|
|
Webber, H., Gaiser, T., Oomen, R., Teixeira, E., Zhao, G., Wallach, D., et al. (2016). Uncertainty in future irrigation water demand and risk of crop failure for maize in Europe. Environ. Res. Lett., .
Abstract: While crop models are widely used to assess the change in crop productivity with climate change, their skill in assessing irrigation water demand or the risk of crop failure in large area impact assessments is relatively unknown. The objective of this study is to investigate which aspects of modeling crop water use (reference crop evapotranspiration (ET0), soil water extraction, soil evaporation, soil water balance and root growth) contributes most to the variability in estimates of maize crop water use and the risk of crop failure, and demonstrate the resulting uncertainty in a climate change impact study for Europe. The SIMPLACE crop modeling framework was used to couple the LINTUL5 crop model in factorial combinations of 2-3 different approaches for simulating the 5 aspects of crop water use, resulting in 51 modeling approaches. Using experiments in France and New Zeland, analysis of total sensitivity revealed that ET0 explained the most variability in both irrigated maize water use and rainfed grain yield levels, with soil evaporation also imporatant in the French experiment. In the European impact study, net irrigation requirement differed by 36% between the Penman and Hargreaves ET0 methods in the baseline period. Average EU grain yields were similar between models, but differences approached 1-2 tonnes in parts of France and Southern Europe. EU wide esimates of crop failure in the historical period ranged between 5.4 years for Priestley-Taylor to every 7.9 years for the Penman ET0 methods. While the uncertainty in absolute values between models was significant, estimates of relative changes were similar between models, confirming the utility of crop models in assessing climate change impacts. If ET0 estimates in crop models can be improved, through the use of appropriate methods, uncertainty in irrigation water demand as well as in yield estimates under drought can be reduced.
|
|
|
|
Wallach, D., Nissanka, S. P., Karunaratne, A. S., Weerakoon, W. M. W., Thorburn, P. J., Boote, K. J., et al. (2016). Accounting for both parameter and model structure uncertainty in crop model predictions of phenology: A case study on rice. European Journal of Agronomy, .
Abstract: We consider predictions of the impact of climate warming on rice development times in Sri Lanka. The major emphasis is on the uncertainty of the predictions, and in particular on the estimation of mean squared error of prediction. Three contributions to mean squared error are considered. The first is parameter uncertainty that results from model calibration. To take proper account of the complex data structure, generalized least squares is used to estimate the parameters and the variance-covariance matrix of the parameter estimators. The second contribution is model structure uncertainty, which we estimate using two different models. An ANOVA analysis is used to separate the contributions of parameter and model uncertainty to mean squared error. The third contribution is model error, which is estimated using hindcasts. Mean squared error of prediction of time from emergence to maturity, for baseline +2 °C, is estimated as 108 days2, with model error contributing 86 days2, followed by model structure uncertainty which contributes 15 days2 and parameter uncertainty which contributes 7 days2. We also show how prediction uncertainty is reduced if prediction concerns development time averaged over years, or the difference in development time between baseline and warmer temperatures.
|
|
|
|
Tomozeiu, R., Pasqui, M., & Quaresima, S. (2017). Future changes of air temperature over Italian agricultural areas: a statistical downscaling technique applied to 2021–2050 and 2071–2100 periods. Meteorology and Atmospheric Physics, in press.
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.
|
|
|
|
Hoffmann, M. P., Haakana, M., Asseng, S., Höhn, J. G., Palosuo, T., Ruiz-Ramos, M., et al. (2017). How does inter-annual variability of attainable yield affect the magnitude of yield gaps for wheat and maize? An analysis at ten sites. Agric. Syst., , in press.
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.
|
|
