Global crop yield response to extreme heat stress under multiple climate change futures

Extreme heat stress during the crop reproductive period can be critical for crop productivity. Projected changes in the frequency and severity of extreme climatic events are expected to negatively impact crop yields and global food production. This study applies the global crop model PEGASUS to quantify, for the first time at the global scale, impacts of extreme heat stress on maize, spring wheat and soybean yields resulting from 72 climate change scenarios for the 21st century. Our results project maize to face progressively worse impacts under a range of RCPs but spring wheat and soybean to improve globally through to the 2080s due to CO2 fertilization effects, even though parts of the tropic and sub-tropic regions could face substantial yield declines. We find extreme heat stress at anthesis (HSA) by the 2080s (relative to the 1980s) under RCP 8.5, taking into account CO2 fertilization effects, could double global losses of maize yield (ΔY = −12.8 ± 6.7% versus − 7.0 ± 5.3% without HSA), reduce projected gains in spring wheat yield by half (ΔY = 34.3 ± 13.5% versus 72.0 ± 10.9% without HSA) and in soybean yield by a quarter (ΔY = 15.3 ± 26.5% versus 20.4 ± 22.1% without HSA). The range reflects uncertainty due to differences between climate model scenarios; soybean exhibits both positive and negative impacts, maize is generally negative and spring wheat generally positive. Furthermore, when assuming CO2 fertilization effects to be negligible, we observe drastic climate mitigation policy as in RCP 2.6 could avoid more than 80% of the global average yield losses otherwise expected by the 2080s under RCP 8.5. We show large disparities in climate impacts across regions and find extreme heat stress adversely affects major producing regions and lower income countries

OPTIMIZING COVER CROP ROTATIONS FOR WATER, NITROGEN AND WEED MANAGEMENT

Winter cover crops grown in rotation with grain crops can be an efficient integrated pest management tool (IPM). However, cover crop biomass production and thus successful provisioning of ecosystem services depend on a timely planting and cover crop establishment after harvest of a cash crop in the fall. One potential management adaptation is the use of short-season soybeans to advance cover crop planting date in the fall. Cover crops planted earlier in the fall may provide a greater percentage of ground cover early in the season because of higher biomass accumulation that may improve weed suppression. However, adapting to short-season soybeans could have a yield penalty compared to full-season soybeans. In addition, it is unclear if further increasing cover crop growing season and biomass production under environmental conditions in Kentucky could limit nitrogen and water availability for the next cash crop. This thesis combines the use of field trials and a crop simulation model to address the research questions posed. In Chapter 1, field trials evaluating yield and harvest date of soybean maturity group (MG) cultivars from 0 to 4 in 13 site-years across KY, NE, and OH, were used to calibrate and evaluate the DSSAT crop modeling software (v 4.7). The subsequent modeling analysis showed that planting shorter soybean maturity groups (MG) would advance date of harvest maturity (R8) by 6.6 to 11 days per unit decrease in MG for May planting or by 1 to 7.3 days for July planting. The earliest MG cultivar that maximized yield ranged from MG 0 to 3 depending on the location, allowing a winter-killed cover crop to accumulate between 257 to 270 growing degree days (GDD) before the first freeze occurrence when soybean was planted in May, and between 280 to 296 GDD when soybean was planted in July. Winter-hardy cover crops could accumulate 701 to 802 GDD following soybean planted in May and 329 to 416 GDD after soybean planted in July. In Chapter 2, a two-year field trial was conducted at Lexington, KY to evaluate the effect of a soybean – cover crop rotation with soybean cultivars MG 1, 2, 3 or 4 on cover crop biomass and canopy cover, and on weed biomass in the fall and the following spring. Results showed that having cover crops was an efficient management strategy to reduce weed biomass in the fall and spring compared to no cover treatment. Planting cover crops earlier in the fall after a short-season soybean increased cover crop biomass production and percentage of ground cover in the fall, but not the following spring. Planting cover crop earlier after a short-season soybean did not improve weed suppression in the fall or spring compared to a fallow control with full-season soybean. Having a fall herbicide application improved weed control when there was a high pressure of winter annual weeds. By the spring, delaying cover crop termination increased cover crop biomass but also did weed biomass. In Chapter 3, a soybean – cover crop – corn rotation was simulated to evaluate the effect of different soybean MG and cover crop termination, as well as year to year variability on water and nitrogen availability for the next corn crop in Lexington, KY. Simulations showed that when cover crops were terminated early, they did not reduced soil available water at corn planting. However, introducing a non-legume cover crop reduced total inorganic nitrogen content in the soil profile by 21 to 34 kg ha-1 implying 15 to 30 kg ha-1 less in corn nitrogen uptake. Cover crop management that was able to maintain similar available water values than fallow treatment while minimizing nitrogen uptake differences was cover crops planted after soybean MG 4 with an early termination. However, the best management strategies that will maximize ecosystem services from cover crops as well as cash crop productivity may need to be tailored to each environment, soil type, irrigation management, and must consider year-to-year variability

