| Home | << 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 >> [11–17] |
|
| Records | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Author | Tomozeiu, R.; Pasqui, M.; Quaresima, S. | ||||
| Title | Future changes of air temperature over Italian agricultural areas: a statistical downscaling technique applied to 2021–2050 and 2071–2100 periods | Type | Journal Article | ||
| Year | 2017 | Publication | Meteorology and Atmospheric Physics | Abbreviated Journal | Meteorology and Atmospheric Physics |
| Volume | in press | Issue | Pages | ||
| Keywords | |||||
| Abstract | Climate change scenarios of seasonal minimum and maximum temperature over different Italian agricultural areas, during the periods 2021–2050 and 2071–2100 against 1961–1990, are assessed. The areas are those selected in the framework of the Agroscenari project and are represented by: Padano–Veneta plain, Marche, Beneventano, Destra Sele, Oristano, Puglia and Sicilia, all areas of prominent agricultural vocation with excellence productions. A statistical downscaling technique applied to ENSEMBLES global climate simulations, emission scenario A1B, is used to achieve this objective. The statistical scheme consists of a multivariate regression based on Canonical Correlation Analysis. The scheme is constructed using large-scale fields derived from ECMWF reanalysis and seasonal mean minimum, maximum temperature derived from national observed daily gridded data that cover 1959–2008 period. Once the most skillful model has been selected for each season and variable, this is then applied to GCMs of ENSEMBLES runs. The statistical downscaling method developed reveals good skill over the case studies of the present work, underlying the possibility to apply the scheme over whole Italian peninsula. In addition, the results emphasize that the temperature at 850 hPa is the best predictor for surface air temperature. The future projections show that an increase could be expected to occur under A1B scenario conditions in all seasons, both in minimum and maximum temperatures. The projected increases are about 2 °C during 2021–2050 and between 2.5 and 4.5 °C during 2071–2100, respect to 1961–1990. The spatial distribution of warming is projected to be quite uniform over the territory to the end of the century, while some spatial differences are noted over 2021–2050 period. For example, the increase in minimum temperature is projected to be slightly higher in areas from northern and central part than those situated in the southern part of Italian peninsula, during 2021–2050 period. The peak of changes is projected to appear during summer season, for both minimum and maximum temperature. The probability density function tends to shift to warmer values during both periods, with increases more intense during summer and to the end of the century, when the lower tail is projected to shift up to 3 °C and the upper tail up to 6 °C. All these projected changes have important impacts on viticulture, intensive fruit and tomatoes, some of the main agricultural systems analyzed in the Agroscenari project. | ||||
| Address | |||||
| Corporate Author | Thesis | ||||
| Publisher | Place of Publication | Editor | |||
| Language | Summary Language | Original Title | |||
| Series Editor | Series Title | Abbreviated Series Title | |||
| Series Volume | Series Issue | Edition | |||
| ISSN | 0177-7971 | ISBN | Medium | ||
Area  |
CropM | Expedition | Conference | ||
| Notes | CropM, ft_macsur | Approved | no | ||
| Call Number | MA @ admin @ | Serial | 4970 | ||
| Permanent link to this record | |||||
| Author | Hoffmann, M.P.; Haakana, M.; Asseng, S.; Höhn, J.G.; Palosuo, T.; Ruiz-Ramos, M.; Fronzek, S.; Ewert, F.; Gaiser, T.; Kassie, B.T.; Paff, K.; Rezaei, E.E.; Rodríguez, A.; Semenov, M.; Srivastava, A.K.; Stratonovitch, P.; Tao, F.; Chen, Y.; Rötter, R.P. | ||||
| Title | How does inter-annual variability of attainable yield affect the magnitude of yield gaps for wheat and maize? An analysis at ten sites | Type | Journal Article | ||
| Year | 2017 | Publication | Agricultural Systems | Abbreviated Journal | Agric. Syst. |
| Volume | Issue | Pages | in press | ||
| Keywords | |||||
