Search NASA⌕ Search

Engineering topics

Challinor, Andrew J.

Publications and source records attributed to Challinor, Andrew J..

Climate Change Impact and Adaptation for Wheat Protein

Wheat grain protein concentration is an important determinant of wheat quality for human nutrition that is often overlooked in efforts to improve crop production. We tested and applied a 32‐multi‐model ensemble to simulate global wheat yield and quality in a changing climate. Potential benefits of elevated atmospheric CO2 concentration by 2050 on global wheat grain and protein yield are likely to be negated by impacts from rising temperature and changes in rainfall, but with considerable disparities between regions. Grain and protein yields are expected to be lower and more variable in most low‐rainfall regions, with nitrogen availability limiting growth stimulus from elevated CO2. Introducing genotypes adapted to warmer temperatures (and also considering changes in CO2 and rainfall) could boost global wheat yield by 7% and protein yield by 2%, but grain protein concentration would be reduced by −1.1 percentage points, representing a relative change of −8.6%. Climate change adaptations that benefit grain yield are not always positive for grain quality, putting additional pressure on global wheat production.

grain protein↗

The Uncertainty of Crop Yield Projections Is Reduced by Improved Temperature Response Functions

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 is greater than 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.

Wang, Enli↗

The International Heat Stress Genotype Experiment for Modeling Wheat Response to Heat: Field Experiments and AgMIP-Wheat Multi-Model Simulations

The data set contains a portion of the International Heat Stress Genotype Experiment (IHSGE) data used in the AgMIP-Wheat project to analyze the uncertainty of 30 wheat crop models and quantify the impact of heat on global wheat yield productivity. It includes two spring wheat cultivars grown during two consecutive winter cropping cycles at hot, irrigated, and low latitude sites in Mexico (Ciudad Obregon and Tlaltizapan), Egypt (Aswan), India (Dharwar), the Sudan (Wad Medani), and Bangladesh (Dinajpur). Experiments in Mexico included normal (November-December) and late (January-March) sowing dates. Data include local daily weather data, soil characteristics and initial soil conditions, crop measurements (anthesis and maturity dates, anthesis and final total above ground biomass, final grain yields and yields components), and cultivar information. Simulations include both daily in-season and end-of-season results from 30 wheat models.

Wheat; Field Experimental Data; Heat Stress; Simul↗

Uncertainty of Wheat Water Use: Simulated Patterns and Sensitivity to Temperature and CO2

Projected global warming and population growth will reduce future water availability for agriculture. Thus, it is essential to increase the efficiency in using water to ensure crop productivity. Quantifying crop water use (WU; i.e. actual evapotranspiration) is a critical step towards this goal. Here, sixteen wheat simulation models were used to quantify sources of model uncertainty and to estimate the relative changes and variability between models for simulated WU, water use efficiency (WUE, WU per unit of grain dry mass produced), transpiration efficiency (Teff, transpiration per kg of unit of grain yield dry mass produced), grain yield, crop transpiration and soil evaporation at increased temperatures and elevated atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations ([CO2]). The greatest uncertainty in simulating water use, potential evapotranspiration, crop transpiration and soil evaporation was due to differences in how crop transpiration was modelled and accounted for 50 of the total variability among models. The simulation results for the sensitivity to temperature indicated that crop WU will decline with increasing temperature due to reduced growing seasons. The uncertainties in simulated crop WU, and in particularly due to uncertainties in simulating crop transpiration, were greater under conditions of increased temperatures and with high temperatures in combination with elevated atmospheric [CO2] concentrations. Hence the simulation of crop WU, and in particularly crop transpiration under higher temperature, needs to be improved and evaluated with field measurements before models can be used to simulate climate change impacts on future crop water demand.

Sensitivity↗

Estimating Model Prediction Error: Should You Treat Predictions as Fixed or Random?

Crop models are important tools for impact assessment of climate change, as well as for exploring management options under current climate. It is essential to evaluate the uncertainty associated with predictions of these models. We compare two criteria of prediction error; MSEP fixed, which evaluates mean squared error of prediction for a model with fixed structure, parameters and inputs, and MSEP uncertain( X), which evaluates mean squared error averaged over the distributions of model structure, inputs and parameters. Comparison of model outputs with data can be used to estimate the former. The latter has a squared bias term, which can be estimated using hindcasts, and a model variance term, which can be estimated from a simulation experiment. The separate contributions to MSEP uncertain (X) can be estimated using a random effects ANOVA. It is argued that MSEP uncertain (X) is the more informative uncertainty criterion, because it is specific to each prediction situation.

model structure uncertainty↗

Statistical Analysis of Large Simulated Yield Datasets for Studying Climate Effects

Many studies have been carried out during the last decade to study the effect of climate change on crop yields and other key crop characteristics. In these studies, one or several crop models were used to simulate crop growth and development for different climate scenarios that correspond to different projections of atmospheric CO2 concentration, temperature, and rainfall changes (Semenov et al., 1996; Tubiello and Ewert, 2002; White et al., 2011). The Agricultural Model Intercomparison and Improvement Project (AgMIP; Rosenzweig et al., 2013) builds on these studies with the goal of using an ensemble of multiple crop models in order to assess effects of climate change scenarios for several crops in contrasting environments. These studies generate large datasets, including thousands of simulated crop yield data. They include series of yield values obtained by combining several crop models with different climate scenarios that are defined by several climatic variables (temperature, CO2, rainfall, etc.). Such datasets potentially provide useful information on the possible effects of different climate change scenarios on crop yields. However, it is sometimes difficult to analyze these datasets and to summarize them in a useful way due to their structural complexity; simulated yield data can differ among contrasting climate scenarios, sites, and crop models. Another issue is that it is not straightforward to extrapolate the results obtained for the scenarios to alternative climate change scenarios not initially included in the simulation protocols. Additional dynamic crop model simulations for new climate change scenarios are an option but this approach is costly, especially when a large number of crop models are used to generate the simulated data, as in AgMIP. Statistical models have been used to analyze responses of measured yield data to climate variables in past studies (Lobell et al., 2011), but the use of a statistical model to analyze yields simulated by complex process-based crop models is a rather new idea. We demonstrate herewith that statistical methods can play an important role in analyzing simulated yield data sets obtained from the ensembles of process-based crop models. Formal statistical analysis is helpful to estimate the effects of different climatic variables on yield, and to describe the between-model variability of these effects.

