Abstract: • Systematic analysis of the influence of spatial soil data resolution on simulated regional yields and total growing season evapotranspiration. • The responses of four crop models of different complexity are compared. • Differences between models are larger than the effect of the chosen spatial soil data resolution. • Low influence of soil data resolution due to: high precipitation amount, methods for calculating water retention and method of data aggregation. The spatial variability of soil properties is an important driver of yield variability at both field and regional scale. Thus, when using crop growth simulation models, the choice of spatial resolution of soil input data might be key in order to accurately reproduce observed yield variability. In this study we used four crop models (SIMPLACE<LINTUL-SLIM>, DSSAT-CSM, EPIC and DAISY) differing in the detail of modeling above-ground biomass and yield as well as of modeling soil water dynamics, water uptake and drought effects on plants to simulate winter wheat in two (agro-climatologically and geo-morphologically) contrasting regions of the federal state of North-Rhine-Westphalia (Germany) for the period from 1995 to 2008. Three spatial resolutions of soil input data were taken into consideration, corresponding to the following map scales: 1:50 000, 1:300 000 and 1:1 000 000. The four crop models were run for water-limited production conditions and model results were evaluated in the form of frequency distributions, depicted by bean-plots. In both regions, soil data aggregation had very small influence on the shape and range of frequency distributions of simulated yield and simulated total growing season evapotranspiration for all models. Further analysis revealed that the small influence of spatial resolution of soil input data might be related to: (a) the high precipitation amount in the region which partly masked differences in soil characteristics for water holding capacity, (b) the loss of variability in hydraulic soil properties due to the methods applied to calculate water retention properties of the used soil profiles, and (c) the method of soil data aggregation. No characteristic “fingerprint” between sites, years and resolutions could be found for any of the models. Our results support earlier recommendation to evaluate model results on the basis of frequency distributions since these offer quick and better insight into the distribution of simulation results as compared to summary statistics only. Finally, our results support conclusions from other studies about the usefulness of considering a multi-model approach to quantify the uncertainty in simulated yields introduced by the crop growth simulation approach when exploring the effects of scaling for regional yield impact assessments.

Abstract: Droughts have serious and widespread impacts on crop production with substantial economic losses. The frequency and severity of drought events may increase in the future due to climate change. We have developed three meteorological drought scenarios for Austria in the period 2008-2040. The scenarios are defined based on a dry day index which is combined with bootstrapping from an observed daily weather dataset of the period 1975-2007. The severity of long-term drought scenarios is characterized by lower annual and seasonal precipitation amounts as well as more sig- nificant temperature increases compared to the observations. The long-term impacts of the drought scenarios on Aus- trian crop production have been analyzed with the biophysical process model EPIC (Environmental Policy Integrated Climate). Our simulation outputs show that—for areas with historical mean annual precipitation sums below 850 mm— already slight increases in dryness result in significantly lower crop yields i.e. depending on the drought severity, be- tween 0.6% and 0.9% decreases in mean annual dry matter crop yields per 1.0% decrease in mean annual precipitation sums. The EPIC results of more severe droughts show that spring and summer precipitation may become a limiting factor in crop production even in regions with historical abundant precipitation.

Abstract: Climate change and human activities are two major factors affecting water resource change. It is important to understand the roles of the major factors in affecting runoff change in different basins for watershed management. Here, we investigated the trends in climate and runoff in seven typical catchments in seven basins across China from 1961 to 2014. Then we attributed the runoff change to climate change and human activities in each catchment and in three time periods (1980s, 1990s and 2000s), using the VIC model and long-term runoff observation data. During 1961-2014, temperature increased significantly, while the trends in precipitation were insignificant in most of the catchments and inconsistent among the catchments. The runoff in most of the catchments showed a decreasing trend except the Yingluoxia catchment in the northwestern China. The contributions of climate change and human activities to runoff change varied in different catchments and time periods. In the 1980s, climate change contributed more to runoff change than human activities, which was 84%, 59%,-66%,-50%, 59%, 94%, and -59% in the Nianzishan, Yingluoxia, Xiahui, Yangjiaping, Sanjiangkou, Xixian, and Changle catchment, respectively. After that, human activities had played a more essential role in runoff change. In the 1990s and 2000s, human activities contributed more to runoff change than in the 1980s. The contribution by human activities accounted for 84%,- 68%, and 67% in the Yingluoxia, Xiahui, and Sanjiangkou catchment, respectively, in the 1990s; and -96%,-67%,-94%, and -142% in the Nianzishan, Yangjiaping, Xixian, and Changle catchment, respectively, in the 2000s. It is also noted that after 2000 human activities caused decrease in runoff in all catchments except the Yingluoxia. Our findings highlight that the effects of human activities, such as increase in water withdrawal, land use/cover change, operation of dams and reservoirs, should be well managed. (C) 2017 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.