• Energy Research
• Open Access close

AbstractPotential consequences of climate change on crop production can be studied using mechanistic crop simulation models. While a broad variety of maize simulation models exist, it is not known whether different models diverge on grain yield responses to changes in climatic factors, or whether they agree in their general trends related to phenology, growth, and yield. With the goal of analyzing the sensitivity of simulated yields to changes in temperature and atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations [CO2], we present the largest maize crop model intercomparison to date, including 23 different models. These models were evaluated for four locations representing a wide range of maize production conditions in the world: Lusignan (France), Ames (USA), Rio Verde (Brazil) and Morogoro (Tanzania). While individual models differed considerably in absolute yield simulation at the four sites, an ensemble of a minimum number of models was able to simulate absolute yields accurately at the four sites even with low data for calibration, thus suggesting that using an ensemble of models has merit. Temperature increase had strong negative influence on modeled yield response of roughly −0.5 Mg ha−1 per °C. Doubling [CO2] from 360 to 720 μmol mol−1 increased grain yield by 7.5% on average across models and the sites. That would therefore make temperature the main factor altering maize yields at the end of this century. Furthermore, there was a large uncertainty in the yield response to [CO2] among models. Model responses to temperature and [CO2] did not differ whether models were simulated with low calibration information or, simulated with high level of calibration information.

Abstract A multi-model inter-comparison study was conducted to evaluate the performance of ten potato crop models to accurately predict potato yield in response to elevated CO2 (Ce) when calibrated with ambient CO2 data (Ca). Experimental data from seven open-top chambers (OTC) and free-air−CO2-enrichment (FACE) facilities across continental Europe were used. Model ensemble percent errors averaged over all datasets for simulated yields were 26.5 % for Ca and 27.2 % Ce data. Metrics such as Wilmott’s index of agreement (IA) and root mean square relative error (RMSRE) ranged broadly among individual models and locations, such that four of the ten models outperformed the median or mean of the ensemble for about half of the Ce datasets. These top performing models were representative of three different model structural groups, including radiation use efficiency, transpiration efficiency, or leaf-level based approaches. Relative response to an increase in CO2 was more accurately modeled than absolute yield responses when averaged across all locations, and within 3.3 kg ppm−1 (or 5%) of observed values. Specific targets in the model structure needed for improvement were not identified due to large and inconsistent variation in the accuracy of yield predictions across locations. However, models with the lowest calibration errors tended to be top performers for Ce predictions as well. Such results suggest calibration is at least as important as model structure. Where possible, modelers using potato models to estimate Ce responses should use Ce calibration data to improve confidence in such predictions.

Climate change is expected to severely affect cropping systems and food production in many parts of the world unless local adaptation can ameliorate these impacts. Ensembles of crop simulation models can be useful tools for assessing if proposed adaptation options are capable of achieving target yields, whilst also quantifying the share of uncertainty in the simulated crop impact resulting from the crop models themselves. Although some studies have analysed the influence of ensemble size on model outcomes, the effect of ensemble composition has not yet been properly appraised. Moreover, results and derived recommendations typically rely on averaged ensemble simulation results without accounting sufficiently for the spread of model outcomes. Therefore, we developed an Ensemble Outcome Agreement (EOA) index, which analyses the effect of changes in composition and size of a multi-model ensemble (MME) to evaluate the level of agreement between MME outcomes with respect to a given hypothesis (e.g. that adaptation measures result in positive crop responses). We analysed the recommendations of a previous study performed with an ensemble of 17 crop models and testing 54 adaptation options for rainfed winter wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) at Lleida (NE Spain) under perturbed conditions of temperature, precipitation and atmospheric CO2 concentration. Our results confirmed that most adaptations recommended in the previous study have a positive effect. However, we also showed that some options did not remain recommendable in specific conditions if different ensembles were considered. Using EOA, we were able to identify the adaptation options for which there is high confidence in their effectiveness at enhancing yields, even under severe climate perturbations. These include substituting spring wheat for winter wheat combined with earlier sowing dates and standard or longer duration cultivars, or introducing supplementary irrigation, the latter increasing EOA values in all cases. There is low confidence in recovering yields to baseline levels, although this target could be attained for some adaptation options under moderate climate perturbations. Recommendations derived from such robust results may provide crucial information for stakeholders seeking to implement adaptation measures.

Increasing the accuracy of crop productivity estimates is a key element in planning adaptation strategies to ensure global food security under climate change. Process-based crop models are effective means to project climate impact on crop yield, but have large uncertainty in yield simulations. Here, we show that variations in the mathematical functions currently used to simulate temperature responses of physiological processes in 29 wheat models account for >50% of uncertainty in simulated grain yields for mean growing season temperatures from 14 °C to 33 °C. We derived a set of new temperature response functions that when substituted in four wheat models reduced the error in grain yield simulations across seven global sites with different temperature regimes by 19% to 50% (42% average). We anticipate the improved temperature responses to be a key step to improve modelling of crops under rising temperature and climate change, leading to higher skill of crop yield projections.