climate↗

Multimodel Ensembles of Wheat Growth: Many Models are Better than One

Crop models of crop growth are increasingly used to quantify the impact of global changes due to climate or crop management. Therefore, accuracy of simulation results is a major concern. Studies with ensembles of crop model scan give valuable information about model accuracy and uncertainty, but such studies are difficult to organize and have only recently begun. We report on the largest ensemble study to date, of 27 wheat models tested in four contrasting locations for their accuracy in simulating multiple crop growth and yield variables. The relative error averaged over models was 2438 for the different end-of-season variables including grain yield (GY) and grain protein concentration (GPC). There was little relation between error of a model for GY or GPC and error for in-season variables. Thus, most models did not arrive at accurate simulations of GY and GPC by accurately simulating preceding growth dynamics. Ensemble simulations, taking either the mean (e-mean) or median (e-median) of simulated values, gave better estimates than any individual model when all variables were considered. Compared to individual models, e-median ranked first in simulating measured GY and third in GPC. The error of e-mean and e-median declined with an increasing number of ensemble members, with little decrease beyond 10 models. We conclude that multimodel ensembles can be used to create new estimators with improved accuracy and consistency in simulating growth dynamics. We argue that these results are applicable to other crop species, and hypothesize that they apply more generally to ecological system models.

model intercomparison↗

Multimodel Ensembles of Wheat Growth: More Models are Better than One

Crop models of crop growth are increasingly used to quantify the impact of global changes due to climate or crop management. Therefore, accuracy of simulation results is a major concern. Studies with ensembles of crop models can give valuable information about model accuracy and uncertainty, but such studies are difficult to organize and have only recently begun. We report on the largest ensemble study to date, of 27 wheat models tested in four contrasting locations for their accuracy in simulating multiple crop growth and yield variables. The relative error averaged over models was 24-38% for the different end-of-season variables including grain yield (GY) and grain protein concentration (GPC). There was little relation between error of a model for GY or GPC and error for in-season variables. Thus, most models did not arrive at accurate simulations of GY and GPC by accurately simulating preceding growth dynamics. Ensemble simulations, taking either the mean (e-mean) or median (e-median) of simulated values, gave better estimates than any individual model when all variables were considered. Compared to individual models, e-median ranked first in simulating measured GY and third in GPC. The error of e-mean and e-median declined with an increasing number of ensemble members, with little decrease beyond 10 models. We conclude that multimodel ensembles can be used to create new estimators with improved accuracy and consistency in simulating growth dynamics. We argue that these results are applicable to other crop species, and hypothesize that they apply more generally to ecological system models.

wheat↗

Impacts of El Nino Southern Oscillation on the Global Yields of Major Crops

The monitoring and prediction of climate-induced variations in crop yields, production and export prices in major food-producing regions have become important to enable national governments in import-dependent countries to ensure supplies of affordable food for consumers. Although the El Nino/Southern Oscillation (ENSO) often affects seasonal temperature and precipitation, and thus crop yields in many regions, the overall impacts of ENSO on global yields are uncertain. Here we present a global map of the impacts of ENSO on the yields of major crops and quantify its impacts on their global-mean yield anomalies. Results show that El Nino likely improves the global-mean soybean yield by 2.15.4 but appears to change the yields of maize, rice and wheat by -4.3 to +0.8. The global-mean yields of all four crops during La Nina years tend to be below normal (-4.5 to 0.0).Our findings highlight the importance of ENSO to global crop production.

Crops↗

Prediction of Seasonal Climate-induced Variations in Global Food Production

Consumers, including the poor in many countries, are increasingly dependent on food imports and are therefore exposed to variations in yields, production, and export prices in the major food-producing regions of the world. National governments and commercial entities are paying increased attention to the cropping forecasts of major food-exporting countries as well as to their own domestic food production. Given the increased volatility of food markets and the rising incidence of climatic extremes affecting food production, food price spikes may increase in prevalence in future years. Here we present a global assessment of the reliability of crop failure hindcasts for major crops at two lead times derived by linking ensemble seasonal climatic forecasts with statistical crop models. We assessed the reliability of hindcasts (i.e., retrospective forecasts for the past) of crop yield loss relative to the previous year for two lead times. Pre-season yield predictions employ climatic forecasts and have lead times of approximately 3 to 5 months for providing information regarding variations in yields for the coming cropping season. Within-season yield predictions use climatic forecasts with lead times of 1 to 3 months. Pre-season predictions can be of value to national governments and commercial concerns, complemented by subsequent updates from within-season predictions. The latter incorporate information on the most recent climatic data for the upcoming period of reproductive growth. In addition to such predictions, hindcasts using observations from satellites were performed to demonstrate the upper limit of the reliability of crop forecasting.

variations↗