toggle visibility Search & Display Options

Select All    Deselect All
 |   | 
Details
   print
  Records Links
Author Yin, X.; Olesen, J.E.; Wang, M.; Kersebaum, K.-C.; Chen, H.; Baby, S.; Öztürk, I.; Chen, F. url  doi
openurl 
  Title Adapting maize production to drought in the Northeast Farming Region of China Type Journal Article
  Year 2016 Publication European Journal of Agronomy Abbreviated Journal European Journal of Agronomy  
  Volume 77 Issue Pages 47-58  
  Keywords Drought; Maize production; Adaptation strategies; Household characteristics; Policy support; The Northeast Farming Region of China; climate change; Jilin province; water-stress; sowing date; yield; risk; tolerance; impacts; corn; agriculture  
  Abstract Maize (Zea mays L.) is the most prominent crop in the Northeast Farming Region of China (NFR), and drought has been the largest limitation for maize production in this area during recent decades. The question of how to adapt maize production to drought has received great attention from policy makers, researchers and farmers. In order to evaluate the effects of adaptation strategies against drought and examine the influences of policy supports and farmer households’ characteristics on adopting decisions, a large scale household survey was conducted in five representative maize production counties across NFR. Our survey results indicated that using variety diversification, drought resistant varieties and dibbling irrigation are the three major adaptation strategies against drought in spring, and farmers also adopted changes in sowing time, conservation tillage and mulching to cope with drought in spring. About 20% and 18% of households enhanced irrigation against drought in summer and autumn, respectively. Deep loosening tillage and organic fertilizer are also options for farmers to resist drought in summer. Maize yield was highly dependent on soil qualities, with yields on land of high soil quality approximately 1050 kg/ha and 2400 kg/ha higher than for normal and poor soil conditions, respectively. Using variety diversification and drought resistant varieties can respectively increase maize yield by approximately 150 and 220 kg/ha under drought. Conservation tillage increased maize yield by 438–459 kg/ha in drought years. Irrigation improved maize yield by 419–435 kg/ha and 444–463 kg/ha against drought in summer and autumn, respectively. Offering information service, financial and technical support can greatly increase the use of adaptation strategies for farmers to cope with drought. However, only 46% of households received information service, 43% of households received financial support, and 26% of households received technical support against drought from the local government. The maize acreage and the irrigation access are the major factors that influenced farmers’ decisions to apply adaptation strategies to cope with drought in each season, but only 25% of households have access to irrigation. This indicates the need for enhanced public support for farmers to better cope with drought in maize production, particularly through improving access to irrigation.  
  Address 2016-10-31  
  Corporate Author Thesis  
  Publisher Place of Publication Editor  
  Language (up) English Summary Language Original Title  
  Series Editor Series Title Abbreviated Series Title  
  Series Volume Series Issue Edition  
  ISSN 1161-0301 ISBN Medium Article  
  Area Expedition Conference  
  Notes CropM, ft_macsur Approved no  
  Call Number MA @ admin @ Serial 4825  
Permanent link to this record
 

 
Author Webber, H.; Martre, P.; Asseng, S.; Kimball, B.; White, J.; Ottman, M.; Wall, G.W.; De Sanctis, G.; Doltra, J.; Grant, R.; Kassie, B.; Maiorano, A.; Olesen, J.E.; Ripoche, D.; Rezaei, E.E.; Semenov, M.A.; Stratonovitch, P.; Ewert, F. doi  openurl
  Title Canopy temperature for simulation of heat stress in irrigated wheat in a semi-arid environment: A multi-model comparison Type Journal Article
  Year 2017 Publication Field Crops Research Abbreviated Journal Field Crops Research  
  Volume 202 Issue Pages 21-35  
  Keywords Crop model comparison; Canopy temperature; Heat stress; Wheat  
  Abstract Even brief periods of high temperatures occurring around flowering and during grain filling can severely reduce grain yield in cereals. Recently, ecophysiological and crop models have begun to represent such phenomena. Most models use air temperature (Tair) in their heat stress responses despite evidence that crop canopy temperature (Tc) better explains grain yield losses. Tc can deviate significantly from Tair based on climatic factors and the crop water status. The broad objective of this study was to evaluate whether simulation of Tc improves the ability of crop models to simulate heat stress impacts on wheat under irrigated conditions. Nine process-based models, each using one of three broad approaches (empirical, EMP; energy balance assuming neutral atmospheric stability, EBN; and energy balance correcting for the atmospheric stability conditions, EBSC) to simulate Tc, simulated grain yield under a range of temperature conditions. The models varied widely in their ability to reproduce the measured Tc with the commonly used EBN models performing much worse than either EMP or EBSC. Use of Tc to account for heat stress effects did improve simulations compared to using only Tair to a relatively minor extent, but the models that additionally use Tc on various other processes as well did not have better yield simulations. Models that simulated yield well under heat stress had varying skill in simulating Tc. For example, the EBN models had very poor simulations of Tc but performed very well in simulating grain yield. These results highlight the need to more systematically understand and model heat stress events in wheat.  
  Address 2016-10-31  
  Corporate Author Thesis  
  Publisher Place of Publication Editor  
  Language (up) English Summary Language Original Title  
  Series Editor Series Title Abbreviated Series Title  
  Series Volume Series Issue Edition  
  ISSN 0378-4290 ISBN Medium Article  
  Area Expedition Conference  
  Notes CropM, ft_macsur Approved no  
  Call Number MA @ admin @ Serial 4824  
Permanent link to this record
 

