Search Results
Management-induced changes in soil organic carbon on global croplands
2022, Karstens, Kristine, Bodirsky, Benjamin Leon, Dietrich, Jan Philipp, Dondini, Marta, Heinke, Jens, Kuhnert, Matthias, Müller, Christoph, Rolinski, Susanne, Smith, Pete, Weindl, Isabelle, Lotze-Campen, Hermann, Popp, Alexander
Soil organic carbon (SOC), one of the largest terrestrial carbon (C) stocks on Earth, has been depleted by anthropogenic land cover change and agricultural management. However, the latter has so far not been well represented in global C stock assessments. While SOC models often simulate detailed biochemical processes that lead to the accumulation and decay of SOC, the management decisions driving these biophysical processes are still little investigated at the global scale. Here we develop a spatially explicit data set for agricultural management on cropland, considering crop production levels, residue returning rates, manure application, and the adoption of irrigation and tillage practices. We combine it with a reduced-complexity model based on the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) tier 2 method to create a half-degree resolution data set of SOC stocks and SOC stock changes for the first 30 cm of mineral soils. We estimate that, due to arable farming, soils have lost around 34.6 GtC relative to a counterfactual hypothetical natural state in 1975. Within the period 1975-2010, this SOC debt continued to expand by 5 GtC (0.14 GtCyr-1) to around 39.6 GtC. However, accounting for historical management led to 2.1 GtC fewer (0.06 GtCyr-1) emissions than under the assumption of constant management. We also find that management decisions have influenced the historical SOC trajectory most strongly by residue returning, indicating that SOC enhancement by biomass retention may be a promising negative emissions technique. The reduced-complexity SOC model may allow us to simulate management-induced SOC enhancement - also within computationally demanding integrated (land use) assessment modeling.
The GGCMI Phase 2 experiment: Global gridded crop model simulations under uniform changes in CO2, temperature, water, and nitrogen levels (protocol version 1.0)
2020, Franke, James A., Müller, Christoph, Elliott, Joshua, Ruane, Alex C., Jägermeyr, Jonas, Balkovic, Juraj, Ciais, Philippe, Dury, Marie, Falloon, Pete D., Folberth, Christian, François, Louis, Hank, Tobias, Hoffmann, Munir, Izaurralde, R. Cesar, Jacquemin, Ingrid, Jones, Curtis, Khabarov, Nikolay, Koch, Marian, Li, Michelle, Liu, Wenfeng, Olin, Stefan, Phillips, Meridel, Pugh, Thomas A. M., Reddy, Ashwan, Wang, Xuhui, Williams, Karina, Zabel, Florian, Moyer, Elisabeth J.
Concerns about food security under climate change motivate efforts to better understand future changes in crop yields. Process-based crop models, which represent plant physiological and soil processes, are necessary tools for this purpose since they allow representing future climate and management conditions not sampled in the historical record and new locations to which cultivation may shift. However, process-based crop models differ in many critical details, and their responses to different interacting factors remain only poorly understood. The Global Gridded Crop Model Intercomparison (GGCMI) Phase 2 experiment, an activity of the Agricultural Model Intercomparison and Improvement Project (AgMIP), is designed to provide a systematic parameter sweep focused on climate change factors and their interaction with overall soil fertility, to allow both evaluating model behavior and emulating model responses in impact assessment tools. In this paper we describe the GGCMI Phase 2 experimental protocol and its simulation data archive. A total of 12 crop models simulate five crops with systematic uniform perturbations of historical climate, varying CO2, temperature, water supply, and applied nitrogen (“CTWN”) for rainfed and irrigated agriculture, and a second set of simulations represents a type of adaptation by allowing the adjustment of growing season length. We present some crop yield results to illustrate general characteristics of the simulations and potential uses of the GGCMI Phase 2 archive. For example, in cases without adaptation, modeled yields show robust decreases to warmer temperatures in almost all regions, with a nonlinear dependence that means yields in warmer baseline locations have greater temperature sensitivity. Inter-model uncertainty is qualitatively similar across all the four input dimensions but is largest in high-latitude regions where crops may be grown in the future.
