Uncertainty in future irrigation water demand and risk of crop failure for maize in Europe
Uncertainty in future irrigation water demand and risk of crop failure for maize in Europe
复制标题
DOI：
10.1088/1748-9326/11/7/074007
复制
发表时间：
2016-07
影响因子：
6.7
通讯作者：
H. Webber;T. Gaiser;R. Oomen;E. Teixeira;Gang Zhao;D. Wallach;A. Zimmermann;F. Ewert
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
H. Webber;T. Gaiser;R. Oomen;E. Teixeira;Gang Zhao;D. Wallach;A. Zimmermann;F. Ewert
虽然作物模型被广泛用于评估作物生产力随气候变化的变化，但在大面积影响评估中，它们在评估灌溉用水需求或作物歉收风险方面的技能相对未知。本研究的目的是调查哪些方面的建模作物用水（参考作物蒸散量（ET 0），土壤水分提取，土壤蒸发，土壤水分平衡和根系生长）最有助于玉米作物用水的估计和作物歉收的风险的变化，并证明由此产生的不确定性在欧洲的气候变化影响研究。SIMPLACE作物建模框架用于耦合LINTUL 5作物模型，采用2-3种不同方法的因子组合来模拟作物水分利用的5个方面，产生51种建模方法。使用在法国和新西兰的实验，总的敏感性分析表明，ET 0解释了最大的变异性，在灌溉玉米用水和粮食产量水平，与土壤蒸发也imporatant在法国的实验。在欧洲影响研究中，在基线期，Penman和Hargreaves ET 0方法之间的净灌溉需求相差36%。欧盟的平均谷物产量在不同模式之间相似，但在法国和南欧的部分地区差异接近1-2吨。在历史时期，欧盟范围内作物歉收的估计值从Priestley-Taylor的5.4年到Penman ET 0方法的每7.9年不等。虽然模型之间绝对值的不确定性很大，但模型之间相对变化的估计数相似，证实了作物模型在评估气候变化影响方面的效用。如果作物模型中的ET 0估计值可以通过使用适当的方法得到改进，那么灌溉需水量以及干旱条件下产量估计值的不确定性就可以降低。
While crop models are widely used to assess the change in crop productivity with climate change, their skill in assessing irrigation water demand or the risk of crop failure in large area impact assessments is relatively unknown. The objective of this study is to investigate which aspects of modeling crop water use (reference crop evapotranspiration (ET0), soil water extraction, soil evaporation, soil water balance and root growth) contributes most to the variability in estimates of maize crop water use and the risk of crop failure, and demonstrate the resulting uncertainty in a climate change impact study for Europe. The SIMPLACE crop modeling framework was used to couple the LINTUL5 crop model in factorial combinations of 2–3 different approaches for simulating the 5 aspects of crop water use, resulting in 51 modeling approaches. Using experiments in France and New Zeland, analysis of total sensitivity revealed that ET0 explained the most variability in both irrigated maize water use and rainfed grain yield levels, with soil evaporation also imporatant in the French experiment. In the European impact study, net irrigation requirement differed by 36% between the Penman and Hargreaves ET0 methods in the baseline period. Average EU grain yields were similar between models, but differences approached 1–2 tonnes in parts of France and Southern Europe. EU wide esimates of crop failure in the historical period ranged between 5.4 years for Priestley–Taylor to every 7.9 years for the Penman ET0 methods. While the uncertainty in absolute values between models was significant, estimates of relative changes were similar between models, confirming the utility of crop models in assessing climate change impacts. If ET0 estimates in crop models can be improved, through the use of appropriate methods, uncertainty in irrigation water demand as well as in yield estimates under drought can be reduced.