Climate change and global crop yield: impacts, uncertainties and adaptation

As global mean temperature continues to rise steadily, agricultural systems are projected to face unprecedented challenges to cope with climate change. However, understanding of climate change impacts on global crop yield, and of farmers’ adaptive capacity, remains incomplete as previous global assessments: (1) inadequately evaluated the role of extreme weather events; (2) focused on a small subset of the full range of climate change predictions; (3) overlooked uncertainties related to the choice of crop modelling approach and; (4) simplified the representation of farming adaptation strategies. This research aimed to assess climate change impacts on global crop yield that accounts for the knowledge gaps listed above, based on the further development and application of the global crop model PEGASUS. Four main research topics are presented. First, I investigated the roles of extreme heat stress at anthesis on crop yield and uncertainties related to the use of seventy-two climate change scenarios. I showed large disparities in impacts across regions as extreme temperatures adversely affects major areas of crop production and lower income countries, the latter appear likely to face larger reduction in crop yields. Second, I coordinated the first global gridded crop model intercomparison study, comparing simulations of crop yield and water use under climate change. I found modelled global average crop water productivity increases by up to 17±20.3% when including carbon fertilisation effects, but decreases to –28±13.9% when excluding them; and identified fundamental uncertainties and gaps in our understanding of crop response to elevated carbon dioxide. Third, to link climate impacts with adaptation, I introduced the recently developed concept of representative agricultural pathways and examined their potential use in models to explore farming adaptation options within biophysical and socio-economic constraints. Finally, I explored tradeoffs between increasing nitrogen fertiliser use to close the global maize yield gap and the resulting nitrous oxide emissions. I found global maize production increases by 62% based on current harvested area using intensive rates of nitrogen fertiliser. This raises the share of nitrous oxide emissions associated with maize production from 20 to 32% of global cereal related emissions. Finally, these results demonstrated that in some regions increasing nitrogen fertiliser application, without addressing other limiting factors such as soil nutrient imbalance and water scarcity, could raise nitrous oxide emissions without enhancing crop yield

Integrated crop water management might sustainably halve the global food gap

As planetary boundaries are rapidly being approached, humanity has little room for additional expansion and conventional intensification of agriculture, while a growing world population further spreads the food gap. Ample evidence exists that improved on-farm water management can close water-related yield gaps to a considerable degree, but its global significance remains unclear. In this modeling study we investigate systematically to what extent integrated crop water management might contribute to closing the global food gap, constrained by the assumption that pressure on water resources and land does not increase. Using a process-based bio-/agrosphere model, we simulate the yield-increasing potential of elevated irrigation water productivity (including irrigation expansion with thus saved water) and optimized use of in situ precipitation water (alleviated soil evaporation, enhanced infiltration, water harvesting for supplemental irrigation) under current and projected future climate (from 20 climate models, with and without beneficial CO2 effects). Results show that irrigation efficiency improvements can save substantial amounts of water in many river basins (globally 48% of non-productive water consumption in an 'ambitious' scenario), and if rerouted to irrigate neighboring rainfed systems, can boost kcal production significantly (26% global increase). Low-tech solutions for small-scale farmers on water-limited croplands show the potential to increase rainfed yields to a similar extent. In combination, the ambitious yet achievable integrated water management strategies explored in this study could increase global production by 41% and close the water-related yield gap by 62%. Unabated climate change will have adverse effects on crop yields in many regions, but improvements in water management as analyzed here can buffer such effects to a significant degree.Framework of the Leibniz CompetitionFACCE MACSURPeer Reviewe