| Home | [1–10] << 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 >> [21–23] |
|
Ruiz-Ramos, M., Ferrise, R., Rodríguez, A., Lorite, I. J., Bindi, M., Carter, T. R., et al. (2017). Applying adaptation response surfaces for managing wheat under perturbed climate and elevated CO2 in a Mediterranean environment (Vol. 1ß).
Abstract: This study developed Adaptation Response Surfaces and applied them to a study case in North East Spain on winter crops adaptation, using rainfed winter wheat as reference crop. Crop responses to perturbed temperature, precipitation and CO2 were simulated by an ensemble of crop models. A set of combined changes on cultivars (on vernalisation requirements and phenology) and management (on sowing date and irrigation) were considered as adaptation options and simulated by the crop model ensemble. The discussion focused on two main issues: 1) the recommended adaptation options for different soil types and perturbation levels, and 2) the need of applying our current knowledge (AOCK) when building a crop model ensemble. The study has been published Agricultural Systems (Available online 25 January 2017, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agsy.2017.01.009 ), and the text below consists on extracts from that paper.
|
|
Fronzek, S., Pirttioja, N., Carter, T. R., Bindi, M., Hoffmann, H., Palosuo, T., et al. (2017). Classifying multi-model wheat yield impact response surfaces showing sensitivity to temperature and precipitation change (Vol. 10).
Abstract: Crop growth simulation models can differ greatly in their treatment of key processes and hence in their response to environmental conditions. Here, we used an ensemble of 26 process-based wheat models applied at sites across a European transect to compare their sensitivity to changes in temperature (−2 to +9°C) and precipitation (−50 to +50%). Model results were analysed by plotting them as impact response surfaces (IRSs), classifying the IRS patterns of individual model simulations, describing these classes and analysing factors that may explain the major differences in model responses. The model ensemble was used to simulate yields of winter and spring wheat at sites in Finland, Germany and Spain. Results were plotted as IRSs that show changes in yields relative to the baseline with respect to temperature and precipitation. IRSs of 30-year means and selected extreme years were classified using two approaches describing their pattern. The expert diagnostic approach (EDA) combines two aspects of IRS patterns: location of the maximum yield (nine classes, Figure 1) and strength of the yield response with respect to climate (four classes), resulting in a total of 36 combined classes defined using criteria pre-specified by experts. The statistical diagnostic approach (SDA) groups IRSs by comparing their pattern and magnitude, without attempting to interpret these features. It applies a hierarchical clustering method, grouping response patterns using a distance metric that combines the spatial correlation and Euclidian distance between IRS pairs. The two approaches were used to investigate whether different patterns of yield response could be related to different properties of the crop models, specifically their genealogy, calibration and process description. Although no single model property across a large model ensemble was found to explain the integrated yield response to temperature and precipitation perturbations, the application of the EDA and SDA approaches revealed their capability to distinguish: (i) stronger yield responses to precipitation for winter wheat than spring wheat; (ii) differing strengths of response to climate changes for years with anomalous weather conditions compared to period-average conditions; (iii) the influence of site conditions on yield patterns; (iv) similarities in IRS patterns among models with related genealogy; (v) similarities in IRS patterns for models with simpler process descriptions of root growth and water uptake compared to those with more complex descriptions; and (vi) a closer correspondence of IRS patterns in models using partitioning schemes to represent yield formation than in those using a harvest index. Such results can inform future crop modelling studies that seek to exploit the diversity of multi-model ensembles, by distinguishing ensemble members that span a wide range of responses as well as those that display implausible behaviour or strong mutual similarities. The full manuscript of this study is currently under revision (Fronzek et al. 2017).
|
|
Lehtonen, H. S., Kässi, P., Korhonen, P., Niskanen, O., Rötter, R., Palosuo, T., et al. (2014). Specific problems and solutions in climate change adaptation in North Savo region (Vol. 3).
