (V3).
Pasture diversity management	Undesirable species & forage value	Management focused on promoting functional diversity enhances system resilience (Whitehead, 2020). Diverse root structures improve soil organic matter distribution (Liu et al., 2023), increasing forage quality (E4) and supporting efficient belowground transformations (V3).
Integrated management	Grazing intensity & forage value	Practices such as the strategic introduction of cultivated forages when legally compliant (Santos et al., 2022) and silvopastoral systems (Santos et al., 2023a) enhance forage quality and nutrient cycling (Liu et al., 2023). This increases the total organic matter input to the soil, supporting sustained carbon stocks, increased carbon fixation (V1), reduced carbon loss (V2), and improved efficiency of below ground transformations (V3).
Restoration and biodiversity promotion	Undesirable species & forage plant cover	Promoting biodiversity means managing land use to allow the full expression of native flora. This favors species intrinsically more resilient to the climate (especially to aridity) and ensures a high-quality and high-quantity input of carbon (litter and roots) to the soil, maximizing the system’s long-term fixation capacity and resilience (Liu et al., 2023), while increasing carbon fixation (V1) and improving feed efficiency (V3).
Biomass management (fire control)	Grazing intensity & forage plant cover	Using grazing intensity to strategically reduce fine fuel loads prevents the massive instantaneous release of stored carbon via wildfire (Santos et al., 2023b). This practice is crucial for conserving existing carbon stocks, avoiding major pulse emissions of greenhouse gases, while reducing carbon loss (V2).

Management practice	FPS indicator⁽³⁾	Scientific support/primary carbon pathway (V)
Optimizing forage value and intake	Forage value	Ensuring the diet meets the minimum protein threshold of ~6% is critical for an efficient microbial activity (Histrov et al., 2019). A higher feed quality (E4) leads to a faster passage and a lower CH₄ production per unit of energy used, as evidenced by C3 grasses (Santos, 2023), also reducing carbon loss in pastures (V2).
Management and conservation of low-emission species	Undesirable species & forage value	Prioritizing native species (E5) with a low CH₄ potential emission (E4), such as C3 grasses and some C4 grasses as Mesosetum chaseae (Santos, 2023; Santos et al., 2020a), enhances system resilience and diet quality (V3).
Seasonal access to high-quality pastures	Grazing intensity & forage value	Using seasonal high-quality forage ensures a consistent diet (Santos et al., 2021a). Managing grazing intensity (Liu et al., 2023) controls the sustainable use of this temporary high-quality resource (E4), also enhancing system resilience and feed efficiency (V3)
Monitoring of protein-energy balance	Forage value	Using diagnostic systems favoring native pastures in FPS to guide precise supplementation prevents microbial inefficiency caused by poor protein-energy synchrony (Santos et al., 2020b). This enhanced efficiency maximizes feed use (E4), reducing CH₄ intensity and minimizing wasteful nitrogen excretion (V2).
Strategic use of cultivated pastures	Forage value & grazing intensity	The use of cultivated pastures following current legislation and technical criteria (Santos et al., 2022) increases carrying capacity and productivity (E2) per area (Crispim & Branco, 2002). This is essential for the dilution of CH₄ emissions per product (V1).

location_on

Embrapa Secretaria de Pesquisa e Desenvolvimento; Pesquisa Agropecuária Brasileira Caixa Postal 040315, 70770-901 Brasília DF Brazil, Tel. +55 61 3448-1813, Fax +55 61 3340-5483 - Brasília - DF - Brazil
E-mail: pab@embrapa.br

rss_feed Acompanhe os números deste periódico no seu leitor de RSS

[TFN1] ⁽¹⁾
The key ecophysiological elements (E) are: E1, ground and sward cover; E2, productivity; E4, forage quality; and E5, diversity.

[TFN2] ⁽²⁾
The pathways (V) for greenhouse gas mitigation and resilience, adapted from Stanley et al. (2024), are: V1, increased carbon fixation (dilution of emissions per product); V2, reduced carbon loss by a slower decomposition and reduced fire use; and V3, improved efficiency of belowground transformations (via diet quality).

[TFN3] ⁽³⁾
The FPS indicators are adapted from Santos et al. (2017).