|
|
Köchy, M., Banse, M., Tiffin, R., Ewert, F., Rötter, R., Van den Pol-van Dasselaar, A., et al. (2014). General outline of plans for an extension phase of MACSUR. FACCE MACSUR Mid-term Scientific Conference, 3(S) Sassari, Italy.
Abstract: FACCE MACSUR has indicated a possible extension of funding by two years until May 2017 (phase 2).For phase 2, hub and theme coordinators suggest the following main activities, that will be discussed during the remainder of the meeting and in the coming months.Evolution, upscaling, and transfer of knowledge gained in regional case studies.Assessment of additional scenarios of socio-economic and climate trends.Further development of an interdisciplinary scientific community.Extending scaling methods for crop models to the European and global scale.Intensification of feed quality and animal health modelling with climate change.Economic models from farm to global level capable of reflecting climate change.
|
|
|
|
Ewert, F., & Rötter, R. (2014). MACSUR CropM – progress overview. FACCE MACSUR Mid-term Scientific Conference, 3(S) Sassari, Italy.
Abstract: Activities in the first 1 ½ years of CropM were related to key issues identified as critical at the beginning of the FACCE MACSUR the knowledge Hub. These include: Model intercomparisonGeneration of new data for model improvementMethods for scaling and model linkingUncertainty analysisBuilding research capacity Climate scenario data for crop models The key ambition of CropM has been to develop scientific excellence on methods for a comprehensive assessment of climate change impact, adaptation and policy on European crop production, agriculture and food security. Much progress has been made in developing a first shared continental assessment and tool for: A range of important cropsImportant crop rotationsAdvanced scaling methodsAdvanced link to farm and sector modelsNovel impact uncertainty assessment and reportingState-of-the-art scenario construction A number of concrete studies towards this aim have been launched in CropM workpackages (WPs): WP1-2: Two multi-facetted studies on crop rotation, launched in summer 2013 WP3: comprehensive scaling exercises, launched in March 2013WP4: Studies on (a) Climate scenario development, (b) impact response surface method and (c) Extremes, launched in summer 2013WP5: Analysis of transect across Europe with temperature effect (Space for Time) In addition, extended activities related to capacity building including several PhD courses (WP5) workshops (in WPs1-4) and an International Symposium (10-12 Feb, Oslo, Norway) have been organized. Present and future work is and will be focused on framing and advancing crop modelling as integrated part of comprehensive climate risk assessment and modelling of agricultural systems for food security from farm to supra-national level.
|
|
|
|
Zhao, G., Hoffmann, H., Van Bussel, L., Enders, A., Specka, X., Sosa, C., et al. (2014). Weather data aggregation’s effects on simulation of cropping systems: a model, production system and crop comparison. FACCE MACSUR Mid-term Scientific Conference, 3(S) Sassari, Italy.
Abstract: Interactions of climate, soil and management practices in cropping systems can be simulated at different scales to provide information for decision making. Low resolution simulation need less effort, but important details could be lost through data aggregation effects (DAEs). This paper aims to provide a general method to assess the DAEs on weather data and the simulation of cropping systems, and further investigate how the DAEs vary with changing crop models, crops, variables and production systems. A 30-year continuous cropping system was simulated for winter wheat and silage maize and potential, water-limited and water-nitrogen-limited production situations. Climate data of 1 km resolution and aggregations to resolutions of 10 to 100 km was used as input for the simulations. The data aggregation narrowed the variation of weather data and DAEs increased with increasingly coarser spatial resolution, causing the loss of hot spots in simulated results. Spatial patterns were similar across different resolutions. Consistent with DAEs on weather data, the DAEs on simulated yield (0 to 1.2 t ha-1 for winter wheat and 0 to 1.7 t ha-1 for silage maize), evapotranspiration (3 to 45 mm yr-1 for winter wheat and 4 to 40 mm yr-1 for silage maize), and water use efficiency (0.02 to 0.25 kg m-3 for winter wheat and 0.04 to 0.4 kg m-3 for silage maize), increased with coarser spatial resolution. Thus, if spatial information is needed for local management decisions, higher resolution is needed to adequately capture the spatial heterogeneity or hot spots in the region.
|
|
|
|
Webber, H., Zhao, G., Britz, W., deVries, W., Wolf, J., Gaiser, T., et al. (2015). Specification of nitrogen use in regional climate impact assessment studies.. Montpellier (France).
|
|
|
|
Zhao, G., Hoffmann, H., van Bussel, L. G. J., Enders, A., Specka, X., Sosa, C., et al. (2015). Effect of weather data aggregation on regional crop simulation for different crops, production conditions, and response variables. Clim. Res., 65, 141–157.
Abstract: We assessed the weather data aggregation effect (DAE) on the simulation of cropping systems for different crops, response variables, and production conditions. Using 13 process-based crop models and the ensemble mean, we simulated 30 yr continuous cropping systems for 2 crops (winter wheat and silage maize) under 3 production conditions for the state of North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany. The DAE was evaluated for 5 weather data resolutions (i.e. 1, 10, 25, 50, and 100 km) for 3 response variables including yield, growing season evapotranspiration, and water use efficiency. Five metrics, viz. the spatial bias (Delta), average absolute deviation (AAD), relative AAD, root mean squared error (RMSE), and relative RMSE, were used to evaluate the DAE on both the input weather data and simulated results. For weather data, we found that data aggregation narrowed the spatial variability but widened the., especially across mountainous areas. The DAE on loss of spatial heterogeneity and hotspots was stronger than on the average changes over the region. The DAE increased when coarsening the spatial resolution of the input weather data. The DAE varied considerably across different models, but changed only slightly for different production conditions and crops. We conclude that if spatially detailed information is essential for local management decision, higher resolution is desirable to adequately capture the spatial variability for heterogeneous regions. The required resolution depends on the choice of the model as well as the environmental condition of the study area.
|
|
