Abstract: Potential consequences of climate change on crop production can be studied using mechanistic crop simulation models. While a broad variety of maize simulation models exist, it is not known whether different models diverge on grain yield responses to changes in climatic factors, or whether they agree in their general trends related to phenology, growth, and yield. With the goal of analyzing the sensitivity of simulated yields to changes in temperature and atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations [CO2 ], we present the largest maize crop model intercomparison to date, including 23 different models. These models were evaluated for four locations representing a wide range of maize production conditions in the world: Lusignan (France), Ames (USA), Rio Verde (Brazil) and Morogoro (Tanzania). While individual models differed considerably in absolute yield simulation at the four sites, an ensemble of a minimum number of models was able to simulate absolute yields accurately at the four sites even with low data for calibration, thus suggesting that using an ensemble of models has merit. Temperature increase had strong negative influence on modeled yield response of roughly -0.5 Mg ha(-1) per °C. Doubling [CO2 ] from 360 to 720 μmol mol(-1) increased grain yield by 7.5% on average across models and the sites. That would therefore make temperature the main factor altering maize yields at the end of this century. Furthermore, there was a large uncertainty in the yield response to [CO2 ] among models. Model responses to temperature and [CO2 ] did not differ whether models were simulated with low calibration information or, simulated with high level of calibration information.

Abstract: Radiant spring frosts occurring during reproductive developmental stages can result in catastrophic yield loss for wheat producers. To better understand the spatial and temporal variability of frost, the occurrence and impact of frost events on rain-fed wheat production was estimated across the Australian wheatbelt for 1957-2013 using a 0.05 ° gridded weather data set. Simulated yield outcomes at 60 key locations were compared with those for virtual genotypes with different levels of frost tolerance. Over the last six decades, more frost events, later last frost day, and a significant increase in frost impact on yield were found in certain regions of the Australian wheatbelt, in particular in the South-East and West. Increasing trends in frost-related yield losses were simulated in regions where no significant trend of frost occurrence was observed, due to higher mean temperatures accelerating crop development and causing sensitive post-heading stages to occur earlier, during the frost risk period. Simulations indicated that with frost-tolerant lines the mean national yield could be improved by up to 20% through (i) reduced frost damage (~10% improvement) and (ii) the ability to use earlier sowing dates (adding a further 10% improvement). In the simulations, genotypes with an improved frost tolerance to temperatures 1 °C lower than the current 0 °C reference provided substantial benefit in most cropping regions, while greater tolerance (to 3 °C lower temperatures) brought further benefits in the East. The results indicate that breeding for improved reproductive frost tolerance should remain a priority for the Australian wheat industry, despite warming climates.

Abstract: Rather than on crop modelling only, climate change impact assessments in agriculture need to be based on integrated assessment and farming systems analysis, and account for adaptation at different levels. With a case study for Flevoland, the Netherlands, we illustrate that (1) crop models cannot account for all relevant climate change impacts and adaptation options, and (2) changes in technology, policy and prices have had and are likely to have larger impacts on farms than climate change. While crop modelling indicates positive impacts of climate change on yields of major crops in 2050, a semi-quantitative and participatory method assessing impacts of extreme events shows that there are nevertheless several climate risks. A range of adaptation measures are, however, available to reduce possible negative effects at crop level. In addition, at farm level farmers can change cropping patterns, and adjust inputs and outputs. Also farm structural change will influence impacts and adaptation. While the 5th IPCC report is more negative regarding impacts of climate change on agriculture compared to the previous report, also for temperate regions, our results show that when putting climate change in context of other drivers, and when explicitly accounting for adaptation at crop and farm level, impacts may be less negative in some regions and opportunities are revealed. These results refer to a temperate region, but an integrated assessment may also change perspectives on climate change for other parts of the world.