2 results
A simulation study for assessing yield optimization and potential for water reduction for summer-sown maize under different climate change scenarios
- M. A. IQBAL, J. EITZINGER, H. FORMAYER, A. HASSAN, L. K. HENG
-
- Journal:
- The Journal of Agricultural Science / Volume 149 / Issue 2 / April 2011
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 14 January 2011, pp. 129-143
-
- Article
- Export citation
-
The objective of the present paper was to study the impact of climate change on grain yield, water balance, crop water productivity (CWP) and water requirements for the summer-sown maize in Faisalabad, Pakistan. Climate-change scenarios (Special Report on Emission Scenarios (SRES) A1B, A2 and B1) were derived from the general circulation model ECHAM 5 and the crop model CERES-Maize was used to simulate impacts of the applied climate scenarios. Calibration and validation of the crop models were carried out for the summer-sown maize in 2007 and for the spring-sown maize in 2008. Three predefined reduced irrigation scenarios were compared to traditional irrigation practices for the summer-sown maize. Under the current conditions, scenario S1 (one irrigation event skipped at the vegetative stage) showed a higher simulated yield than scenario S2 (one irrigation event skipped at the grain-filling stage) due to higher water drainage and nitrogen (N) leaching rates in scenario S2. Scenario S3 (irrigation events skipped at both crop establishment and the grain-filling stage) showed significantly higher grain yield because it had the lowest drainage and N leaching rates. In this irrigation scenario, 60 mm of water were saved compared to the other two scenarios, and much more water was saved compared to the traditional local regime.
In the predicted climatic scenarios and with reduced irrigation, the simulated maize yields and crop water productivities were affected differently. For the period from 2036 to 2065, a more significant yield decrease was shown in all emission and irrigation scenarios. A yield decrease was simulated by both, including and not including the direct effect of elevated atmospheric CO2 concentrations on photosynthesis. However, the simulated direct effect of elevated CO2 was to produce higher yield and CWP in all scenarios. The highest grain yields and crop water productivities were achieved in the reduced irrigation scenario S3 for all emission scenarios and climatic periods for the same reason as under the current conditions (N leaching). However, the yield differences between the climate scenarios were mainly due to the shortening of the simulated growing period. This was caused by increased temperatures compared to current conditions. A shortened growing cycle reduced the potential time for biomass accumulation and in the present case it was not balanced by the CO2 fertilizing effect (without a potential change in maize cultivars).
By simulating optimum yields (where automatic irrigation is determined by the model to receive optimum yield), under the current conditions it was found that 285 mm of irrigation would ensure the highest grain yield and CWP (30 mm more than under irrigation scenario S3). In this case, actual evapotranspiration reached 373 mm and less deep drainage and N leaching occurred. In the future climate scenarios, optimum yields and irrigation demands diminished depending on the emission scenario, but CWP increased slightly.
The present simulation study shows a clear decreasing yield trend for autumn maize under a warm climate for each type of (unchanged) irrigation management due to the shortening of the growing period. However, in the current climate, as well as in the future climate scenarios, maize yield levels could be improved by optimized (and reduced) irrigation compared to traditional irrigation due to reduced N leaching. Even in the scenario with the highest warming trend (A1B emission scenario for the period 2036–65), the current yield levels could be kept or even improved.
Is rainfed crop production in central Europe at risk? Using a regional climate model to produce high resolution agroclimatic information for decision makers
- M. TRNKA, J. EITZINGER, M. DUBROVSKÝ, D. SEMERÁDOVÁ, P. ŠTĚPÁNEK, P. HLAVINKA, J. BALEK, P. SKALÁK, A. FARDA, H. FORMAYER, Z. ŽALUD
-
- Journal:
- The Journal of Agricultural Science / Volume 148 / Issue 6 / December 2010
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 16 August 2010, pp. 639-656
-
- Article
-
- You have access Access
- HTML
- Export citation
-
The reality of climate change has rarely been questioned in Europe in the last few years as a consensus has emerged amongst a wide range of national to local environmental and resource policy makers and stakeholders that climate change has been sufficiently demonstrated in a number of sectors. A number of site-based studies evaluating change of attainable yields of various crops have been conducted in Central Europe, but studies that evaluate agroclimatic potential across more countries in the region are rare. Therefore, the main aim of the present study was to develop and test a technique for a comprehensive evaluation of agroclimatic conditions under expected climate conditions over all of Central Europe with a high spatial resolution in order to answer the question posed in the title of the paper ‘Is rainfed crop production in central Europe at risk?’ The domain covers the entire area of Central Europe between latitudes 45° and 51·5°N and longitudes 8° and 27°E, including at least part of the territories of Austria, the Czech Republic, Germany, Hungary, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, Switzerland and Ukraine. The study is based on a range of agroclimatic indices that are designed to capture complex relations existing between climate and crops (their development and/or production) as well as the agrosystems as a whole. They provide information about various aspects of crop production, but they are not meant to compete with other and sometimes more suitable tools (e.g. process-based crop models, soil workability models, etc.). Instead, the selected indices can be seen as complementary to crop modelling tools that describe aspects not fully addressed or covered by crop models for an overall assessment of crop production conditions. The set of indices includes: sum of effective global radiation, number of effective growing days, Huglin index, water balance during the period from April to June (AMJ) and during the summer (JJA), proportion of days suitable for harvesting of field crops in June and July, and proportion of days suitable for sowing in early spring as well as during the autumn. The study concluded that while the uncertainties about future climate change impacts remain, the increase in the mean production potential of the domain as a whole (expressed in terms of effective global radiation and number of effective growing days) is likely a result of climate change, while inter-annual yield variability and risk may also increase. However, this is not true for the Pannonian (the lowlands between the Alps, the Carpathian Mountains and the Dinaric Alps) and Mediterranean parts of the domain, where increases in the water deficit will further limit rainfed agriculture but will probably lead to an increase in irrigation agriculture if local water resources are dwindling. Increases in the severity of the 20-year drought deficit and more substantial water deficits during the critical part of the growing season are very likely over the central and western part of the domain. Similarly, the inter-annual variability of water balance is likely to increase over the domain. There is also a chance of conditions for sowing during spring deteriorating due to unfavourable weather, which might increase the preference given to winter crops. This is already likely due to their ability to withstand spring drought stress events. Harvesting conditions in June (when harvest of some crops might take place in the future) are not improving beyond the present level, making the planning of the effective harvest time more challenging. Based on the evidence provided by the present study, it could be concluded that rainfed agriculture might indeed face more climate-related risks, but the overall conditions will probably allow for acceptable yield levels in most seasons. However, the evidence also suggests that the risk of extremely unfavourable years, resulting in poor economic returns, is likely to increase.
![](/core/cambridge-core/public/images/lazy-loader.gif)