| Abstract | Highlights • The larger simulated attainable yield for a specific crop season, the larger the yield gap. • Average size of the yield gap is not affected by the inter-annual variability of attainable yield. • Technology levels (resource input and accessibility) determine average yield gap. • To reduce yield gaps in rainfed environments, farmers need to improve season-specific crop management. Abstract Provision of food security in the face of increasing global food demand requires narrowing of the gap between actual farmer’s yield and maximum attainable yield. So far, assessments of yield gaps have focused on average yield over 5–10 years, but yield gaps can vary substantially between crop seasons. In this study we hypothesized that climate-induced inter-annual yield variability and associated risk is a major barrier for farmers to invest, i.e. increase inputs to narrow the yield gap. We evaluated the importance of inter-annual attainable yield variability for the magnitude of the yield gap by utilizing data for wheat and maize at ten sites representing some major food production systems and a large range of climate and soil conditions across the world. Yield gaps were derived from the difference of simulated attainable yields and regional recorded farmer yields for 1981 to 2010. The size of the yield gap did not correlate with the amplitude of attainable yield variability at a site, but was rather associated with the level of available resources such as labor, fertilizer and plant protection inputs. For the sites in Africa, recorded yield reached only 20% of the attainable yield, while for European, Asian and North American sites it was 56–84%. Most sites showed that the higher the attainable yield of a specific season the larger was the yield gap. This significant relationship indicated that farmers were not able to take advantage of favorable seasonal weather conditions. To reduce yield gaps in the different environments, reliable seasonal weather forecasts would be required to allow farmers to manage each seasonal potential, i.e. overcoming season-specific yield limitations. | ||||
| Address | |||||
| Corporate Author | Thesis | ||||
| Publisher | Place of Publication | Editor | |||
| Language | Summary Language | Original Title | |||
| Series Editor | Series Title | Abbreviated Series Title | |||
| Series Volume | Series Issue | Edition | |||
| ISSN | 0308521x | ISBN | Medium | ||
| Area |
CropM | Expedition | Conference | ||
| Notes | CropM, ft_macsur | Approved | no | ||
| Call Number | MA @ admin @ | Serial | 4985 | ||
| Permanent link to this record | |||||
| Author | Challinor, A.J.; Müller, C.; Asseng, S.; Deva, C.; Nicklin, K.J.; Wallach, D.; Vanuytrecht, E.; Whitfield, S.; Ramirez-Villegas, J.; Koehler, A.-K. | ||||
| Title | Improving the use of crop models for risk assessment and climate change adaptation | Type | Journal Article | ||
| Year | 2017 | Publication | Agricultural Systems | Abbreviated Journal | Agric. Syst. |
| Volume | 159 | Issue | Pages | 296-306 | |
| Keywords | Crop model; Risk assessment; Climate change impacts; Adaptation; Climate models; Uncertainty | ||||
| Abstract | Highlights • 14 criteria for use of crop models in assessments of impacts, adaptation and risk • Working with stakeholders to identify timing of risks is key to risk assessments. • Multiple methods needed to critically assess the use of climate model output • Increasing transparency and inter-comparability needed in risk assessments Abstract Crop models are used for an increasingly broad range of applications, with a commensurate proliferation of methods. Careful framing of research questions and development of targeted and appropriate methods are therefore increasingly important. In conjunction with the other authors in this special issue, we have developed a set of criteria for use of crop models in assessments of impacts, adaptation and risk. Our analysis drew on the other papers in this special issue, and on our experience in the UK Climate Change Risk Assessment 2017 and the MACSUR, AgMIP and ISIMIP projects. The criteria were used to assess how improvements could be made to the framing of climate change risks, and to outline the good practice and new developments that are needed to improve risk assessment. Key areas of good practice include: i. the development, running and documentation of crop models, with attention given to issues of spatial scale and complexity; ii. the methods used to form crop-climate ensembles, which can be based on model skill and/or spread; iii. the methods used to assess adaptation, which need broadening to account for technological development and to reflect the full range options available. The analysis highlights the limitations of focussing only on projections of future impacts and adaptation options using pre-determined time slices. Whilst this long-standing approach may remain an essential component of risk assessments, we identify three further key components: 1. Working with stakeholders to identify the timing of risks. What are the key vulnerabilities of food systems and what does crop-climate modelling tell us about when those systems are at risk? 2. Use of multiple methods that critically assess the use of climate model output and avoid any presumption that analyses should begin and end with gridded output. 3. Increasing transparency and inter-comparability in risk assessments. Whilst studies frequently produce ranges that quantify uncertainty, the assumptions underlying these ranges are not always clear. We suggest that the contingency of results upon assumptions is made explicit via a common uncertainty reporting format; and/or that studies are assessed against a set of criteria, such as those presented in this paper. |
