Nazan Koluman^1*, Jerry D. Agossou²

1 Department of Animal Science, Agricultural Faculty, Cukurova University, Adana-Turkey

2 Center for tropical Agricultural Research and Development (CTARD_NGO), Parakou-Republic of Benin

*Corresponding Author:Nazan Koluman, Department of Animal Science, Agricultural Faculty, Cukurova University, Adana-Turkey, Tel: 0370 633 603; Fax: 0370 633 603; E-mail: nazankoluman@gmail.com

Citation: Nazan Koluman, Jerry D. Agossou (2022) Impacts of Climate Change on The Animal Farming in Mediterranean Region: A Perception Survey Among Agro Pastoral Households in Mountainous Area of Adana, Turkey. SciEnvironm 5: 155.

Received: October 17, 2022; Accepted: October 23, 2022; Published: October 26, 2022.

Copyright: © 2022 Nazan Koluman, et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

Extreme climate change (CC) and atmospheric events have been become nowadays a global issue. Livestock production contributes to global warming. It is estimated that livestock responsible to 9% of human-welded CO₂ emission, 35-40% of CH₄ emission, 65% of N₂O emission and 64% of NH₃ emission. In addition, CC (increase in high temperature and drought) has been found to adversely affect livestock production. Consequently, a lot of effort is made to adjust livestock production systems to forecast on future changes in weather according to climate modeling. From this point of view, it is very important that the correct estimation will be made with regard to questions, such as which feed, or which goat breed will be found as most appropriate for different regions. This study elucidates people’s perception about causes and impacts of climate change, current plans and programs, and future programming needed to address climate change issues more fully. The study was undertaken from November 2017 to May 2018 to investigate the observed changes in agropastoral practices and constraints limiting the sustainable development of goat and sheep production in the province of Adana. Structured questionnaires were administered to 80 farmers purposely selected during village visits. Data related to the socio demographic information of farmers, farms' characteristics, major problems faced and approaches of solutions were collected. In addition, focus discussions based on guide were done to collect information used to discuss this paper.

Keywords: Climate Change, Animal Farming, Mediterranean, Impacts, Survey, Agropastoral System

IPCC (2007) defines climate change as all statistical variations (notably mean and spread) in climatic characteristics at a given location, over a prolonged period (typically decades or longer). These changes are directly or indirectly due to or anthropogenic activity resulting from different forms of pollution (the global atmospheric composition, water pollution etc.) and in addiction to natural variability observed over comparable periods [1]. Climate change is the misbalance of customary weather factors such as temperature, radiation, wind speed, humidity and rainfall. It constitutes a major environmental challenge affecting entire population, with greatest threats to biodiversity, food security, water resources and economic growth [2,3]. The relations between agriculture and the climate are central focus of all the attentions. Agricultural sector is both responsible and a victim of climate change. With 10 to 12 percent of global human-induced greenhouse gases emissions, the agriculture sector is the world's second largest emitter [4]. Climate change can affect animal welfare and performance of livestock systems through the combination of acute and chronic stress. Reducing the vulnerability of livestock systems involves combining corrective and anticipatory measures at different scales.

Turkey is located in a transitory zone between arid and temperate climates, characterized by Mediterranean and continental climate types. The Eastern Mediterranean is highly vulnerable to climate change impacts, where, during the next decade temperatures appear to increase most rapidly and the precipitation will decrease especially in winter following an irregular regime [5-7]. As consequence, agriculture in this region is becoming more vulnerable to climate variations. The increase in the frequency and intensity of extreme environmental events such drought, floods, heat or the irregularity of rainfall have devastating effects, especially on small producers. This study is the exploratory survey conducted with local stakeholders on the impacts of climate change on mountain farming and the spontaneous adaptations implemented by farmers on their exploitation.

Data collection

Questionnaire elaborated as interview guide was used during the surveys with agro-pastoral households. Interview form were administrated to eighty (80) agro-pastoral households purposely selected among four villages around in Seyhan river basin in the province of Adana, Turkey (Figure 1). 

Farmers with at least 25 years of experience in agricultural production and agro-pastoralism were considered into the surveyed population. Questionnaire were used to collected primary data on socio-demographic characteristics of farmers, animals' management practices. Additionally, through individual and group focus discussion were used to gather information about farmers' perception of changes in pasture areas, feed resources and animal rearing practices in parallel with the climate and environmental changes. To evaluate the changes in climate over 25 last years, the previous data for climatic indicators (ambient temperature, relative humidity and annual precipitation) were obtained from the Meteorology Directorate.

