代做ANSC10001 Animal & Society 1: Animals & Our World ASSESSMENT 2帮做R语言
- 首页 >> WebANSC10001 Animal & Society 1: Animals & Our World
ASSESSMENT 2
Due date 20 September 2024 17:00
The Task:
Write a 1200-word essay style. report (25%).
Purpose:
This assessment develops your skills of critical research for writing, enhances your critical evaluation and writing skills, and you also gain more in-depth knowledge of some of the livestock production systems and the animals we have been talking about.
The Brief:
It’s all about the facts and only the facts! Or is it? In our online worlds we are constantly bombarded with information, knowing what is reliable is increasingly difficult especially as information becomes more polarised and shaped to short digestible click bait bites or generated by artificial intelligence (AI) chat bots.
We have used a generative AI (OpenAI 2024) to generate a series of summaries comparing different types of animal production systems for each of six (6) different species.
We want you to choose one paragraph and fact check it.
You will need to read the summaries located at the end of this document (appendix 1) and choose one summary to analyse, research, and fact check, the options are:
1. Salmon: Wild harvested vs farmed
2. Egg production: Free-range vs cage
3. Beef cattle: Grass-fed vs feedlot
4. Dairy production: Pasture based vs indoor
5. Pork production: free-range vs indoor
6. Venison: Wild harvested vs farmed
Once you have chosen your paragraph you need to analyse the paragraph and identify the key claims being made for each system. (We will workshop this step during week 6 tutorials). Then, choose 3 of these key claims to fact check.
These claims should each fall under one of the areas of key concern that we discussed in lectures, environment, animal welfare, human health or economics. Choose 3 different areas to fact check. For example, if the 1st claim relates to environmental impacts of the two production systems, then the 2nd claim needs to relate to animal welfare, economics or human health and so on for the 3rd claim.
When completing your analysis and fact checking you need to consider: Is each claim valid? Does it overlook important points? Does all evidence agree?
Your report should analyse each claim, including counter arguments and qualifications. In preparing your response it should include specific examples, facts or evidence to support your discussion.
References:
When fact checking your main source of information should be scholarly sources, you will need to use a minimum of 3 peer reviewed sources.
In some cases non-peer reviewed reliable sources may be needed, we workshopped some of these in Week 4.
This library resource can help you identify peer reviewed sources https://unimelb.libguides.com/researchessentials/choosing-resources
Writing should be supported by in-text citations with full details provided in a reference list at the end of the assignment. Both in-text citations and reference list should be in APA 7 format. For details see: https://library.unimelb.edu.au/recite/referencing-styles/apa7
Word count:
1200 words total with plus or minus 10% allowed. Aim for around 350 words for each claim, and 150 words for a conclusion or takeaway message. Title, subheadings, figure captions and reference list are not included in the word count.
Sample Layout:
Title
Claim 1:
Claim 2:
Claim 3:
Take away message:
Reference list
How you will be marked:
Your report will be marked on the following three criteria:
· Content (50% of mark)
· Structure, organisation, and task completion (30% of mark)
· Evidence of research and citation (20% of mark)
Appendix 1
The following paragraphs have ben generate by a generative AI program (OpenAI 2024)
Reference: OpenAI. (2024). GTP-4o mini (July 18 version) [Large language model]. https:chat.openai.com/chat
1. Salmon: Wild-caught vs farmed
Farmed and wild-caught salmon differ in several key aspects, including environmental impact, nutritional content, and flavor. Farmed salmon are raised in controlled aquaculture environments, which allows for a steady, year-round supply but often leads to environmental concerns such as water pollution, the spread of diseases to wild populations, and habitat destruction. Nutritionally, farmed salmon typically have higher fat content and more omega-6 fatty acids, while wild-caught salmon are leaner and richer in omega-3 fatty acids due to their natural diet and active lifestyle. Wild-caught salmon are generally considered to have a more robust and nuanced flavor compared to the milder taste of farmed salmon. Additionally, farmed salmon are usually more affordable and readily available, while wild-caught salmon are often more expensive and subject to seasonal availability.