||||
| Address | |||||
| Corporate Author | Thesis | ||||
| Publisher | Place of Publication | Editor | |||
| Language | Summary Language | phase 2+ | Original Title | ||
| Series Editor | Series Title | Abbreviated Series Title | |||
| Series Volume | Series Issue | Edition | |||
| ISSN | 0308521x | ISBN | Medium | ||
| Area |
CropM | Expedition | Conference | ||
| Notes | CropM, ft_macsur | Approved | no | ||
| Call Number | MA @ admin @ | Serial | 5175 | ||
| 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. | ||||
| 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 | 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 | Klosterhalfen, A.; Herbst, M.; Weihermueller, L.; Graf, A.; Schmidt, M.; Stadler, A.; Schneider, K.; Subke, J.-A.; Huisman, J.A.; Vereecken, H. | ||||
| Title | Multi-site calibration and validation of a net ecosystem carbon exchange model for croplands | Type | Journal Article | ||
| Year | 2017 | Publication | Ecological Modelling | Abbreviated Journal | Ecol. Model. |
| Volume | 363 | Issue | Pages | 137-156 | |
| Keywords | AgroC; Soil respiration; Carbon balance; Winter wheat; Grassland; NEE; LOLIUM-PERENNE L; SOIL HETEROTROPHIC RESPIRATION; LAND-SURFACE MODELS; EDDY-COVARIANCE; WINTER-WHEAT; CARBOHYDRATE CONTENT; TURNOVER MODEL; ROTHC MODEL; ROOT RATIOS; CO2 EFFLUX | ||||
| Abstract | Croplands play an important role in the carbon budget of many regions. However, the estimation of their carbon balance remains difficult due to diversity and complexity of the processes involved. We report the coupling of a one-dimensional soil water, heat, and CO2 flux model (SOILCO2), a pool concept of soil carbon turnover (RothC), and a crop growth module (SUCROS) to predict the net ecosystem exchange (NEE) of carbon. The coupled model, further referred to as AgroC, was extended with routines for managed grassland as well as for root exudation and root decay. In a first step, the coupled model was applied to two winter wheat sites and one upland grassland site in Germany. The model was calibrated based on soil water content, soil temperature, biometric, and soil respiration measurements for each site, and validated in terms of hourly NEE measured with the eddy covariance technique. The overall model performance of AgroC was sufficient with a model efficiency above 0.78 and a correlation coefficient above 0.91 for NEE. In a second step, AgroC was optimized with eddy covariance NEE measurements to examine the effect of different objective functions, constraints, and data-transformations on estimated NEE. It was found that NEE showed a distinct sensitivity to the choice of objective function and the inclusion of soil respiration data in the optimization process. In particular, both positive and negative day- and nighttime fluxes were found to be sensitive to the selected optimization strategy. Additional consideration of soil respiration measurements improved the simulation of small positive fluxes remarkably. Even though the model performance of the selected optimization strategies did not diverge substantially, the resulting cumulative NEE over simulation time period differed substantially. Therefore, it is concluded that data transformations, definitions of objective functions, and data sources have to be considered cautiously when a terrestrial ecosystem model is used to determine NEE by means of eddy covariance measurements. (C) 2017 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. | ||||
| Address | 2017-11-09 | ||||
| Corporate Author | Thesis | ||||
| Publisher | Place of Publication | Editor | |||
| Language | English | Summary Language | Original Title | ||
| Series Editor | Series Title | Abbreviated Series Title | |||
| Series Volume | Series Issue | Edition | |||
| ISSN | 0304-3800 | ISBN | Medium | ||
| Area |
Expedition | Conference | |||
| Notes | CropM, ft_MACSUR | Approved | no | ||
| Call Number | MA @ admin @ | Serial | 5216 | ||
| Permanent link to this record | |||||