Figure 1: Geographical location of study area.

The project mainly aims to conduct surveys in order to show the current problems and impacts of climate change. To that end, a survey of 36 questions was conducted on owners of stockbreeding businesses, as well as family members responsible for animal production. The famers' questionnaire was designed to address following major aspects of small ruminant management under changing environmental conditions:

•Socio-demographic information of households;

•Feeding practices of animals which comprised types of grassland (forages) and fed that used to feed animals throughout the year along;

•Changes in capacity of grassland during the last 25 years;

•Management practices commonly in use, such as, veterinarian programs, heat detection, mastitis control and mating period;

•Observed changes in animals’ resistance to diseases in last 25 years;

•Perceived effects of climate changes on animals’ production and performances;

•Adjustment measures undertaken in response to climate change and environmental fluctuations.

The public survey was carried especially on the animal farmers out of the 10 % of the total house number in each village by Intentional Illustration Method.

Vegetation Analyses

Plant cover, botanical composition, and grazing capacity of these pastures were determined. The electric fences were nailed on to the different parts of pastures at February, before the grazing period, for determination of the pastures fodder yield and grazing capacity. Three electric fences were placed to the different directions of the pastures for each village. At the end of the grazing period, the nets were removed and the space inside of a quadrate (33 x 33 cm) was harvested from the soil surface. This was replicated three times for each net. The plant material harvested was weighted and the obtained value converted to the yield for 1 hectare.

Vegetation measurements were collected with the loop method modified from the dot quadrate techniques especially for the arid and semi-arid regions. In this technique, each 20 cm from the line of 20 m was identified in relation with plant species. Accordingly, a hundred records were obtained along a line around each net.

Identification of plant species

Undefined plant species during the measurement were collected, mounted and identified as herbarium. The codes temporary given in the field for the undefined ones were replaced the corrected names after identification.

Plant Cover

The equation below was used to calculate how much land covers with the plant;

                                     Total Plant Cover 

Plant Cover (%) =--------------------------------- x 100

                                     Investigated land

On the other side the place without plant was determined with the help of the formula below;

Surface without plant (%) =100 – total plant cover

Calculation of botanical composition

The percentage of a species among the total was expressed as botanical composition for that species. And it was calculated using below formula

                                                    Plant cover of species ‘A’

Botanical Composition (%) = -------------------------------------- x 100

                                                  Plant cover of whole species

Data processing and Statistical analyses

All collected data were firstly coded and subject to statistical analysis using statistical package for social sciences (SPSS version 20). Descriptive statistical analysis (mean, standard error, frequency) and an analysis of variance were performed for the following major variables: socio-demographic characteristics of household (age, sex, level of education, and experience in animal farming), general management (herd size, feeding, type of grassland, breeding, socio-economical structure and zoonotic diseases), migration routes and environmental constraints.

Change in climate data over last 25 years

The environmental indices i.e., ambient temperature, relative humidity, and level of precipitation showed disrupted changes over last decades (figure 2). Various trends marked by a sudden increased of ambient temperature and decline of rainfall was observed. In addition, an irregular distribution of the precipitation during a year was noticed. These findings are support various results from previous studies. Indeed, Turkey is located in a transitory zone between arid and temperate climates, characterized by Mediterranean and continental climate types. This region (The Eastern Mediterranean and the Middle East) is highly vulnerable to climate change impacts, where, during the day maximum temperatures appear to increase most rapidly (Lelieveld et al., 2012; IPCC, 2013; Turunço?lu et al., 2018).

Figure 2: Climatic fluctuation in study area.

Grasslands use and management

The findings gave in the Table 1, were obtained based on farmers' statements. The grazing in field edges and harvest residues after harvesting of produced crop (stubble) is more common than grazing in natural areas. This later consists to the use of common pastures to feed animals. Those areas are extent of forests which are not use for crop production by farmers. Even though the grazing in fallows is not less practiced, it also justifies the less use of natural areas for animals grazing.

Table 2: Frequency and distribution of grassland areas. 

For the mountainous villages located at high altitude where bush and shrub areas are dense, grazing of these feeding resources are mostly used for sheep and goats' rearing.

Although it is forbidden to graze in forestry area, the use of these areas in a density which cannot be underrated in sheep and goats rearing has been noticed in Aladag and Tufanbeyli. Furthermore, we found that 13.6 % of the animals are kept in the barns. These animals contain rather the cattle which are kept in the plains. Also, only one farmer hired a pasture.