 
Author Rötter, R.P.; Palosuo, T.; Kersebaum, K.C.; Angulo, C.; Bindi, M.; Ewert, F.; Ferrise, R.; Hlavinka, P.; Moriondo, M.; Nendel, C.; Olesen, J.E.; Patil, R.H.; Ruget, F.; Takác, J.; Trnka, M. url  doi
openurl 
  Title Simulation of spring barley yield in different climatic zones of Northern and Central Europe: A comparison of nine crop models Type Journal Article
  Year 2012 Publication Field Crops Research Abbreviated Journal Field Crops Research  
  Volume 133 Issue Pages 23-36  
  Keywords climate; crop growth simulation; model comparison; spring barley; yield variability; uncertainty; change impacts; nitrogen dynamics; high-temperature; soil-moisture; elevated co2; ceres-wheat; data set; growth; drought; sensitivity  
  Abstract In this study, the performance of nine widely used and accessible crop growth simulation models (APES-ACE, CROPSYST, DAISY, DSSAT-CERES, FASSET, HERMES, MONICA, STICS and WOFOST) was compared during 44 growing seasons of spring barley (Hordeum vulgare L) at seven sites in Northern and Central Europe. The aims of this model comparison were to examine how different process-based crop models perform at multiple sites across Europe when applied with minimal information for model calibration of spring barley at field scale, whether individual models perform better than the multi-model mean, and what the uncertainty ranges are in simulated grain yields. The reasons for differences among the models and how results for barley compare to winter wheat are discussed. Regarding yield estimation, best performing based on the root mean square error (RMSE) were models HERMES, MONICA and WOFOST with lowest values of 1124, 1282 and 1325 (kg ha(-1)), respectively. Applying the index of agreement (IA), models WOFOST, DAISY and HERMES scored best having highest values (0.632, 0.631 and 0.585, respectively). Most models systematically underestimated yields, whereby CROPSYST showed the highest deviation as indicated by the mean bias error (MBE) (-1159 kg ha(-1)). While the wide range of simulated yields across all sites and years shows the high uncertainties in model estimates with only restricted calibration, mean predictions from the nine models agreed well with observations. Results of this paper also show that models that were more accurate in predicting phenology were not necessarily the ones better estimating grain yields. Total above-ground biomass estimates often did not follow the patterns of grain yield estimates and, thus, harvest indices were also different. Estimates of soil moisture dynamics varied greatly. In comparison, even though the growing cycle for winter wheat is several months longer than for spring barley, using RMSE and IA as indicators, models performed slightly, but not significantly, better in predicting wheat yields. Errors in reproducing crop phenology were similar, which in conjunction with the shorter growth cycle of barley has higher effects on accuracy in yield prediction. (C) 2012 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.  
  Address 2016-10-31  
  Corporate Author Thesis  
  Publisher Place of Publication Editor  
  Language (up) English Summary Language Original Title  
  Series Editor Series Title Abbreviated Series Title  
  Series Volume Series Issue Edition  
  ISSN 0378-4290 ISBN Medium Article  
  Area Expedition Conference  
  Notes CropM, ftnotmacsur Approved no  
  Call Number MA @ admin @ Serial 4803  
Permanent link to this record
 