Abstract: Crop production for feed dominates land use in North Savo in eastern Finland. The value of dairy and beef production is appr. 70 % of the total value of agricultural production of the region. In climate change adaptation research we are especially interested in dairy and meat sectors, which are directly dependent on the development of productivity of crop production. Climate change implies changes in cereals and forage crop yields and nutritive quality. There are most likely increasing problems and risks related to overwintering and growing periods. Grass silage is mainly self-produced on farms and most often there is no market for silage. Silage production and use are vulnerable to changes in local climate, because lost yield cannot be easily replaced from market. Risks and costs due to increasing inter-annual yield volatility can be reduced by good management practices, such as crop rotation, plant protection, soil improvements and better crop protection against plant diseases.However the profitability of such measures is dependent on market and policy conditions. Nevertheless new cultivars and species, as well as various options for production and risk management, are most likely needed in future climate. Some adaptations may have multiple benefits which however may realize only in medium or long run. It is important to safeguard the most important and obviously needed adaptations, and identify market and socio-economic conditions which inhibit farmers from necessary adaptations and lead to reduced productivity and increased production costs. No Label
|
|
Lehtonen, H. S., Liu, X., Purola, T., Rötter, R., & Palosuo, T. (2014). Farm level dynamic economic modelling of crop rotation with adaptation practices (Vol. 3).
Abstract: Agriculture is facing increasing challenges under volatile commodity markets, on-going climate change with more frequent extreme weather events and tightened environmental constraints. Crop rotation is considered essential and may even gain more importance for sustainable farming in the context of climate change challenges while monocropping is expected to become increasingly problematic. This is, among others, because of increasing plant protection challenges due to warmer climate which is expected to result in severe droughts, heavy rainfall and waterlogging in northern latitudes more frequently. Such changes require improved soil structure and water retention, also aided by crop rotations, to avoid yield losses. Our objective is to build and apply a dynamic optimization model of farm level crop rotation on many field parcels over 30-40 years. The model takes into account various adaptation management methods such as fungicide treatment, soil improvements such as liming, and nitrogen fertilization, simultaneously with dynamic crop rotation choices. However, these management options come along with costs. Using the model, outcomes of crop growth simulation modeling can be included into economic analysis. Simulated new cultivars, suited for a longer growing season, can be defined as alternatives to current cultivars, both having specific nutrient and other input requirements such as water, labor or pesticides. The model is used in evaluating the value of future cultivars and other management practices in climate and socio-economic scenarios. The first results show that expected market prices have major impacts on the management choices, the resulting yield levels, production and income over time. No Label
|
|
Köchy, M., Aberton, M., Bannink, A., Banse, M., Brouwer, F., Brüser, K., et al. (2015). MACSUR — Summary of research results, phase 1: 2012-2015 (Vol. 6).
Abstract: MACSUR — Modelling European Agriculture with Climate Change for Food Security — is a knowledge hub that was formally created in June 2012 as a European scientific network. The strategic aim of the knowledge hub is to create a coordinated and globally visible network of European researchers and research groups, with intra- and interdisciplinary interaction and shared expertise creating synergies for the development of scientific resources (data, models, methods) to model the impacts of climate change on agriculture and related issues. This objective encompasses a wide range of political and sociological aspects, as well as the technical development of modelling capacity through impact assessments at different scales and assessing uncertainties in model outcomes. We achieve this through model intercomparisons and model improvements, harmonization and exchange of data sets, training in the selection and use of models, assessment of benefits of ensemble modelling, and cross-disciplinary linkages of models and tools. The project engages with a diverse range of stakeholder groups and to support the development of resources for capacity building of individuals and countries. Commensurate with this broad challenge, a network of currently 300 scientists (measured by the number of individuals on the central e-mail list) from 18 countries evolved from the original set of research groups selected by FACCE. In the spirit of creating and maintaining a network for intra- and interdisciplinary knowledge exchange, network activities focused on meetings of researchers for sharing expertise and, depending on group resources (both financial and personnel), development of collaborative research activities. The outcome of these activities is the enhanced knowledge of the individual researchers within the network, contributions to conference presentations and scholarly papers, input to stakeholders and the general public, organised courses for students, junior and senior scientists. The most visible outcome are the scientific results of the network activities, represented in the contributions of MACSUR members to the impressive number of more than 200 collaborative papers in peer-reviewed publications. Here, we present a selection of overview and cross-disciplinary papers which include contributions from MACSUR members. It highlights the major scientific challenges addressed, and the methodological solutions and insights obtained. Over and above these highlights, major achievements have been reached regarding data collection, data processing, evaluation, model testing, modelling assessments of the effects of agriculture on ecosystem services, policy, and development of scenarios. Details on these achievements in the context of MACSUR can be found in our online publication FACCE MACSUR Reports at http://ojs.macsur.eu.
Keywords: Hub
|