|
|
Bellocchi, G., & Sándor, R. (2015). Model intercomparison (Vol. 6).
Abstract: This deliverable focuses on some illustrative results obtained with different grassland- specific, grassland adapted crop and dynamic vegetation models selected out of the first list of models compiled in D-L2.1.1 to simulate biomass and flux data from grassland sites in Europe and peri-Mediterranean regions (D-L2.1.1 and D-L2.1.2). Results from uncalibrated simulations were documented in the D-L2.3 report as a blind exercise. Some model improvements are emphasized in this report due to the higher information level of the model calibrations. The complete set of results will include simulations from uncalibrated and calibrated models. No Label
|
|
|
|
Cammarano, D., Rivington, M., Matthews, K., B,, & Bellocchi, G. (2015). Estimates of crop responses to climate change with quantified ranges of uncertainty (Vol. 6).
Abstract: In estimating responses of crops to future climate realisations, it is necessary to understand and differentiate between the sources of uncertainty in climate models and how these lead to errors in estimating the past climate and biases in future projections, and how these affect crop model estimates. This paper investigates the complexities in using climate model projections representing different spatial scales within climate change impacts and adaptation studies. This is illustrated by simulating spring barley with three crop models run using site-specific observed, original (50•50 km) and bias corrected downscaled (site-specific) hindcast (1960-1990) weather data from the HadRM3 Regional Climate Model (RCM). Original and bias corrected downscaled weather data were evaluated against the observed data. The comparisons made between the crop models were in the light of lessons learned from this data evaluation. Though the bias correction downscaling method improved the match between observed and hindcast data, this did not always translate into better matching of crop models estimates. At four sites the original HadRM3 data produced near identical mean simulated yield values as from the observed weather data, despite differences in the weather data, giving a situation of ‘right results for the wrong reasons’. This was likely due to compensating errors in the input weather data and non-linearity in crop models processes, making interpretation of results problematic. Overall, bias correction downscaling improved the quality of simulated outputs. Understanding how biases in climate data manifest themselves in crop models gives greater confidence in the utility of the estimates produced using downscaled future climate projections. The results indicate implications on how future projections of climate change impacts are interpreted. Fundamentally, considerable care is required in determining the impact weather data sources have in climate change impact and adaptation studies, whether from individual models or ensembles. No Label
|
|
|
|
Van den Pol-van Dasselaar, A., Bellocchi, G., Hutchings, N., Olesen, J., & Saetnan, E. (2014). AnimalChange. FACCE MACSUR Mid-term Scientific Conference, 3(S) Sassari, Italy.
Abstract: The EU-FP7 project AnimalChange (AN Integration of Mitigation and Adaptation options for sustainable Livestock production under climate CHANGE, http://www.animalchange.eu, 2011-2015) addresses mitigation and adaptation options and provides scientific guidance for their integration in sustainable development pathways for livestock production under climate change in Europe, Northern and Sub-Saharan Africa, and Latin America. The project provides insights, innovations, tools and models for livestock production incorporating socio-economic and environmental (particularly GHG emission) variables. Scenario studies are carried out at scales ranging from animal and pasture, to farm and to region, for given management options. A wide range of livestock production systems is included in the project. The core analytical spine of the project is a series of coupled biophysical and socio-economic models combined with experimentation. This allows exploring future scenarios for the livestock sector under baseline and atmospheric CO2 stabilization scenarios. These scenarios are first constructed and then elaborated and enriched by breakthrough mitigation and adaptation options at field and animal scales, integrated and evaluated at farm scale and finally used to assess policy options and their socio-economic consequences. The modelling results are useful for governments, agricultural and food industry and the agricultural sector (farmers). There are many synergies between the European activities of AnimalChange and those of the LiveM theme of MACSUR, in particular with respect to access to livestock production datasets, dialogue with stakeholders and comparison and integration of grassland and livestock models with crop and socio-economic models in pilot studies at a variety of scales.
|
|
|
|
Lellei-Kovács, E., Barcza, Z., Hidy, D., Horváth, F., Ittzés, D., Ittzés, P., et al. (2014). Application of Biome-BGC MuSo in managed grassland ecosystems in the Euro-Mediteranean region. FACCE MACSUR Mid-term Scientific Conference, 3(S) Sassari, Italy.
Abstract: Simulation of the biogeochemical cycles of extensively and intensively managed grasslands and croplands are of particular interest due to the strong connection between ecosystem production, animal husbandry and food security. In the frame of MACSUR LiveM activities, we conducted a series of „blind tests” (i.e. uncalibrated model simulations with previously optimized model) on differently managed grasslands within Europe and Israel. We used the latest version of Biome-BGC MuSo model, the modified version of the widely used biogeochemical Biome-BGC model. Biome-BGC MuSo contains structural improvements, development of management modules, and the extension of the model to simulate herbaceouos ecosystem carbon and water cycles more faithfully. The studied ecosystems were meadows and pastures located in a variety of climate zones from the Atlantic sector to Central Europe, including Mediterranean sites. Managements were intensive and extensive grazing or mowing with or without different kind of fertilizers. Under similar options we simulated ecosystem variables, e.g. Gross Primary Production (GPP) and Net Ecosystem Exchange (NEE). Our experiences show that different sites have different sensitivity to the parameters (maximum root depth, soil parameters, etc.), but overall the model provided realistic fluxes. Experiences gained during the blind tests led us to further improve the model. Biome-BGC MuSo is available as a standalone model in personal computers, but also through virtual laboratory environment and Biome-BGC Projects database (http://ecos.okologia.mta.hu/bbgcdb) developed within the BioVeL project (http://www.biovel.eu). Scientific workflow management, web service and desktop grid technology can support model optimization in the so-called „calibrated runs” within MACSUR.
|
|
|
|
Bellocchi, G., Rivington, M., & Acutis, M. (2014). Deliberative processes for comprehensive evaluation of agro-ecological models. FACCE MACSUR Mid-term Scientific Conference, 3(S) Sassari, Italy.
Abstract: Biophysical models are acknowledged for examining interactions of agro-ecological systems and fostering communication between scientists, managers and the public. As the role of models grows in importance, there is an increase in the need to assess their quality and performance (Bellocchi et al., 2010). However, the heterogeneity of factors influencing model outputs makes it difficult a full assessment of model features. Where models are used with or for stakeholders then model credibility depends not only on the outcomes of well-structured statistical evaluation but also less tangible factors may need to be addressed using complementary deliberative processes. To expand our horizons in the evaluation of crop and grassland models, approaches have been reviewed with emphasis on using combined metrics. Comprehensive evaluation of simulation models was developed to integrate expectations of stakeholders via a weighting system where lower and upper fuzzy bounds are applied to a set of evaluation metrics. A questionnaire-based survey helped understanding the multi-faceted knowledge and experience required and the substantial challenges posed by the deliberative process. MACSUR knowledge hub holds potential to advance in good modelling practice in relation with model evaluation (including access to appropriate software tools), an activity which is frequently neglected in the context of time-limited projects.
|
|
