|
|
Patil, R. H., Laegdsmand, M., Olesen, J. E., & Porter, J. R. (2014). Soil temperature manipulation to study global warming effects in arable land: performance of buried heating-cable method. Environment and Ecology Research, 1(4), 196–204.
Abstract: Buried heating-cable method for manipulating soil temperature was designed and tested its performance in large concrete lysimeters grown with the wheat crop in Denmark. Soil temperature in heated plots was elevated by 5℃ compared with that in control by burying heating-cable at 0.1 m depth in a plough layer. Temperature sensors were placed at 0.05, 0.1 and 0.25 m depths in soil, and 0.1 m above the soil surface in all plots, which were connected to an automated data logger. Soil-warming setup was able to maintain a mean seasonal temperature difference of 5.0 ± 0.005℃ between heated and control plots at 0.1 m depth while the mean seasonal rise in soil temperature in the top 0.25 m depth (plough layer) was 3℃. Soil temperature in control plots froze (≤ 0℃) for 15 and 13 days respectively at 0.05 and 0.1 m depths while it did not in heated plots during the coldest period (Nov-Apr). This study clearly showed the efficacy of buried heating-cable technique in simulating soil temperature, and thus offers a simple, effective and alternative technique to study soil biogeochemical processes under warmer climates. This technique, however, decouples below-ground soil responses from that of above-ground vegetation response as this method heats only the soil. Therefore, using infrared heaters seems to represent natural climate warming (both air and soil) much more closely and may be used for future climate manipulation field studies.
|
|
|
|
Rötter, R. P., Palosuo, T., Kersebaum, K. - C., Angulo, C., Bindi, M., Ewert, F., et al. (2012). Simulation of spring barley yield in different climatic zones of Northern and Central Europe: A comparison of nine crop models. Field Crops Research, 133, 23–36.
Abstract: ► We compared nine crop simulation models for spring barley at seven sites in Europe. ► Applying crop models with restricted calibration leads to high uncertainties. ► Multi-crop model mean yield estimates were in good agreement with observations. ► The degree of uncertainty for simulated grain yield of barley was similar to winter wheat. ► We need more suitable data enabling us to verify different processes in the models. In this study, the performance of nine widely used and accessible crop growth simulation models (APES-ACE, CROPSYST, DAISY, DSSAT-CERES, FASSET, HERMES, MONICA, STICS and WOFOST) was compared during 44 growing seasons of spring barley (Hordeum vulgare L) at seven sites in Northern and Central Europe. The aims of this model comparison were to examine how different process-based crop models perform at multiple sites across Europe when applied with minimal information for model calibration of spring barley at field scale, whether individual models perform better than the multi-model mean, and what the uncertainty ranges are in simulated grain yields. The reasons for differences among the models and how results for barley compare to winter wheat are discussed. Regarding yield estimation, best performing based on the root mean square error (RMSE) were models HERMES, MONICA and WOFOST with lowest values of 1124, 1282 and 1325 (kg ha(-1)), respectively. Applying the index of agreement (IA), models WOFOST, DAISY and HERMES scored best having highest values (0.632, 0.631 and 0.585, respectively). Most models systematically underestimated yields, whereby CROPSYST showed the highest deviation as indicated by the mean bias error (MBE) (-1159 kg ha(-1)). While the wide range of simulated yields across all sites and years shows the high uncertainties in model estimates with only restricted calibration, mean predictions from the nine models agreed well with observations. Results of this paper also show that models that were more accurate in predicting phenology were not necessarily the ones better estimating grain yields. Total above-ground biomass estimates often did not follow the patterns of grain yield estimates and, thus, harvest indices were also different. Estimates of soil moisture dynamics varied greatly. In comparison, even though the growing cycle for winter wheat is several months longer than for spring barley, using RMSE and IA as indicators, models performed slightly, but not significantly, better in predicting wheat yields. Errors in reproducing crop phenology were similar, which in conjunction with the shorter growth cycle of barley has higher effects on accuracy in yield prediction.
|
|
|
|
Olesen, J. E., Porter, J. R., & Christensen, J. H. (2014). Centre for Regional change in the Earth System. FACCE MACSUR Mid-term Scientific Conference, 3(S) Sassari, Italy.