Perceived changes in grazing capacity of grasslands

Data related to perceived changes in the grazing capacity of pastures over last 25 years are given in the Table 3.

Table 3: Perceived Change in farm-grassland capacity during the last 25 years.

The results showed that 52.5 % of farmers declared that grazing capacity in the grassland change over the last 25 years, while 47.5 % of them have not since. Of those farmers who farmers recognized a change in the grazing capacity, 88.75% mentioned a reduction in the grazing areas, 3.75% an increase and 7.5% were unable to qualify the change. Despite the reduction in the grasslands is observed in all areas and then is not limited to a particular area, most of farmers claiming this change in pasture capacity are situated in Tufanbeyli and Saimbeyli. While some of farmers’ point of views showed a minimum change in Karaisali. The causes of that fact are going to be scrutinized in the Table 4.

As can be seen in the Table 4, the principal cause of changes is the converting of pastures into crop fields (30%). 25.0 % of farmers evoked the enlargement of the forest cultivation by government while goats' grazing in forests is banned. For 22.5 % of farmers the decline of grassland capacity is due prolonged drought and irregularity of of precipitation (time and rain level). Also, some of them claimed that the increasing number of animals results to the decreasing of pasture areas. Revival of the vegetation as a result of the change in the time of the precipitation has been recorded during interviews.

Table 4: Reason of change in grassland areas.

Feeding of animals kept in barns

The distribution of the feeds that are used in barns is summarized in the Table 5. Sheep or goats are generally reared in barns during winter when grasslands are poor. During this period, sheep or goats are kept indoors and fed with some feeds. In contrast, indoor cattle's feeding is generally seen during the whole year and is done addition to the grazing. It is determined that feeding in barn is mostly based on pulp (77.5 %), straw (75.0 %) and highly us of factored concentrate (72.5%). In addition to these, using various seeds, grass and dry grass has been recorded. Some of farmers have been fed their animals exclusively with grains and straw since decades. However, because of the increase in the performance capacity of the animals and number of the crossbred animals, indoor feeding has increased as well.

Table 5: Nutritional status of farms.

The data concerning changes feeding in barn in the last 25 years was shown in Table 5. Depending on this, 67.5 % of farmers declared that there has been a change in hand-feeding in the last 25 years was 30.0%. Of farmers declared that there haven’t been any changes. Farmers declared that changes occurred in feeding resulted from the reduction in the quantity of grasslands and number. Some of the farmers reported that they less feed animals because of the increase food prices. 

Seasonal Change in Physiological Stage

Seasonal changes related to oestrus and weaning periods are given in Table 6. Globally, there has been a change in suckling periods of all animal species during last 25 years. This change has been observed in cattle production because of high milk production level. Sheep and goat are being sucked for 3 months fully according to their birth season and then are fed with residual milk (after milking). In the past, milk was said to be enough for both young animals and farmers’ family needs. Nowadays, one part of the milk is processed in cheese and the other market. As consequence, the young animals are weaned in early stages increasing then the milk production.

Table 6: Reported seasonal movements of the physiological stages of the animals.

For many farmers, there was no change in duration the oestrus period. However, the oestrus duration is already controlled through artificial insemination which doesn’t depend on the season in cattle production. Consequently, farmers who didn’t notice any changes are raising their animals in this way. The point that must be emphasized here is that only sheep or goat farmers talk about a seasonal change. Breeding season has moved from spring to summer. Farmers gave many different responses to the questions concerning the seasonal changes in oestrus duration. The proportional distributions of these responses are given in the Table 7.

Table 7: Reported reason of movement of oestrus periods of farm animals.

As shown in the Table, most of the farmers are not aware of this subject. Only 27.5 % of them stated reasons for that change. 13.7 % of famers pointed out climate conditions, 10.0 % changes in feeding sources and feeding conditions and 3.8 % changes in animals' genotype diversity.

The changes in feeding conditions and grasslands result from the seasonal changes. Considerable changes which have been reported are those relating to climates. The proportional distribution of the farmers’ responses about what the basic objective is in animal production is seen in the Table 8.    

Table 8: Main production types of livestock farming.’

42.5 % animals are generally raised for milk production. But it is also seen that in some of the business enterprises both meat and milk production are prioritized. In 11.3 % cases business enterprises use animals for breeding and stud. Consequently, studs marketing depends on the public sector. And it has found that the business enterprises which are active in meat production were in the sheep raising sector. The milk productivity according to species for the last 35 years has been recorded in Table 9. 

Table 9: Change of milk production level (kg/animal/lactation).

Generally, no change in the milk yield of the sheep and goats is seen depending on their genetic capacities. On the other hand, a change in cattle in the level of 35.2 % is seen. This change results from both feeding of animals with concentrate feed in the covered areas and crossing with exotic breeds such as Holstein Friesian. The responses of the farmers about this change are seen in the Table 33.  The declarations of the farmers get along with the declarations above (Improvement in the nourishment conditions 14.3 %, change resulting from genotype 42.9 %).

Farmers' Perceived Constraints

The proportional distribution of the problems occurring in the animals which are raised in the working area was given in the Table 10. According to the farmers, the proportion of the epidemic diseases is 36.2 %. Abortion and infertility follow the epidemic diseases. These two problems generally result from the Brucella disease and it is very common in the area. In addition, the farmers complain about their animals’ low productivity is understood from their responses (17.5 %).

Table 10: Health problems and causes of diseases in the region.

The farmers stated that generally the cause of the diseases that appear at their flocks was the insufficient feeding. And they declared that their animals came down with a disease because of infection or problems that occur during the grazing.

 It is seen that the proportion of the diseases resulting from climate conditions is 8.8 %. It is a well-known reality that there have been problems in health protection in the working area. Especially, vaccination with money is one of the basic causes of their non-vaccination. It is seen that the vaccination program is only applied in cattle; the number of farmers who apply the vaccination program to their sheep or goats is very low (2.8 %). The reason of this, sheep or goat farmers generally work with local animals but on the other hand the cattle farmers work with crossbred animals. Because the crossbred animals are not as resistant as the local animals, the farmers apply the vaccination program only on cattle against different diseases. 82.5 % of this group point increase of atmospheric temperature and 2.5 % (decreased the decrease of atmospheric temperature as cause of climate changes as shown in Table 11.

Table 11: Farmers’ awareness of climate change.

However, farmers stated answering questions by explaining how climate changes s affected animal and crop production. The responses which were given in this way cannot be undervalued. It is generally understood from the responses that negative climate conditions degraded plant and animal production.

Milk Production and Processing Practices

Even there were not changes in animal genotypes; some farmers started increasing performance due to using new techniques such as in-barn feeding, silage, health care and housing conditions (63%).  The big part of the farmers established a barn for their animals (84%) while they kept animals outside before. Thus, the mortality rates of the new-born were decrease and practice of animal and health care were easier. They milked their animals by machine instead of hand milking (85%). Most of them have mobile solar energy for summer season while they migrate to high land regions (54%). This innovation helped to get electricity for milking process and store the milk and dairy products. Over past 25 years, dairy products (especially cheese) were conserved into snow or soil. But they reported they gave up this process due to increasing soil temperature. Most of them stated that due to increasing temperature they could not dig into the soil for ripening. A minority (10%) of farmers are still using this traditional conservation method. Increase of earth temperature affects caves and soil temperatures. Thus, the farmers have to give up storing their dairy products into caves and soil. The taste of the products changed, and it effects the prices of special products. The price of traditional dairy products and marketing possibilities decreased due to changing process and traditional storage conditions. The use commercial yeast increased instead of traditional yeast as fresh fig, sarkanak (kind of sheep tissue) and dried fruit (78%). It has also negative effects on taste of traditional cheese.

Assessment of Adaptation Innovations

Various adaptation strategies implemented farmers to adapt to harsh environmental conditions were identified during the farm visit.

Access to information relating weather conditions: The respondents declared that the access to information on weather conditions positively affected their planning of agricultural activities. According to farmers, the weather conditions were accessed through different canal including: discussion with others farmers colleagues, via Smartphone, TV and radio.  They responded, some educational and training activities were organised to enhance awareness of climate change impacts by Universities and Ministry of Forest and Agriculture for 10 years.  Further, the use of solar panel and continuous availability of electricity helped to be in touch with real-time weather news.

Providing of shelter to protect animals from environmental factors: During focus group discussion with farmers, some of them, declared to provide appropriate shelter during hot period.  These strategies consist of the use of shade or barn (along with feed and drinking water) to protect animals from extreme weather conditions (cold and hot). In addition, farmers explained that the tree planted also provide shadow which protect animal from solar radiation. Some farmers established barn to housing their animals to improve production levels and make easier the managerial practice as feeding, lambing and health caring.

