|
Ewert, F., van Bussel, L. G. J., Zhao, G., Hoffmann, H., Gaiser, T., Specka, X., et al. (2015). Uncertainties in Scaling up Crop Models for Large Area Climate-change Impact Assessments. In C. Rosenzweig, & D. Hillel (Eds.), (pp. 261–277). Handbook of Climate Change and Agroecosystems: The Agricultural Model Intercomparison and Improvement Project (AgMIP) Integrated Crop and Economic Assessments — Joint Publication with American Society of Agronomy, Crop Science Society of America, and Soil Science Society of America (In 2 Parts), ICP Series on Climate Change Impacts, Adaptation, . London: Imperial College Press.
|
|
Ewert, F., Hoffmann, H., & WP3 partners. (2015). Scaling up crop models for large area application.. Minneapolis (U.S.A.).
|
Webber, H., Zhao, G., Wolf, J., Britz, W., Vries, W. de, Gaiser, T., et al. (2015). Climate change impacts on European crop yields: Do we need to consider nitrogen limitation. European Journal of Agronomy, 71, 123–134.
Abstract: Global climate impact studies with crop models suggest that including nitrogen and water limitation causes greater negative climate change impacts on actual yields compared to water-limitation only. We simulated water limited and nitrogen water limited yields across the EU-27 to 2050 for six key crops with the SIMPLACE<LINTUL5, DRUNIR, HEAT> model to assess how important consideration of nitrogen limitation is in climate impact studies for European cropping systems. We further investigated how crop nitrogen use may change under future climate change scenarios. Our results suggest that inclusion of nitrogen limitation hardly changed crop yield response to climate for the spring-sown crops considered (grain maize, potato, and sugar beet). However, for winter-sown crops (winter barley, winter rapeseed and winter wheat), simulated impacts to 2050 were more negative when nitrogen limitation was considered, especially with high levels of water stress. Future nitrogen use rates are likely to decrease due to climate change for spring-sown crops, largely in parallel with their yields. These results imply that climate change impact studies for winter-sown crops should consider N-fertilization. Specification of future N fertilization rates is a methodological challenge that is likely to need integrated assessment models to address.
|
Hoffmann, H. (2015). Effects of soil and climate input data aggregation on modelling regional crop yields (Vol. 5).
Abstract: Climate and soil data at coarse resolution are often used as input for crop models in order to simulate crop yields at larger scales, e.g. at regional or national level, potentially leading to biased yield estimates. While the response to data resolution differs between crop models, it is unknown how the spatial aggregation of different types of input data interacts and contributes to this so-called aggregation effect. An ensemble of crop models was run with soil and climate input data at different spatial resolutions from 1 to 100 km for the state of North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany. For this purpose, climate time series were averaged spatially and soil data was aggregated by selecting the dominant soil type with a representative soil profile based on a soil map at the scale of 1:50,000. Yields of winter wheat and silage maize were simulated under potential, water-limited and water-nitrogen-limited production conditions. Crop yields from soil and climate aggregation were evaluated separately.Mean of crop yields of the region and over the simulation period were reasonably reproduced by most models regardless of input data resolution, either using aggregated soil or climate as input. However, larger aggregation effects were observed at higher temporal resolution (e.g. annual yields). Models revealed similar spatial patterns in yield. Being distinct for soil and climate aggregation, these patterns indicate a larger impact of soil aggregation on the spatial distribution of simulated crop yield for this region. Additionally, models differed considerably in their susceptibility to input data aggregation. The results reveal the importance of model ensemble assessments and the relevance of data aggregation when short simulation periods are considered. No Label
|
Hoffmann, H., & Ewert, F. (2015). Review on scaling methods for crop models (Vol. 6).
Abstract: Agricultural systems cover a range of organisational levels and spatial and temporal scales. To capture multi-scale problems of sustainable management in agricultural systems, Integrated assessment modelling (IAM) including crop models is often applied which require methods of scale changes (scaling methods). Scaling methods, however, are often not well understood and are therefore sources of uncertainty in models. The present report summarizes scaling methods as developed and applied in recent years (e.g. in SEAMLESS-IF and MACSUR) in a classification scheme based on Ewert et al. (2011, 2006). Scale changes refer to different spatial, temporal and functional scales with changes in extent, resolution, and coverage rate. Accordingly, there are a number of different scaling methods that can include data extrapolation, aggregation and disaggregation, sampling and nested simulation. Comparative quantitative analysis of alternative scaling methods are currently under way and covered by other reports in MACSUR and several publications (e.g. Ewert et al., 2014; Hoffmann et al., 2015; Zhao et al., 2015). The following classification of scaling methods assists to structure such analysis. Improved integration of scaling methods in IAM may help to overcome modelling limitations that are related to high data demand, complexity of models and scaling methods considered. No Label
|