Abstract: Centre for Regionalchange in the Earth System (CRES, cres-centre.net) is funded by the DanishStrategic Research Council for the period 2009-2014 and is coordinated by theDanish Meteorological Institute. CRES has established a coordinated researcheffort aiming to improve societal preparedness for climate change, inparticular for Denmark. The overall objective of CRES is to extend knowledge ofand reduce the uncertainties surrounding regional climate change and itsimpacts and thereby support future climate change adaptation and mitigationpolicies. Some of the objectives that also have large synergies with theeffects in the CropM theme of MACSUR are a) to reduce uncertainty surroundingregional climate change and its impacts for the period 2020-2050 by improvingmodel formulation and process understanding; b) identify key changes andtipping points in the regional hydrological system, agriculture, freshwater andestuarine ecosystems caused by changes in seasonality, dynamics and extremeevents of precipitation, droughts, heat waves and sea level rise; c) quantifyconfidence and uncertainties in predictions of future regional climate and itsimpacts, by improving the statistical methodology and substance and byintegrating interdisciplinary risk analyses; d) interpret these results inrelation to risk management approaches for climate change adaptation andmitigation. Studies in CRES of particular interest to MACSUR include a)Estimation on generic crop model uncertainties in projection of climate changeimpacts on wheat year, b) Assessment of uncertainties in projected effects onwater balance, crop productivity and nitrate leaching of changes in land use,climate and assessment models.
|
|
|
|
Kersebaum, K. C., Kollas, C., Bindi, M., Palosuo, T., Wu, L., Sharif, B., et al. (2014). Model inter-comparison on crop rotation effects – an intermediate report. FACCE MACSUR Mid-term Scientific Conference, 3(S) Sassari, Italy.
Abstract: Data of diverse crop rotations from five locations across Europe were distributed to modelers to investigate the capability of models to handle complex crop rotations and management interactions. Crop rotations comprise various main crops (winter/spring wheat, winter/spring barley, rye, oat, maize, sugar beet, oil seed rape and potatoes) plus several catch crops. The experimental setup of the datasets included treatments such as modified soils, crops exchanged within the rotations, irrigation/rainfed, nitrogen fertilization, residue management, tillage and atmospheric CO2 concentration. 19 modeling teams registered to model either the whole rotation or single crops. Models which are capable to run the whole rotation should provide transient as well as single year simulations with a reset of initial conditions. In the first step only initial soil conditions (water and soil mineral N) of the first year and key phenological stages were provided to the modelers. For calibration, crop yields and biomass were provided for selected years but not for all seasons. In total the combination of treatments and seasons results in 301 years of simulation. Results were analyzed to evaluate the effect of transient simulation versus single-year simulation regarding crop yield, biomass, water and nitrogen balance components. Model results will be evaluated crop-specifically to identify crops with highest uncertainty and potential for model improvement. Full data will be provided to modelers for model-improvement and results will provide insights into model capabilities to reproduce treatments and crops. Further, the question of error propagation along the transient simulation of crop rotations will be addressed.
|
|
|
|
Olesen, J. E., Vignjevic, M., & Wollenweber, B. (2014). Modelling adaptation of wheat cultivar to increasing temperatures and heat stress. FACCE MACSUR Mid-term Scientific Conference, 3(S) Sassari, Italy.
Abstract: Climate change is expected to lead to yield reductions in cereals due to effects on both growth duration and physiological processes affecting assimilation and translocation to grains. However, some of these negative effects may be alleviated through plant breeding. A pot experiment with selected spring wheat varieties exposed to post anthesis heat stress (35 oC for 5 days) showed that the major factor affecting variety differences in heat tolerance was related to effects on green leaf area duration after heat stress. A field experiment with the same selected spring wheat varieties showed large differences between the varieties in crop development and in biomass. The data were used to calibrate the FASSET and Sirius crop models using a sequenced calibration procedure. Both models simulated crop growth and yield well. A sensitivity analysis with increasing temperature showed declining yields for both models with higher rates of yield reduction at temperature increases above 3oC. The models agreed on the pattern of yield decline between cultivars, with larger yield declines being related to earliness. The FASSET model was further modified to simulate effects of cultivar differences in remobilization of water soluble carbohydrates and effects of post-anthesis heat stress on crop yield. Effects of variation in threshold temperature for heat stress as well as response rate are tested.
|
|
