Impact of spatial soil and climate input data aggregation on regional yield simulations

We show the error in water-limited yields simulated by crop models which is associated with spatially aggregated soil and climate input data. Crop simulations at large scales (regional, national, continental) frequently use input data of low resolution. Therefore, climate and soil data are often generated via averaging and sampling by area majority. This may bias simulated yields at large scales, varying largely across models. Thus, we evaluated the error associated with spatially aggregated soil and climate data for 14 crop models. Yields of winter wheat and silage maize were simulated under water-limited production conditions. We calculated this error from crop yields simulated at spatial resolutions from 1 to 100 km for the state of North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany. Most models showed yields biased by <15% when aggregating only soil data. The relative mean absolute error (rMAE) of most models using aggregated soil data was in the range or larger than the inter-annual or inter-model variability in yields. This error increased further when both climate and soil data were aggregated. Distinct error patterns indicate that the rMAE may be estimated from few soil variables. Illustrating the range of these aggregation effects across models, this study is a first step towards an ex-ante assessment of aggregation errors in large-scale simulations

Aggregation of soil and climate input data can underestimate simulated biomass loss and nitrate leaching under climate change

Predicting areas of severe biomass loss and increased N leaching risk under climate change is critical for applying appropriate adaptation measures to support more sustainable agricultural systems. The frequency of annual severe biomass loss for winter wheat and its coincidence with an increase in N leaching in a temperate region in Germany was estimated including the error from using soil and climate input data at coarser spatial scales, using the soil-crop model CoupModel. We ran the model for a reference period (1980-2010) and used climate data predicted by four climate model(s) for the Representative Concentration Pathways (RCP) 2.6, 4.5 and 8.5. The annual median biomass estimations showed that for the period 2070-2100, under the RCP8.5 scenario, the entire region would suffer from severe biomass loss almost every year. Annual incidence of severe biomass loss and increased N leaching was predicted to increase from RCP4.5 to the 8.5 scenario. During 2070-2100 for RCP8.5, in more than half of the years an area of 95% of the region was projected to suffer from both severe biomass loss and increased N leaching. The SPEI3 predicted a range of 32 (P3 RCP4.5) to 55% (P3 RCP8.5) of the severe biomass loss episodes simulated in the climate change scenarios. The simulations predicted more severe biomass losses than by the SPEI index which indicates that soil water deficits are important in determining crop losses in future climate scenarios. There was a risk of overestimating the area where "no severe biomass loss + increased N leaching" occurred when using coarser aggregated input data. In contrast, underestimation of situations where "severe biomass loss + increased N leaching" occurred when using coarser aggregated input data. Larger annual differences in biomass estimations compared to the finest resolution of input data occurred when aggregating climate input data rather than soil data. The differences were even larger when aggregating both soil and climate input data. In half of the region, biomass could be erroneously estimated in a single year by more than 40% if using soil and climate coarser input data. The results suggest that a higher spatial resolution of especially climate input data would be needed to predict reliably annual estimates of severe biomass loss and N leaching under climate change scenarios

Impact of Spatial Soil and Climate Input Data Aggregation on Regional Yield Simulations

This work was financially supported by the German Federal Ministry of Food and Agriculture (BMEL) through the Federal Office for Agriculture and Food (BLE), (2851ERA01J). FT and RPR were supported by FACCE MACSUR (3200009600) through the Finnish Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry (MMM). EC, HE and EL were supported by The Swedish Research Council for Environment, Agricultural Sciences and Spatial Planning (220-2007-1218) and by the strategic funding ‘Soil-Water-Landscape’ from the faculty of Natural Resources and Agricultural Sciences (Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences) and thank professor P-E Jansson (Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm) for support. JC, HR and DW thank the INRA ACCAF metaprogramm for funding and Eric Casellas from UR MIAT INRA for support. CB was funded by the Helmholtz project “REKLIM—Regional Climate Change”. CK was funded by the HGF Alliance “Remote Sensing and Earth System Dynamics” (EDA). FH was funded by the German Research Foundation (Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft, DFG) under the Grant FOR1695. FE and SS acknowledge support by the German Science Foundation (project EW 119/5-1). HH, GZ, SS, TG and FE thank Andreas Enders and Gunther Krauss (INRES, University of Bonn) for support. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.Peer reviewedPublisher PD