Global cotton production under climate change – Implications for yield and water consumption
2021, Jans, Yvonne, von Bloh, Werner, Schaphoff, Sibyll, Müller, Christoph
Being an extensively produced natural fiber on earth, cotton is of importance for economies. Although the plant is broadly adapted to varying environments, the growth of and irrigation water demand on cotton may be challenged by future climate change. To study the impacts of climate change on cotton productivity in different regions across the world and the irrigation water requirements related to it, we use the process-based, spatially detailed biosphere and hydrology model LPJmL (Lund Potsdam Jena managed land). We find our modeled cotton yield levels in good agreement with reported values and simulated water consumption of cotton production similar to published estimates. Following the Inter-Sectoral Impact Model Intercomparison Project (ISIMIP) protocol, we employ an ensemble of five general circulation models under four representative concentration pathways (RCPs) for the 2011 2099 period to simulate future cotton yields. We find that irrigated cotton production does not suffer from climate change if CO2 effects are considered, whereas rainfed production is more sensitive to varying climate conditions. Considering the overall effect of a changing climate and CO2 fertilization, cotton production on current cropland steadily increases for most of the RCPs. Starting from _ 65 million tonnes in 2010, cotton production for RCP4.5 and RCP6.0 equates to 83 and 92 million tonnes at the end of the century, respectively. Under RCP8.5, simulated global cotton production rises by more than 50% by 2099. Taking only climate change into account, projected cotton production considerably shrinks in most scenarios, by up to one-Third or 43 million tonnes under RCP8.5. The simulation of future virtual water content (VWC) of cotton grown under elevated CO2 results for all scenarios in less VWC compared to ambient CO2 conditions. Under RCP6.0 and RCP8.5, VWC is notably decreased by more than 2000m3 t1 in areas where cotton is produced under purely rainfed conditions. By 2040, the average global VWC for cotton declines in all scenarios from currently 3300 to 3000m3 t1, and reduction continues by up to 30% in 2100 under RCP8.5. While the VWC decreases by the CO2 effect, elevated temperature acts in the opposite direction. Ignoring beneficial CO2 effects, global VWC of cotton would increase for all RCPs except RCP2.6, reaching more than 5000m3 t1 by the end of the simulation period under RCP8.5. Given the economic relevance of cotton production, climate change poses an additional stress and deserves special attention. Changes in VWC and water demands for cotton production are of special importance, as cotton production is known for its intense water consumption. The implications of climate impacts on cotton production on the one hand and the impact of cotton production on water resources on the other hand illustrate the need to assess how future climate change may affect cotton production and its resource requirements. Our results should be regarded as optimistic, because of high uncertainty with respect to CO2 fertilization and the lack of implementing processes of boll abscission under heat stress. Still, the inclusion of cotton in LPJmL allows for various large-scale studies to assess impacts of climate change on hydrological factors and the implications for agricultural production and carbon sequestration. © 2021 BMJ Publishing Group. All rights reserved.
Diverging importance of drought stress for maize and winter wheat in Europe
2018, Webber, Heidi, Ewert, Frank, Olesen, Jørgen E., Müller, Christoph, Fronzek, Stefan, Ruane, Alex C., Bourgault, Maryse, Martre, Pierre, Ababaei, Behnam, Bindi, Marco, Ferrise, Roberto, Finger, Robert, Fodor, Nándor, Gabaldón-Leal, Clara, Gaiser, Thomas, Jabloun, Mohamed, Kersebaum, Kurt-Christian, Lizaso, Jon I., Lorite, Ignacio J., Manceau, Loic, Moriondo, Marco, Nendel, Claas, Rodríguez, Alfredo, Ruiz-Ramos, Margarita, Semenov, Mikhail A., Siebert, Stefan, Stella, Tommaso, Stratonovitch, Pierre, Trombi, Giacomo, Wallach, Daniel
Understanding the drivers of yield levels under climate change is required to support adaptation planning and respond to changing production risks. This study uses an ensemble of crop models applied on a spatial grid to quantify the contributions of various climatic drivers to past yield variability in grain maize and winter wheat of European cropping systems (1984–2009) and drivers of climate change impacts to 2050. Results reveal that for the current genotypes and mix of irrigated and rainfed production, climate change would lead to yield losses for grain maize and gains for winter wheat. Across Europe, on average heat stress does not increase for either crop in rainfed systems, while drought stress intensifies for maize only. In low-yielding years, drought stress persists as the main driver of losses for both crops, with elevated CO2 offering no yield benefit in these years.
