|
|
Montesino-San Martín, M., Olesen, J. E., & Porter, J. R. (2015). Can crop-climate models be accurate and precise? A case study for wheat production in Denmark. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology, 202, 51–60.
Abstract: Crop models, used to make projections of climate change impacts, differ greatly in structural detail. Complexity of model structure has generic effects on uncertainty and error propagation in climate change impact assessments. We applied Bayesian calibration to three distinctly different empirical and mechanistic wheat models to assess how differences in the extent of process understanding in models affects uncertainties in projected impact. Predictive power of the models was tested via both accuracy (bias) and precision (or tightness of grouping) of yield projections for extrapolated weather conditions. Yields predicted by the mechanistic model were generally more accurate than the empirical models for extrapolated conditions. This trend does not hold for all extrapolations; mechanistic and empirical models responded differently due to their sensitivities to distinct weather features. However, higher accuracy comes at the cost of precision of the mechanistic model to embrace all observations within given boundaries. The approaches showed complementarity in sensitivity to weather variables and in accuracy for different extrapolation domains. Their differences in model precision and accuracy make them suitable for generic model ensembles for near-term agricultural impact assessments of climate change.
|
|
|
|
Ghaley, B. B., Porter, J. R., & Sandhu, H. S. (2014). Soil-based ecosystem services: a synthesis of nutrient cycling and carbon sequestration assessment methods. International Journal of Biodiversity Science, Ecosystem Services & Management, 10(3), 177–186.
Abstract: Among the soil-based ecosystem services (ES), nutrient cycling and carbon sequestration have direct influence on the biogeochemical cycles and greenhouse gas emissions affecting provision of other ES that support human existence. We reviewed methods to assess the two key ES by identifying their strengths and weaknesses and have made suggestions for using appropriate methods for better understanding of the ecosystem functions for the provision of ES. Relevant papers for the review were chosen on the basis of (i) diversity of studies on the two key ES in different ecosystems, (ii) methodologies applied and (iii) detailed descriptions of the trial locations in terms of vegetation, soil type, location and climatic information. We concluded that (i) elemental stoichiometrical ratios could be a potential approach to assess the health of ecosystems in terms of provision of the two ES discussed, (ii) stoichiometric imbalances need to be avoided between the supply and the demand of the nutrients to maintain the ES provision in terrestrial ecosystems and (iii) stoichiometric ratios can act as a management tool at a field, farm and at landscape level, to complement other compositional biodiversity and functional diversity approaches to ensure sustainable provision of ES.
|
|
|
|
Ewert, F., Rötter, R. P., Bindi, M., Webber, H., Trnka, M., Kersebaum, K. C., et al. (2015). Crop modelling for integrated assessment of risk to food production from climate change. Env. Model. Softw., 72, 287–303.
Abstract: The complexity of risks posed by climate change and possible adaptations for crop production has called for integrated assessment and modelling (IAM) approaches linking biophysical and economic models. This paper attempts to provide an overview of the present state of crop modelling to assess climate change risks to food production and to which extent crop models comply with IAM demands. Considerable progress has been made in modelling effects of climate variables, where crop models best satisfy IAM demands. Demands are partly satisfied for simulating commonly required assessment variables. However, progress on the number of simulated crops, uncertainty propagation related to model parameters and structure, adaptations and scaling are less advanced and lagging behind IAM demands. The limitations are considered substantial and apply to a different extent to all crop models. Overcoming these limitations will require joint efforts, and consideration of novel modelling approaches.
|
|
|
|
Sandhu, H., Porter, J. R., & Wratten, S. (2013). Experimental assessment of ecosystem services in agriculture. In S. Wratten, H. Sandhu, R. Cullen, & R. Costanza (Eds.), (pp. 122–135). Ecosystem Services in Agricultural and Urban Landscapes.
|
|
|
|
Cammarano, D., Rötter, P., Ewert, F., Palosuo, T., Bindi, M., Kersebaum, K. C., et al. (2013). Challenges for Agro-Ecosystem Modelling in Climate Change Risk Assessment for major European Crops and Farming systems. (pp. 555–564).
|
|
