Abstract: The need to answer new scientific questions can be satisfied by an increased knowledge of physiological mechanisms which, in turn, can be used for improving the accuracy of simulations of process-based models. In this context, this report highlights areas that need to be further improved to facilitate the operational use of simulation models. It describes missing approaches within simulation models which, if implemented, would likely improve the representation of the dynamics of processes underlying different compartments of crop and grassland systems (e.g. plant growth and development, yield production, GHG emissions), as well as of the livestock production systems.  The following rationale has been used in the organization of this report. We first briefly introduced the need to improve the reliability of existing models. Then, we indicated climate change and its influence on the global carbon balance as the main issue to be addressed by existing crop and grassland (section 2), and livestock (section 3) models. In section 2, among the major aspects that if implemented may reduce the uncertainty inherent to model outputs, we suggested: i) quantifying the effects of climate extremes on biological systems; ii) modelling of multi-species sward; iii) coupling of pest and disease sub-models; iv) improvement of the carry-over effect. In section 3, as the most important aspects to consider in livestock models we indicated: i) impacts and dynamics of pathogens and disease; ii) heat stress effects on livestock; iii) effects on grassland productivity and nutritional values; iv) improvement of GHG emissions dynamics.  In Section 4, remarks are made concerning the need to implement the suggested aspects into the existing models.

Abstract: In estimating responses of crops to future climate realisations, it is necessary to understand and differentiate between the sources of uncertainty in climate models and how these lead to errors in estimating the past climate and biases in future projections, and how these affect crop model estimates. This paper investigates the complexities in using climate model projections representing different spatial scales within climate change impacts and adaptation studies. This is illustrated by simulating spring barley with three crop models run using site-specific observed, original (50•50 km) and bias corrected downscaled (site-specific) hindcast (1960-1990) weather data from the HadRM3 Regional Climate Model (RCM). Original and bias corrected downscaled weather data were evaluated against the observed data. The comparisons made between the crop models were in the light of lessons learned from this data evaluation. Though the bias correction downscaling method improved the match between observed and hindcast data, this did not always translate into better matching of crop models estimates. At four sites the original HadRM3 data produced near identical mean simulated yield values as from the observed weather data, despite differences in the weather data, giving a situation of ‘right results for the wrong reasons’. This was likely due to compensating errors in the input weather data and non-linearity in crop models processes, making interpretation of results problematic. Overall, bias correction downscaling improved the quality of simulated outputs. Understanding how biases in climate data manifest themselves in crop models gives greater confidence in the utility of the estimates produced using downscaled future climate projections. The results indicate implications on how future projections of climate change impacts are interpreted. Fundamentally, considerable care is required in determining the impact weather data sources have in climate change impact and adaptation studies, whether from individual models or ensembles. No Label