M. Ruiz-Ramos

Comparing correction methods of RCM outputs for improving crop impact projections in the Iberian Peninsula for 21st century

Assessment of climate change impacts on crops in regions of complex orography such as the Iberian Peninsula (IP) requires climate model output which is able to describe accurately the observed climate. The high resolution of output provided by Regional Climate Models (RCMs) is expected to be a suitable tool to describe regional and local climatic features, although their simulation results may still present biases. For these reasons, we compared several post-processing methods to correct or reduce the biases of RCM simulations from the ENSEMBLES project for the IP. The bias-corrected datasets were also evaluated in terms of their applicability and consequences in improving the results of a crop model to simulate maize growth and development at two IP locations, using this crop as a reference for summer cropping systems in the region. The use of bias-corrected climate runs improved crop phenology and yield simulation overall and reduced the inter-model variability and thus the uncertainty. The number of observational stations underlying each reference observational dataset used to correct the bias affected the correction performance. Although no single technique showed to be the best one, some methods proved to be more adequate for small initial biases, while others were useful when initial biases were so large as to prevent data application for impact studies. An initial evaluation of the climate data, the bias correction/reduction method and the consequences for impact assessment would be needed to design the most robust, reduced uncertainty ensemble for a specific combination of location, crop, and crop management.

Contribution of crop model structure, parameters and climate projections to uncertainty in climate change impact assessments

Climate change impact assessments are plagued with uncertainties from many sources, such as climate projections or the inadequacies in structure and parameters of the impact model. Previous studies tried to account for the uncertainty from one or two of these. Here, we developed a triple-ensemble probabilistic assessment using seven crop models, multiple sets of model parameters and eight contrasting climate projections together to comprehensively account for uncertainties from these three important sources. We demonstrated the approach in assessing climate change impact on barley growth and yield at Jokioinen, Finland in the Boreal climatic zone and Lleida, Spain in the Mediterranean climatic zone, for the 2050s. We further quantified and compared the contribution of crop model structure, crop model parameters and climate projections to the total variance of ensemble output using Analysis of Variance (ANOVA). Based on the triple-ensemble probabilistic assessment, the median of simulated yield change was -4% and +16%, and the probability of decreasing yield was 63% and 31% in the 2050s, at Jokioinen and Lleida, respectively, relative to 1981-2010. The contribution of crop model structure to the total variance of ensemble output was larger than that from downscaled climate projections and model parameters. The relative contribution of crop model parameters and downscaled climate projections to the total variance of ensemble output varied greatly among the seven crop models and between the two sites. The contribution of downscaled climate projections was on average larger than that of crop model parameters. This information on the uncertainty from different sources can be quite useful for model users to decide where to put the most effort when preparing or choosing models or parameters for impact analyses. We concluded that the triple-ensemble probabilistic approach that accounts for the uncertainties from multiple important sources provide more comprehensive information for quantifying uncertainties in climate change impact assessments as compared to the conventional approaches that are deterministic or only account for the uncertainties from one or two of the uncertainty sources.

Water Management and Climate Change in Semiarid Environments

Abstract Climate change will impact on Mediterranean agricultural systems. This impact will be especially relevant for agricultural water management, a key component in semiarid environments. An accurate characterization of the impacts of climate change is essential to develop strategies of adaptation and mitigation to increase the sustainability of Mediterranean agricultural systems. However, the identification of these impacts is not an easy task due to the high uncertainty associated with future climate conditions and consequent crop responses. Therefore this chapter evaluates different methodologies for the impact assessment of climate change on water management in agriculture. Considering the identification of these main impacts on water management, several adaptation and mitigation strategies currently considered or under evaluation in southern Spain have been carried out. Finally, approaches for extension of these adaptation and mitigation strategies are described.

Diverging importance of drought stress for maize and winter wheat in Europe

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.Drivers of crop yield variability require quantification, and historical records can help in improving understanding. Here, Webber et al. report that drought stress will remain a key driver of yield losses in wheat and maize across Europe, and benefits from CO2 will be limited in low-yielding years.

Assessing cover crop management under actual and climate change conditions

The termination date is recognized as a key management factor to enhance cover crops for multiple benefits and to avoid competition with the following cash crop. However, the optimum date depends on annual meteorological conditions, and climate variability induces uncertainty in a decision that needs to be taken every year. One of the most important cover crop benefits is reducing nitrate leaching, a major concern for irrigated agricultural systems and highly affected by the termination date. This study aimed to determine the effects of cover crops and their termination date on the water and N balances of an irrigated Mediterranean agroecosystem under present and future climate conditions. For that purpose, two field experiments were used for inverse calibration and validation of the WAVE model (Water and Agrochemicals in the soil and Vadose Environment), based on continuous soil water content data, soil nitrogen content and crop measurements. The calibrated and validated model was subsequently used in advanced scenario analysis under present and climate change conditions. Under present conditions, a late termination date increased cover crop biomass and subsequently soil water and N depletion. Hence, preemptive competition risk with the main crop was enhanced, but a reduction of nitrate leaching also occurred. The hypothetical planting date of the following cash crop was also an important tool to reduce preemptive competition. Under climate change conditions, the simulations showed that the termination date will be even more important to reduce preemptive competition and nitrate leaching.