 
Author Cammarano, D.; Rötter, R.P.; Asseng, S.; Ewert, F.; Wallach, D.; Martre, P.; Hatfield, J.L.; Jones, J.W.; Rosenzweig, C.; Ruane, A.C.; Boote, K.J.; Thorburn, P.J.; Kersebaum, K.C.; Aggarwal, P.K.; Angulo, C.; Basso, B.; Bertuzzi, P.; Biernath, C.; Brisson, N.; Challinor, A.J.; Doltra, J.; Gayler, S.; Goldberg, R.; Heng, L.; Hooker, J.E.; Hunt, L.A.; Ingwersen, J.; Izaurralde, R.C.; Müller, C.; Kumar, S.N.; Nendel, C.; O’Leary, G.; Olesen, J.E.; Osborne, T.M.; Priesack, E.; Ripoche, D.; Steduto, P.; Stöckle, C.O.; Stratonovitch, P.; Streck, T.; Supit, I.; Tao, F.; Travasso, M.; Waha, K.; White, J.W.; Wolf, J. doi  openurl
  Title Uncertainty of wheat water use: Simulated patterns and sensitivity to temperature and CO2 Type Journal Article
  Year 2016 Publication Field Crops Research Abbreviated Journal Field Crops Research  
  Volume 198 Issue Pages 80-92  
  Keywords Multi-model simulation; Transpiration efficiency; Water use; Uncertainty; Sensitivity  
  Abstract Projected global warming and population growth will reduce future water availability for agriculture. Thus, it is essential to increase the efficiency in using water to ensure crop productivity. Quantifying crop water use (WU; i.e. actual evapotranspiration) is a critical step towards this goal. Here, sixteen wheat simulation models were used to quantify sources of model uncertainty and to estimate the relative changes and variability between models for simulated WU, water use efficiency (WUE, WU per unit of grain dry mass produced), transpiration efficiency (Teff, transpiration per kg of unit of grain yield dry mass produced), grain yield, crop transpiration and soil evaporation at increased temperatures and elevated atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations ([CO2]). The greatest uncertainty in simulating water use, potential evapotranspiration, crop transpiration and soil evaporation was due to differences in how crop transpiration was modelled and accounted for 50% of the total variability among models. The simulation results for the sensitivity to temperature indicated that crop WU will decline with increasing temperature due to reduced growing seasons. The uncertainties in simulated crop WU, and in particularly due to uncertainties in simulating crop transpiration, were greater under conditions of increased temperatures and with high temperatures in combination with elevated atmospheric [CO2] concentrations. Hence the simulation of crop WU, and in particularly crop transpiration under higher temperature, needs to be improved and evaluated with field measurements before models can be used to simulate climate change impacts on future crop water demand.  
  Address 2016-10-31  
  Corporate Author Thesis  
  Publisher Place of Publication Editor  
  Language (up) English Summary Language Original Title  
  Series Editor Series Title Abbreviated Series Title  
  Series Volume Series Issue Edition  
  ISSN 0378-4290 ISBN Medium Article  
  Area Expedition Conference  
  Notes CropM, ft_macsur Approved no  
  Call Number MA @ admin @ Serial 4786  
Permanent link to this record
 

 
Author Yin, X.G.; Olesen, J.E.; Wang, M.; Öztürk, I.; Chen, F. url  doi
openurl 
  Title Climate effects on crop yields in the Northeast Farming Region of China during 1961–2010 Type Journal Article
  Year 2016 Publication Journal of Agricultural Science Abbreviated Journal J. Agric. Sci.  
  Volume 154 Issue 07 Pages 1190-1208  
  Keywords  
  Abstract Crop production in the Northeast Farming Region of China (NFR) is affected considerably by variation in climatic conditions. Data on crop yield and weather conditions from a number of agro-meteorological stations in NFR were used in a mixed linear model to evaluate the impacts of climatic variables on the yield of maize (Zea mays L.), rice (Oryza sativa L.), soybean (Glycine max L. Merr.) and spring wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) in different crop growth phases. The crop growing season was divided into three growth phases based on the average crop phenological dates from records covering 1981 and 2010 at each station, comprising pre-flowering (from sowing to just prior to flowering), flowering (20 days around flowering) and post-flowering (10 days after flowering to maturity). The climatic variables were mean minimum temperature, thermal time (which is used to indicate changes in the length of growth cycles), average daily solar radiation, accumulated precipitation, aridity index (which is used to assess drought stress) and heat degree-days index (HDD) (which is used to indicate heat stress) were calculated for each growth phase and year. Over the 1961–2010 period, the minimum temperature increased significantly in each crop growth phase, the thermal time increased significantly in the pre-flowering phase of each crop and in the post-flowering phases of maize, rice and soybean, and HDD increased significantly in the pre-flowering phase of soybean and wheat. Average solar radiation decreased significantly in the pre-flowering phase of all four crops and in the flowering phase of soybean and wheat. Precipitation increased during the pre-flowering phase leading to less aridity, whereas reduced precipitation in the flowering and post-flowering phases enhanced aridity. Statistical analyses indicated that higher minimum temperature was beneficial for maize, rice and soybean yields, whereas increased temperature reduced wheat yield. Higher solar radiation in the pre-flowering phase was beneficial for maize yield, in the post-flowering phase for wheat yield, whereas higher solar radiation in the flowering phase reduced rice yield. Increased aridity in the pre-flowering and flowering phases severely reduced maize yield, higher aridity in the flowering and post-flowering phases reduced rice yield, and aridity in all growth phases reduced soybean and wheat yields. Higher HDD in all growth phases reduced maize and soybean yield and HDD in the pre-flowering phase reduced rice yield. Such effects suggest that projected future climate change may have marked effects on crop yield through effects of several climatic variables, calling for adaptation measures such as breeding and changes in crop, soil and agricultural water management.  
  Address 2016-09-30  
  Corporate Author Thesis  
  Publisher Place of Publication Editor  
  Language (up) English Summary Language Original Title  
  Series Editor Series Title Abbreviated Series Title  
  Series Volume Series Issue Edition  
  ISSN 0021-8596 ISBN Medium Article  
  Area Expedition Conference  
  Notes CropM Approved no  
  Call Number MA @ admin @ Serial 4782  
Permanent link to this record
Select All    Deselect All
 |   | 
Details
   print

Save Citations:
Export Records: