|
|
Rusu, T., Moraru, P. I., Bogdan, I., Pop, A., Coste, C., Marin, D. I., et al. (2013). Impacts of climate change on agricultural technology management in the Transylvanian Plain, Romania. Scientific Papers, Series A. Agronomy, Lvi, 113–118.
Abstract: The Transylvanian Plain, Romania is an important region for agronomic productivity. However, limited soils data and adoption of best management practices hinder land productivity. Soil temperatures of the Transylvanian Plain were evaluated using a set of twenty datalogging stations positioned throughout the plain. Each station stores electronic data of ground temperature on 3 different levels of depth (10, 30 and 50 cm), of soil humidity at a depth of 10 cm, of the air temperature at 1 meter and of precipitation. Monitoring the thermal and hydric regime of the area is essential in order to identify and implement sets of measures of adjustment to the impact of climatic changes. After analyzing the recorded data, thermic and hydric, in the Transylvanian Plain, we recommend as optimal sowing period, advancing those known in the literature, with 5 days for corn and soybeans, and maintaining the same optimum period for sunflower and sugar beet. Water requirements are provided in an optimum, of 58.8 to 62.1% for the spring weeding crops during the growing season, thus irrigation is necessary to ensure optimum production potential. The amount of biological active degrees registered in Transylvanian Plain shows the necessity to reconstruct crop zoning, known in the literature, for the analyzed crops: wheat, corn, soy, sunflower and sugar beet.
|
|
|
|
Bellocchi, G., Rivington, M., Matthews, K., & Acutis, M. (2015). Deliberative processes for comprehensive evaluation of agroecological models. A review. Agron. Sust. Developm., 35(2), 589–605.
Abstract: The use of biophysical models in agroecology has increased in the last few decades for two main reasons: the need to formalize empirical knowledge and the need to disseminate model-based decision support for decision makers (such as farmers, advisors, and policy makers). The first has encouraged the development and use of mathematical models to enhance the efficiency of field research through extrapolation beyond the limits of site, season, and management. The second reflects the increasing need (by scientists, managers, and the public) for simulation experimentation to explore options and consequences, for example, future resource use efficiency (i.e., management in sustainable intensification), impacts of and adaptation to climate change, understanding market and policy responses to shocks initiated at a biophysical level under increasing demand, and limited supply capacity. Production concerns thus dominate most model applications, but there is a notable growing emphasis on environmental, economic, and policy dimensions. Identifying effective methods of assessing model quality and performance has become a challenging but vital imperative, considering the variety of factors influencing model outputs. Understanding the requirements of stakeholders, in respect of model use, logically implies the need for their inclusion in model evaluation methods. We reviewed the use of metrics of model evaluation, with a particular emphasis on the involvement of stakeholders to expand horizons beyond conventional structured, numeric analyses. Two major topics are discussed: (1) the importance of deliberative processes for model evaluation, and (2) the role computer-aided techniques may play to integrate deliberative processes into the evaluation of agroecological models. We point out that (i) the evaluation of agroecological models can be improved through stakeholder follow-up, which is a key for the acceptability of model realizations in practice, (ii) model credibility depends not only on the outcomes of well-structured, numerically based evaluation, but also on less tangible factors that may need to be addressed using complementary deliberative processes, (iii) comprehensive evaluation of simulation models can be achieved by integrating the expectations of stakeholders via a weighting system of preferences and perception, (iv) questionnaire-based surveys can help understand the challenges posed by the deliberative process, and (v) a benefit can be obtained if model evaluation is conceived in a decisional perspective and evaluation techniques are developed at the same pace with which the models themselves are created and improved. Scientific knowledge hubs are also recognized as critical pillars to advance good modeling practice in relation to model evaluation (including access to dedicated software tools), an activity which is frequently neglected in the context of time-limited framework programs.
|
|
|
|
Mueller, L., Schindler, U., Shepherd, T. G., Ball, B. C., Smolentseva, E., Hu, C., et al. (2012). A framework for assessing agricultural soil quality on a global scale. Archives of Agronomy and Soil Science, 58(sup1), S76–S82.