Forage storage: Since the pastoral resources (forage) are strongly influenced by climatic factors, particularly rainfall in terms of quantity, quality, spatial distribution and accessibility to livestock, in period of high availability of forage and when conditions are favorable, most breeders store the harvest by-products as hay (barley or wheat hays). In addition, some farmers asserted buying and storing alfalfa hay and produce rye-grass silage. These forages are mainly used during winter feeding periods.

In-barn feeding of animals: The other most common strategies that came out from analysis of data was the feeding at pens. Indeed, when scarcity period of forage at grassland and adverse climate conditions (extreme temperature, snowing), animals are kept at the barn and fed with different feed resources such as concentrate, grain, silage, straw and different oil cake. 

Improvement of local genetic resources: Improving the genetic structure seems to be more useful since it contributes to improve the qualitative characters (adaptation to harsh environment) and increasing the productivity level per animal. Since local breed are more adapted to climatic and rearing conditions, various genetic improvement program have been set by government. These programs involving local farmers aimed to improve productivity of some local sheep breed notable Awassi sheep and Hair goats. In addition, native Hair goats are remarkable as one of the breeds which will be utilized in animal production in the future due to their adaptation capability, performances to benefit from the feed and ability to continue their productivity under in all heavy conditions, gain advantage from feeding resources which aren’t used by other animals and enjoy less methane emission in return.

The biological environmental conditions should be taken into consideration in terms of pollution to be caused by preferring conventional methods in the use of natural resources in order to increase production in the unit area. In this respect, issues of protecting the natural life and organic production become prominent. Furthermore, the negative effects on biology deriving from the uncontrolled use of substances cause the emergence of new diseases. The polluted environmental conditions are caused by the greenhouse gas which is released in animal production, as well as inability to perform the waste management in an effective way. Thus, certain negative conditions emerge in production and human health [9].  The Mediterranean region is especially important with regard to understanding and practicing the impact of climate due to its geographical characteristics and capacity to realize the agricultural and animal productions in different altitudes. To that end, the current project evaluates the current situation of stockbreeding activities which re conducted in different altitudes and qualities, as well as advantageous and disadvantageous sides in terms of the climate change. Livestock industry accounts about 25% of the agricultural GNP in the country. Although the share of agriculture has relatively decreased in GNP and total exportation, agriculture still keeps its importance due to the high rates of the active population in the sector and employment and its direct relationship with nutrition. Recently, Turkey has become a net importer of livestock products and is increasingly dependent on the world market. While productivity has risen over the last decade, the Government’s protective measures have not resulted significant production gains (Table 13).

All the observations and calculations which have been made since 1980s concretely show that the climate change exists. Even the most optimistic scenarios mention an increase by 1-1.5°C in the surface area temperature in the last 100 years and emphasize that this increase might climb to 2.5-5°C in the future. At this point, it should be emphasized that the climate change derives from the “human” factor, rather than natural events. In this regard, the fact that the human factor has an impact on the natural course should be highlighted. A great many conventional methods which are applied to meet the needs of increasing population (food, clothing or subject, etc.) case natural resources to be polluted or destroyed. The measures which are considered within this framework contradict to economic sanctions and thus they fail in practice. Therefore, if all the units came together to bring forward a planning which is aimed at eliminating the main source of problem with concrete approaches, more realistic perceptions on a solution would emerge [9].

Table 13: Scenarios of Livestock Population and Livestock Production for next 60 years [8].

Main Findings and Remarks

Potential of the innovation to enhance farm sustainability

•The results of this study indicated that 82.5 % of the farmers perceived climate change as increased of ambient temperature, while for 2.9% of them stated that the atmospheric temperature decreased.

•It’s obviously clear that, climate has significant effects on livestock production. Type of grasses, grassland potential, processing of products and especially some physiological aspects of farm animals has been affected adversely.

•The finding indicated that according 67.8% and 88.8% of farmers respectively stated, that grassland capacity and grassland areas decreased during to last 25 years. This was due to the decreasing trends observed in climatic factors notably the level of rainfall.

•The most common current practices are the grazing in the residues after crop harvesting. Indeed, farmers have privileged the grazing in the field edges and harvest residues (stubble) than grazing in the natural areas.

