Abstract: Farmlands are increasingly exposed to degradation phenomena associated to climate change and agricultural practices, including irrigation. It is estimated that about 20% of the world’s irrigated land is salt affected. In this paper we aimed at evaluating the effect of seasonal and multiannual soil satinization on growth, yield, and radiation use efficiency of tomato in open field. Two field experiments were carried out at the Experimental Station of the University of Naples Federico II (latitude 40 degrees 31’N longitude 14 degrees 58’E) (Italy) on tomato during 2004 and 2005 to study the effect of five levels of water salinity: NSC (EC = 0.5 dS m(-1)), SW1 (EC= 2.3 dS m(-1)), SW2 (EC= 4.4 dS m(-1)), SW3 (EC= 8.5 dS m(-1)) and SW4 (EC= 15.7 dS m(-1)) in a soil exposed to one-season salinization (ST = short-term) and an adjacent soil exposed to >20 years salinization (LT = long-term). Plant growth, yield and fruit quality (pH, EC, total soluble solids and the concentration of reducing sugars and of titratable acids), and plant water relations were measured and radiation use efficiency (RUE) was calculated. Increasing water salinity negatively affected the leaf area index (LAI), radiation use efficiency (RUE) and above-ground dry weight (DW) accumulation resulting in lower total and marketable yield. Maximum total and marketable yield obtained with the NSC treatment were respectively 117.9 and 111.0 Mg ha(-1) in 2004 and 113.1 and 107.9 Mg ha(-1) in 2005. Although the smaller leaf area of salinized plants was largely responsible for reduced RUE, we found approximately 50% of this reduction to be accounted for by processes other than changed crop architecture. These may include an increased stomatal resistance, increased mesophyll resistance and other impaired metabolic functions that may occur at high salinity. Remarkably, we found that LT salinized plants had a slightly better efficiency of use of intercepted radiation (RUEIR) at a given EC of soil extract than ST salinized plants indicating that LT salinization, and consequent permanent modifications of the soil physical properties, may trigger additional physiological mechanisms of adaptation compared to ST salinized plants. These differences are relevant in light of the evolution of salinized areas, also in response to climate change.

Abstract: In crop insurance, the accuracy with which the insurer quantifies the actual risk is highly dependent on the availability on actual yield data. Crop models might be valuable tools to generate data on expected yields for risk assessment when no historical records are available. However, selecting a crop model for a specific objective, location and implementation scale is a difficult task. A look inside the different crop and soil modules to understand how outputs are obtained might facilitate model choice. The objectives of this paper were (i) to assess the usefulness of crop models to be used within a crop insurance analysis and design and (ii) to select the most suitable crop model for drought risk assessment in semi-arid regions in Spain. For that purpose first, a pre-selection of crop models simulating wheat yield under rainfed growing conditions at the field scale was made, and second, four selected models (Aquacrop, CERES-Wheat, CropSyst and WOFOST) were compared in terms of modelling approaches, process descriptions and model outputs. Outputs of the four models for the simulation of winter wheat growth are comparable when water is not limiting, but differences are larger when simulating yields under rainfed conditions. These differences in rainfed yields are mainly related to the dissimilar simulated soil water availability and the assumed linkages with dry matter formation. We concluded that for the simulation of winter wheat growth at field scale in such semi-arid conditions, CERES-Wheat and CropSyst are preferred. WOFOST is a satisfactory compromise between data availability and complexity when detail data on soil is limited. Aquacrop integrates physiological processes in some representative parameters, thus diminishing the number of input parameters, what is seen as an advantage when observed data is scarce. However, the high sensitivity of this model to low water availability limits its use in the region considered. Contrary to the use of ensembles of crop models, we endorse that efforts be concentrated on selecting or rebuilding a model that includes approaches that better describe the agronomic conditions of the regions in which they will be applied. The use of such complex methodologies as crop models is associated with numerous sources of uncertainty, although these models are the best tools available to get insight in these complex agronomic systems. (C) 2015 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.