Abstract: This paper provides information about a novel approach of rating agricultural soil quality (SQ) and crop yield potentials consistently over a range of spatial scales. The Muencheberg Soil Quality Rating is an indicator-based straightforward overall assessment method of agricultural SQ. It is a framework covering aspects of soil texture, structure, topography and climate which is based on 8 basic indicators and more than 12 hazard indicators. Ratings are performed by visual methods of soil evaluation. A field manual is then used to provide ratings from tables based on indicator thresholds. Finally, overall rating scores are given, ranging from 0 (worst) to 100 (best) to characterise crop yield potentials. The current approach is valid for grassland and cropland. Field tests in several countries confirmed the practicability and reliability of the method. At field scale, soil structure is a crucial, management induced criterion of agricultural SQ. At the global scale, climate controlled hazard indicators of drought risk and soil thermal regime are crucial for SQ and crop yield potentials. Final rating scores are well correlated with crop yields. We conclude that this system could be evolved for ranking and controlling agricultural SQ on a global scale.
|
|
|
|
Roggero, P. P. (2016). IC-FAR – Linking long term observatories with crop system modelling for a better understanding of climate change impact and adaptation strategies for Italian cropping systems. European Journal of Agronomy, 77, 136–137.
Abstract: This special issue includes a sub-set of papers developed in the context of the three-years (2013-16) research project “IC-FAR – Linking long term observatories with crop system modelling for a better understanding of climate change impact and adaptation strategies for Italian cropping systems” (www.icfar.it), funded by the Italian Ministry of Education, University and Research. IC-FAR collects the legacy of some three-four generations of researchers, members of the Italian Society of Agronomy, that from the 1960ies onward established long term agro-ecosystem experiments (LTAE) in various Italian locations, to address a wide range of agronomy research questions. A lot of the results from these LTAE were not yet published or were published as grey literature or in Italian and almost always as a single-site, single-experiment outcome.
|
|
|
|
Himanen, S. J., Ketoja, E., Hakala, K., Rötter, R. P., Salo, T., & Kahiluoto, H. (2013). Cultivar diversity has great potential to increase yield for feed barley. Agron. Sust. Developm., 33(3), 519–530.
Abstract: This study shows an average yield increase of 415–1,338 kg ha−1 per unit increase of the Shannon diversity index for feed barley cultivar use. There is a global quest to increase food production sustainably. Therefore, judicious farmer choices such as selection of crop cultivars are increasingly important. Cultivar diversity is limited and, as a consequence, corresponding crop yields are highly impacted by local weather variations and global climate change. Actually, there is little knowledge on the relationships between yields of regional crops and cultivar diversity, that is evenness and richness in cultivar use. Here, we hypothesized that higher cultivar diversity is related to higher regional yield. We also assumed that the diversity-yield relationship depends on weather during the growing season. Our data were based on farm yield surveys of feed and malting barley, Hordeum vulgare L.; spring wheat, Triticum aestivum L.; and spring turnip rape, Brassica rapa L. ssp. oleifera, from 1998 to 2009, representing about 4,500–5,500 farms annually. We modeled the relationships between regional yields and Shannon diversity indices in high-yielding (south-west) and low-yielding (central-east) regions of Finland using linear mixed models. Our results show that an increase of Shannon diversity index increases yield of feed barley. Feed barley had also the greatest cultivar diversity. In contrast, an average yield decrease of 1,052 kg ha−1 per unit increase in Shannon index was found for spring rape in 2006 and 2008. Our findings show that cultivar diversification has potential to raise mean regional yield of feed barley. Increasing cultivar diversity thus offers a novel, sustainability-favoring means to promote higher yields.
|
|