•Other practices implemented by during the insufficient times of the grasslands, it's to keep animals inside and meanwhile fed them with concentrate feeds. Indeed, the results showed that feeding in barn is based on mostly to pulp and to straw silage, but at the same time, concentrate feeds were also given. However, because of economic reasons due to high cost of inputs such as feed expenses and low price of some products in the market, farmers eventually could give up animal production.

•Small ruminant owners indicated a seasonal change in oestrus and it has moved from spring to summer. Additionally, some of the farmers mentioned about the positive and negative effects on the milk productivity occurring in the change of climate conditions.

•Given that the use of natural resource (pasture and forestry area) to rear animals is widely spread in extensive system. Thus, to reduce the pressure due to human activity especially agriculture on natural resources, recent regulations were untaken by governmental authorities.

•Small ruminant production is essential in this area for people living in this area, because they do not have any other alternatives for the sake of life. Hence, the future development of livestock farming systems in mountainous area of East Mediterranean part of Turkey in term of intensive systems will largely depend on the application of modern management strategies, especially for planning and monitoring functions together with political and financial adjustments. Grazing should be planned with new regulation in the area. Moreover, educational studies should be started at utmost priority right away. People should be acknowledged on new technologies. And lastly some heat-resistant farm animal species and genotypes should be adopted in the region.

Extrapolation Limitations

The major limitation of this case study is that, it could not deal with future projection of climatic change and their impact on future agricultural productivity. Therefore, future research needs to assess what are climatic factors susceptible to affect agricultural performances, how climatic change will affect the agriculture and what will be the pathways to mitigate these effects. In addition, it did assess the full relation (in term of quality and economic sustainability) between the taste of dairy products and the traditional methods used for production.

Drivers and constrains for a successful implementation of the innovation

•A decreasing trend in animals' population (cattle, sheep and goats) is observed across the study area.  This was mainly due to socio-economic and political reasons. Since, goat production has been forbidden in forest area by government, this was the most effective obstacle for the sector. 

•Despite livestock farming is the most important activity in mountainous area of Mediterranean Region, migration of rural people, from rural to urban had also constitute a slowing factor on animal production.

This study was supported by EU HORIZON-2020 ISAGE (Innovation for sustainable sheep and goat production in Europe) Project.

1. IPCC (2007) Climate Change 2007: Synthesis Report. Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Core Writing Team, Pachauri, R.K and Reisinger, A. (eds.)]. IPCC, Geneva, Switzerland, 104 pp, ISBN 92-9169-122-4.
2. Prasad CS, Malik PK, Bhatta R (2015) Overview. In: Malik P.K, Bhatta R, Takahashi J, Kohn R.A, Prasad C.S. (Editors), Livestock Production and Climate Change, CAB International, pp 1-7.
3. Dali N (2008) Principal guidelines for a National Climate Change Strategy: Adaptation, mitigation and international solidarity. Livestock and Global Climate Change. British Society of Animal Science 1-5.
4. Gill M, Smith P (2008) Mitigating climate change: the role of livestock in agriculture. In: P Rowlinson, M Steele and A Nefzaoui, The Proceedings of the Livestock and Global Climate Change, Proceedings International Conference. 17-20.
5. Lelieveld J, Hadjinicolaou P, Kostopoulou E, Chenoweth J, El Maayar M, et al. (2012) Climate change and impacts in the Eastern Mediterranean and the Middle East. Climatic Change 114: 667-687.
6. Demircan M, Gürkan H, Eskio?lu O, Arabaci H, Co?kun M, et al. (2017) Climate Change Projections for Turkey: Three Models and Two Scenarios. Turkish Journal of Water Science & Management 1: 22-43.
7. Turunço?lu UU, Türke? M, Bozkurt D, Önol B, ?en ÖL, et al. (2018) Climate. In: Kapur S, Akça E, Günal H. (Editors), The Soils of Turkey, Springer International Publishing AG, pp 25.
8. Koluman N, Gültekin, U (2011) Future Scenarios of Animal Husbandry and Global warming for next 70 years. Final report of Project on Adaptation to animal production and environmental activities to global warming and climate change at Seyhan River Basin, UNDP Project No: 2011/12.
9. Koluman Darcan, N, Kutlu HR, Güney O? (2019) Climate Change and Animal Farming, in: Climate Change Impacts on Basin Agro-ecosystems, Ed: Watanabe, T, Kapur, S, Ayd?n, M, Kanber, R, Akça, E, Springer, pp.223-242.