Classifying multi-model wheat yield impact response surfaces showing sensitivity to temperature and precipitation change
2017, Fronzek, Stefan, Pirttioja, Nina, Carter, Timothy R., Bindi, Marco, Hoffmann, Holger, Palosuo, Taru, Ruiz-Ramos, Margarita, Tao, Fulu, Trnka, Miroslav, Acutis, Marco, Asseng, Senthold, Baranowski, Piotr, Basso, Bruno, Bodin, Per, Buis, Samuel, Cammarano, Davide, Deligios, Paola, Destain, Marie-France, Dumont, Benjamin, Ewert, Frank, Ferrise, Roberto, François, Louis, Gaiser, Thomas, Hlavinka, Petr, Jacquemin, Ingrid, Kersebaum, Kurt Christian, Kollas, Chris, Krzyszczak, Jaromir, Lorite, Ignacio J., Minet, Julien, Minguez, M. Ines, Montesino, Manuel, Moriondo, Marco, Müller, Christoph, Nendel, Claas, Öztürk, Isik, Perego, Alessia, Rodríguez, Alfredo, Ruane, Alex C., Ruget, Françoise, Sanna, Mattia, Semenov, Mikhail A., Slawinski, Cezary, Stratonovitch, Pierre, Supit, Iwan, Waha, Katharina, Wang, Enli, Wu, Lianhai, Zhao, Zhigan, Rötter, Reimund P.
Crop growth simulation models can differ greatly in their treatment of key processes and hence in their response to environmental conditions. Here, we used an ensemble of 26 process-based wheat models applied at sites across a European transect to compare their sensitivity to changes in temperature (−2 to +9°C) and precipitation (−50 to +50%). Model results were analysed by plotting them as impact response surfaces (IRSs), classifying the IRS patterns of individual model simulations, describing these classes and analysing factors that may explain the major differences in model responses. The model ensemble was used to simulate yields of winter and spring wheat at four sites in Finland, Germany and Spain. Results were plotted as IRSs that show changes in yields relative to the baseline with respect to temperature and precipitation. IRSs of 30-year means and selected extreme years were classified using two approaches describing their pattern. The expert diagnostic approach (EDA) combines two aspects of IRS patterns: location of the maximum yield (nine classes) and strength of the yield response with respect to climate (four classes), resulting in a total of 36 combined classes defined using criteria pre-specified by experts. The statistical diagnostic approach (SDA) groups IRSs by comparing their pattern and magnitude, without attempting to interpret these features. It applies a hierarchical clustering method, grouping response patterns using a distance metric that combines the spatial correlation and Euclidian distance between IRS pairs. The two approaches were used to investigate whether different patterns of yield response could be related to different properties of the crop models, specifically their genealogy, calibration and process description. Although no single model property across a large model ensemble was found to explain the integrated yield response to temperature and precipitation perturbations, the application of the EDA and SDA approaches revealed their capability to distinguish: (i) stronger yield responses to precipitation for winter wheat than spring wheat; (ii) differing strengths of response to climate changes for years with anomalous weather conditions compared to period-average conditions; (iii) the influence of site conditions on yield patterns; (iv) similarities in IRS patterns among models with related genealogy; (v) similarities in IRS patterns for models with simpler process descriptions of root growth and water uptake compared to those with more complex descriptions; and (vi) a closer correspondence of IRS patterns in models using partitioning schemes to represent yield formation than in those using a harvest index. Such results can inform future crop modelling studies that seek to exploit the diversity of multi-model ensembles, by distinguishing ensemble members that span a wide range of responses as well as those that display implausible behaviour or strong mutual similarities.