Cereal yield gaps across Europe

peer-reviewedEurope accounts for around 20% of the global cereal production and is a net exporter of ca. 15% of that production. Increasing global demand for cereals justifies questions as to where and by how much Europe’s production can be increased to meet future global market demands, and how much additional nitrogen (N) crops would require. The latter is important as environmental concern and legislation are equally important as production aims in Europe. Here, we used a country-by-country, bottom-up approach to establish statistical estimates of actual grain yield, and compare these to modelled estimates of potential yields for either irrigated or rainfed conditions. In this way, we identified the yield gaps and the opportunities for increased cereal production for wheat, barley and maize, which represent 90% of the cereals grown in Europe. The combined mean annual yield gap of wheat, barley, maize was 239 Mt, or 42% of the yield potential. The national yield gaps ranged between 10 and 70%, with small gaps in many north-western European countries, and large gaps in eastern and south-western Europe. Yield gaps for rainfed and irrigated maize were consistently lower than those of wheat and barley. If the yield gaps of maize, wheat and barley would be reduced from 42% to 20% of potential yields, this would increase annual cereal production by 128 Mt (39%). Potential for higher cereal production exists predominantly in Eastern Europe, and half of Europe’s potential increase is located in Ukraine, Romania and Poland. Unlocking the identified potential for production growth requires a substantial increase of the crop N uptake of 4.8 Mt. Across Europe, the average N uptake gaps, to achieve 80% of the yield potential, were 87, 77 and 43 kg N ha−1 for wheat, barley and maize, respectively. Emphasis on increasing the N use efficiency is necessary to minimize the need for additional N inputs. Whether yield gap reduction is desirable and feasible is a matter of balancing Europe’s role in global food security, farm economic objectives and environmental targets.We received financial contributions from the strategic investment funds (IPOP) of Wageningen University & Research, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, MACSUR under EU FACCE-JPI which was funded through several national contributions, and TempAg (http://tempag.net/)

Impact analysis of climate data aggregation at different spatial scales on simulated net primary productivity for croplands

For spatial crop and agro-systems modelling, there is often a discrepancy between the scale of measured driving data and the target resolution. Spatial data aggregation is often necessary, which can introduce additional uncertainty into the simulation results. Previous studies have shown that climate data aggregation has little effect on simulation of phenological stages, but effects on net primary production (NPP) might still be expected through changing the length of the growing season and the period of grain filling. This study investigates the impact of spatial climate data aggregation on NPP simulation results, applying eleven different models for the same study region (∼34,000 km2), situated in Western Germany. To isolate effects of climate, soil data and management were assumed to be constant over the entire study area and over the entire study period of 29 years. Two crops, winter wheat and silage maize, were tested as monocultures. Compared to the impact of climate data aggregation on yield, the effect on NPP is in a similar range, but is slightly lower, with only small impacts on averages over the entire simulation period and study region. Maximum differences between the five scales in the range of 1–100 km grid cells show changes of 0.4–7.8% and 0.0–4.8% for wheat and maize, respectively, whereas the simulated potential NPP averages of the models show a wide range (1.9–4.2 g C m−2 d−1 and 2.7–6.1 g C m−2 d−1 for wheat and maize, respectively). The impact of the spatial aggregation was also tested for shorter time periods, to see if impacts over shorter periods attenuate over longer periods. The results show larger impacts for single years (up to 9.4% for wheat and up to 13.6% for maize). An analysis of extreme weather conditions shows an aggregation effect in vulnerability up to 12.8% and 15.5% between the different resolutions for wheat and maize, respectively. Simulations of NPP averages over larger areas (e.g. regional scale) and longer time periods (several years) are relatively insensitive to climate data aggregation. However, the scale of climate data is more relevant for impacts on annual averages of NPP or if the period is strongly affected or dominated by drought stress. There should be an awareness of the greater uncertainty for the NPP values in these situations if data are not available at high resolution. On the other hand, the results suggest that there is no need to simulate at high resolution for long term regional NPP averages based on the simplified assumptions (soil and management constant in time and space) used in this study