|
|
Kersebaum, C., Kollas, C., Bindi, M., Nendel, C., Ferrise, R., Moriondo, M., et al. (2014). Modelling complex crop rotations and management across sites in Europe with an ensemble of models..
|
|
|
|
Leogrande, R., Lopedota, O., Vitti, C., Ventrella, D., & Montemurro, F. (2016). Saline water and municipal solid waste compost application on tomato crop: Effects on plant and soil. Journal of Plant Nutrition, 39(4), 491–501.
Abstract: A field experiment was conducted in Southern Italy to evaluate the effects of different water quality and fertilizers on yield performance of tomato crop. In mineral nitrogen (N) fertilizer and irrigation with fresh water (Electrical Conductivity, EC, = 0.9 dS m⁻¹) (FWF); mineral N fertilizer and irrigation with saline water (EC = 6.0 dS m⁻¹) (SWF); municipal solid waste (MSW) compost and irrigation with fresh water (EC = 0.9 dS m⁻¹) (FWC); MSW compost and irrigation with saline water (EC = 6.0 dS m⁻¹) (SWC). At harvest, weight and number of fruits and refractometric index (°Brix) were measured, total and marketable yield and dry matter of fruit were calculated. The results indicated that MSW compost, applied as amendment, could substitute the mineral fertilizer. In fact, in the treatments based on compost application, the tomato average marketable yield increased by 9% compared with treatments with mineral fertilizer. The marketable yield in the SWF and SWC treatments (with an average soil EC in two years to about 3.5 dS m⁻¹) decreased respectively of 20 and 10%, in respect to fresh water treatments. At the end of the experiment, application of compost significantly decreased the sodium absorption rate (SAR) of SWC treatment in respect of SWF (−29.9%). Significant differences were observed among the four treatments both on soil solution cations either exchangeable cations. In particular compost application increased the calcium (Ca) and potassium (K) contents in saturated soil paste respect to the SWF ones (31.4% and 59.5%, respectively). At the same time saturated soil paste sodium (Na) in SWC treatment recorded a decrease of 17.4% compared to SWF.
|
|
|
|
Gobin, A., Kersebaum, K., Eitzinger, J., Trnka, M., Hlavinka, P., Takáč, J., et al. (2017). Variability in the Water Footprint of Arable Crop Production across European Regions. Water, 9(2), 93.
Abstract: Crop growth and yield are affected by water use during the season: the green water footprint (WF) accounts for rain water, the blue WF for irrigation and the grey WF for diluting agri-chemicals. We calibrated crop yield for FAO’s water balance model “Aquacrop” at field level. We collected weather, soil and crop inputs for 45 locations for the period 1992–2012. Calibrated model runs were conducted for wheat, barley, grain maize, oilseed rape, potato and sugar beet. The WF of cereals could be up to 20 times larger than the WF of tuber and root crops; the largest share was attributed to the green WF. The green and blue WF compared favourably with global benchmark values (R² = 0.64–0.80; d = 0.91–0.95). The variability in the WF of arable crops across different regions in Europe is mainly due to variability in crop yield (c̅v̅ = 45%) and to a lesser extent to variability in crop water use (c̅v̅ = 21%). The WF variability between countries (c̅v̅ = 14%) is lower than the variability between seasons (c̅v̅ = 22%) and between crops (c̅v̅ = 46%). Though modelled yields increased up to 50% under sprinkler irrigation, the water footprint still increased between 1% and 25%. Confronted with drainage and runoff, the grey WF tended to overestimate the contribution of nitrogen to the surface and groundwater. The results showed that the water footprint provides a measurable indicator that may support European water governance.
|
|
|
|
Kersebaum, K., Kroes, J., Gobin, A., Takáč, J., Hlavinka, P., Trnka, M., et al. (2016). Assessing uncertainties of water footprints using an ensemble of crop growth models on winter wheat. Water, 8(12), 571.
Abstract: Crop productivity and water consumption form the basis to calculate the water footprint (WF) of a specific crop. Under current climate conditions, calculated evapotranspiration is related to observed crop yields to calculate WF. The assessment of WF under future climate conditions requires the simulation of crop yields adding further uncertainty. To assess the uncertainty of model based assessments of WF, an ensemble of crop models was applied to data from five field experiments across Europe. Only limited data were provided for a rough calibration, which corresponds to a typical situation for regional assessments, where data availability is limited. Up to eight models were applied for wheat. The coefficient of variation for the simulated actual evapotranspiration between models was in the range of 13%–19%, which was higher than the inter-annual variability. Simulated yields showed a higher variability between models in the range of 17%–39%. Models responded differently to elevated CO2 in a FACE (Free-Air Carbon Dioxide Enrichment) experiment, especially regarding the reduction of water consumption. The variability of calculated WF between models was in the range of 15%–49%. Yield predictions contributed more to this variance than the estimation of water consumption. Transpiration accounts on average for 51%–68% of the total actual evapotranspiration.
|
|
|
|
Ventrella, D., Giglio, L., & Charfeddine, M. (2014). Climate change and nitrogen fertilization for winter durum wheat and tomato cultivated in Southern Italy..
|
|