Simulating the effect of tillage practices with the global ecosystem model LPJmL (version 5.0-tillage)
2019, Lutz, Femke, Herzfeld, Tobias, Heinke, Jens, Rolinski, Susanne, Schaphoff, Sibyll, von Bloh, Werner, Stoorvogel, Jetse J., Müller, Christoph
The effects of tillage on soil properties, crop productivity, and global greenhouse gas emissions have been discussed in the last decades. Global ecosystem models have limited capacity to simulate the various effects of tillage. With respect to the decomposition of soil organic matter, they either assume a constant increase due to tillage or they ignore the effects of tillage. Hence, they do not allow for analysing the effects of tillage and cannot evaluate, for example, reduced tillage or no tillage (referred to here as “no-till”) practises as mitigation practices for climate change. In this paper, we describe the implementation of tillage-related practices in the global ecosystem model LPJmL. The extended model is evaluated against reported differences between tillage and no-till management on several soil properties. To this end, simulation results are compared with published meta-analyses on tillage effects. In general, the model is able to reproduce observed tillage effects on global, as well as regional, patterns of carbon and water fluxes. However, modelled N fluxes deviate from the literature values and need further study. The addition of the tillage module to LPJmL5 opens up opportunities to assess the impact of agricultural soil management practices under different scenarios with implications for agricultural productivity, carbon sequestration, greenhouse gas emissions, and other environmental indicators.
State-of-the-art global models underestimate impacts from climate extremes
2019, Schewe, Jacob, Gosling, Simon N., Reyer, Christopher, Zhao, Fang, Ciais, Philippe, Elliott, Joshua, Francois, Louis, Huber, Veronika, Lotze, Heike K., Seneviratne, Sonia I., van Vliet, Michelle T. H., Vautard, Robert, Wada, Yoshihide, Breuer, Lutz, Büchner, Matthias, Carozza, David A., Chang, Jinfeng, Coll, Marta, Deryng, Delphine, de Wit, Allard, Eddy, Tyler D., Folberth, Christian, Frieler, Katja, Friend, Andrew D., Gerten, Dieter, Gudmundsson, Lukas, Hanasaki, Naota, Ito, Akihiko, Khabarov, Nikolay, Kim, Hyungjun, Lawrence, Peter, Morfopoulos, Catherine, Müller, Christoph, Müller Schmied, Hannes, Orth, René, Ostberg, Sebastian, Pokhrel, Yadu, Pugh, Thomas A. M., Sakurai, Gen, Satoh, Yusuke, Schmid, Erwin, Stacke, Tobias, Steenbeek, Jeroen, Steinkamp, Jörg, Tang, Qiuhong, Tian, Hanqin, Tittensor, Derek P., Volkholz, Jan, Wang, Xuhui, Warszawski, Lila
Global impact models represent process-level understanding of how natural and human systems may be affected by climate change. Their projections are used in integrated assessments of climate change. Here we test, for the first time, systematically across many important systems, how well such impact models capture the impacts of extreme climate conditions. Using the 2003 European heat wave and drought as a historical analogue for comparable events in the future, we find that a majority of models underestimate the extremeness of impacts in important sectors such as agriculture, terrestrial ecosystems, and heat-related human mortality, while impacts on water resources and hydropower are overestimated in some river basins; and the spread across models is often large. This has important implications for economic assessments of climate change impacts that rely on these models. It also means that societal risks from future extreme events may be greater than previously thought.
Climate change impacts on European arable crop yields: Sensitivity to assumptions about rotations and residue management
2022, Faye, Babacar, Webber, Heidi, Gaiser, Thomas, Müller, Christoph, Zhang, Yinan, Stella, Tommaso, Latka, Catharina, Reckling, Moritz, Heckelei, Thomas, Helming, Katharina, Ewert, Frank
Most large scale studies assessing climate change impacts on crops are performed with simulations of single crops and with annual re-initialization of the initial soil conditions. This is in contrast to the reality that crops are grown in rotations, often with sizable proportion of the preceding crop residue to be left in the fields and varying soil initial conditions from year to year. In this study, the sensitivity of climate change impacts on crop yield and soil organic carbon to assumptions about annual model re-initialization, specification of crop rotations and the amount of residue retained in fields was assessed for seven main crops across Europe. Simulations were conducted for a scenario period 2040–2065 relative to a baseline from 1980 to 2005 using the SIMPLACE1 framework. Results indicated across Europe positive climate change impacts on yield for C3 crops and negative impacts for maize. The consideration of simulating rotations did not have a benefit on yield variability but on relative yield change in response to climate change which slightly increased for C3 crops and decreased for C4 crops when rotation was considered. Soil organic carbon decreased under climate change in both simulations assuming a continuous monocrop and plausible rotations by between 1% and 2% depending on the residue management strategy.