2. Egg production : Free-range vs cage
Free-range and cage egg production differ significantly in terms of animal welfare, environmental impact, and cost. Free-range egg production allows hens to roam outdoors, promoting natural behaviors like foraging and dust bathing, which generally leads to better animal welfare and healthier, more active birds. This system, however, requires more land and resources, potentially increasing its environmental footprint and cost. In contrast, cage egg production confines hens to small cages, restricting their movement and natural behaviors, often resulting in stress and health issues. While cage systems are more space-efficient and cost-effective, they raise significant animal welfare concerns and can lead to higher concentrations of waste and pollution.
3. Beef Cattle: grass-fed vs feedlot
Grass-fed and feedlot beef cattle differ primarily in their diets, environmental impacts, and meat characteristics. Grass-fed cattle are raised on pasture and consume a diet of grass and forage, which typically results in leaner meat with higher levels of omega-3 fatty acids and conjugated linoleic acid (CLA). This method often promotes better animal welfare and has potential benefits for soil health and biodiversity. However, it requires more land and can have a higher environmental footprint in terms of greenhouse gas emissions due to slower growth rates and more extensive resource use. In contrast, feedlot cattle are raised in confined spaces and fed a diet of grains and supplements, leading to faster weight gain and more marbled meat, which is often more tender and less lean. While feedlot systems are more space-efficient and can reduce costs, they are associated with significant environmental concerns such as higher waste production, water use, and greenhouse gas emissions. Both methods have their own advantages and challenges, impacting the quality of meat, animal welfare, and environmental sustainability.
4. Dairy : Pasture-based vs indoor housed
Pasture-based and indoor dairy production systems differ notably in terms of animal welfare, environmental impact, and milk quality. In pasture-based systems, dairy cows graze on natural grasslands or forage for a significant portion of their diet, promoting natural behaviors and generally leading to better animal welfare. This system can also contribute to soil health and biodiversity, though it requires more land and can be subject to seasonal variations in milk production. In contrast, indoor dairy production keeps cows in confined spaces with a controlled diet of feed and supplements, which allows for consistent milk production year-round and can be more efficient in terms of space and resource use. However, indoor systems often face challenges such as waste management and reduced opportunities for natural behaviors, which can impact animal welfare. The milk from pasture-based systems is sometimes perceived as having superior flavor and nutritional quality due to the cows' varied diet, while indoor systems can produce milk more consistently and cost-effectively. Both methods have their respective benefits and trade-offs, affecting the overall sustainability and quality of dairy production.
5. Pig production: Free-range vs indoor
Free-range and indoor pig production systems differ markedly in terms of animal welfare, environmental impact, and meat quality. In free-range systems, pigs are raised with access to outdoor spaces where they can roam, forage, and engage in natural behaviors, leading to improved animal welfare and potentially higher meat quality. This method supports better environmental practices through natural soil management and reduced concentration of waste, though it requires more land and can result in higher production costs. In contrast, indoor pig production confines pigs to controlled environments with limited space, focusing on efficient use of resources and space, which can lower production costs and ensure consistent meat supply. However, indoor systems often face issues such as reduced animal welfare due to limited movement and higher concentrations of waste, which can also impact the environment. The meat from free-range pigs is often perceived as having superior flavor and texture compared to indoor-raised pork. Each system has its own benefits and challenges, influencing overall sustainability and quality in different ways.
6. Venison: Wild harvested vs farmed
Wild-harvested and farmed venison differ significantly in their sourcing, environmental impact, and meat characteristics. Wild-harvested venison comes from deer that roam freely in their natural habitats, which often leads to leaner meat with a more complex flavor due to their varied diet and active lifestyle. However, the hunting process can impact local ecosystems, and issues like overhunting and habitat disruption need to be managed carefully. In contrast, farmed venison is produced in controlled environments where deer are fed a managed diet, resulting in meat that can be more consistent in flavor and texture. While farmed venison is typically more tender and available year-round, it often involves intensive land use and waste management, and concerns about animal welfare can arise from confinement. Each method has its benefits and trade-offs, affecting the overall sustainability, quality, and environmental footprint of the venison produced.