Potential yield simulated by global gridded crop models: using a process-based emulator to explain their differences
2021-3-23, Ringeval, Bruno, Müller, Christoph, Pugh, Thomas A. M., Mueller, Nathaniel D., Ciais, Philippe, Folberth, Christian, Liu, Wenfeng, Debaeke, Philippe, Pellerin, Sylvain
How global gridded crop models (GGCMs) differ in their simulation of potential yield and reasons for those differences have never been assessed. The GGCM Intercomparison (GGCMI) offers a good framework for this assessment. Here, we built an emulator (called SMM for simple mechanistic model) of GGCMs based on generic and simplified formalism. The SMM equations describe crop phenology by a sum of growing degree days, canopy radiation absorption by the Beer–Lambert law, and its conversion into aboveground biomass by a radiation use efficiency (RUE). We fitted the parameters of this emulator against gridded aboveground maize biomass at the end of the growing season simulated by eight different GGCMs in a given year (2000). Our assumption is that the simple set of equations of SMM, after calibration, could reproduce the response of most GGCMs so that differences between GGCMs can be attributed to the parameters related to processes captured by the emulator. Despite huge differences between GGCMs, we show that if we fit both a parameter describing the thermal requirement for leaf emergence by adjusting its value to each grid-point in space, as done by GGCM modellers following the GGCMI protocol, and a GGCM-dependent globally uniform RUE, then the simple set of equations of the SMM emulator is sufficient to reproduce the spatial distribution of the original aboveground biomass simulated by most GGCMs. The grain filling is simulated in SMM by considering a fixed-in-time fraction of net primary productivity allocated to the grains (frac) once a threshold in leaves number (nthresh) is reached. Once calibrated, these two parameters allow for the capture of the relationship between potential yield and final aboveground biomass of each GGCM. It is particularly important as the divergence among GGCMs is larger for yield than for aboveground biomass. Thus, we showed that the divergence between GGCMs can be summarized by the differences in a few parameters. Our simple but mechanistic model could also be an interesting tool to test new developments in order to improve the simulation of potential yield at the global scale.
Global crop yields can be lifted by timely adaptation of growing periods to climate change
2022, Minoli, Sara, Jägermeyr, Jonas, Asseng, Senthold, Urfels, Anton, Müller, Christoph
Adaptive management of crop growing periods by adjusting sowing dates and cultivars is one of the central aspects of crop production systems, tightly connected to local climate. However, it is so far underrepresented in crop-model based assessments of yields under climate change. In this study, we integrate models of farmers’ decision making with biophysical crop modeling at the global scale to simulate crop calendars adaptation and its effect on crop yields of maize, rice, sorghum, soybean and wheat. We simulate crop growing periods and yields (1986-2099) under counterfactual management scenarios assuming no adaptation, timely adaptation or delayed adaptation of sowing dates and cultivars. We then compare the counterfactual growing periods and corresponding yields at the end of the century (2080-2099). We find that (i) with adaptation, temperature-driven sowing dates (typical at latitudes >30°N-S) will have larger shifts than precipitation-driven sowing dates (at latitudes <30°N-S); (ii) later-maturing cultivars will be needed, particularly at higher latitudes; (iii) timely adaptation of growing periods would increase actual crop yields by ~12%, reducing climate change negative impacts and enhancing the positive CO2 fertilization effect. Despite remaining uncertainties, crop growing periods adaptation require consideration in climate change impact assessments.
- «
- 1 (current)
- 2
- 3
- »