Abstract
Projections of future climate change are plagued with uncertainties from global climate models and emission scenarios, causing difficulties for impact assessments and for planners taking decisions on adaptation measure. Here, we developed an approach to deal with the uncertainties and to project the changes of maize productivity and water use in China using a process-based crop model, against a global mean temperature (GMT) increase scale relative to 1961–1990 values. From 20 climate scenarios output from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Data Distribution Centre, we adopted the median values of projected changes in monthly mean climate variables for representative stations and driven the CERES-Maize model to simulate maize production under baseline and future climate scenarios. Adaptation options such as automatic planting, automatic application of irrigation and fertilization were considered, although cultivars were assumed constant over the baseline and future. After assessing representative stations across China, we projected changes in maize yield, growing period, evapotranspiration, and irrigation-water use for GMT changes of 1°C, 2°C, and 3°C, respectively. Results indicated that median values of projected decreases in the yields of irrigated maize without (with) consideration of CO2-fertilization effects ranged from 1.4% to 10.9% (1.6% to 7.8%), 9.8% to 21.7% (10.2% to 16.4%), and 4.3% to 32.1% (3.9% to 26.6%) for GMT changes of 1°C, 2°C, and 3°C, respectively. Median values of projected changes in irrigation-water use without (with) consideration of CO2-fertilization effects ranged from −1.3% to 2.5% (−18.8% to 0.0%), −43.6% to 2.4% (−56.1% to −18.9%), and −19.6% to 2.2% (−50.6% to −34.3%), which were ascribed to rising CO2 concentration, increased precipitation, as well as reduced growing period with GMT increasing. For rainfed maize, median values of projected changes in yields without (with) consideration of CO2-fertilization effects ranged from −22.2% to −1.0% (−10.8% to 0.7%), −27.6% to −7.9% (−18.1% to −5.6%), and −33.7% to −4.6% (−25.9% to −1.6%). Approximate comparisons showed that projected maize yield losses were larger than previous estimates, particularly for rainfed maize. Our study presents an approach to project maize productivity and water use with GMT increases using process-based crop models and multiple climate scenarios. The resultant impact function is fundamental for identifying which climate change level is dangerous for food security.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Allen R (1997) Self-calibrating method for estimating solar radiation from air temperature. J Hydrol Eng 2:56–67
Cantelaube P, Terres J (2005) Seasonal weather forecasts for crop yield modeling in Europe. Tellus A 57:476–487
Carberry PS, Muchow RC, Mc Cown RL (1989) Testing the CERES-Maize model in a semi-arid tropical environment. Field Crop Res 20:297–315
Carter T, Hulme M, Viner D (eds) (1999) Representing uncertainty in climate change scenarios and impact studies. In: Proceedings of the ECLAT-2 Helsinki workshop, 14–16 April 1999, Climatic Research Unit, Norwich, UK, 128 pp
Challinor J, Slingo JM, Wheeler TR, Doblas-Reyes FJ (2005) Probabilistic simulations of crop yield over western India using the DEMETER seasonal hindcast ensembles. Tellus A 57:498–512
Fischer G, Frohberg K, Parry M, Rosenzweig C (1996) The potential effects of climate change on world food production and security. In: Bazzaz F, Sombroek W (eds) Global climate change and agricultural production. Direct and indirect effects of changing hydrological, pedological and plant physiological processes. FAO, Rome. John Wiley & Sons Ltd., Baffins Lane, Chichester, West Sussex PO19 1UD, England
Giorgi F, Mearns LO (2003) Probability of regional climate change based on the Reliability Ensemble Averaging (REA) method. Geophys Res Lett 30:1629
Hansen JW, Indeje M (2004) Linking dynamic seasonal climate forecasts with crop simulation for maize yield prediction in semi-arid Kenya. Agric For Meteor 125:143–157
Hare B (2006) Relationship between increases in global mean temperature and impacts on ecosystems, food production, water and socio-economic systems. In: Schellnhuber HJ, Cramer W, Nakicenovic N, Wigley T, Yohe G (eds) Avoiding dangerous climate change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 177–186
Hargreaves GL, Hargreaves GH, Riley P (1985) Irrigation water requirement for the Senegal River Basin. J Irrig Drain Eng 111:265–275
Hitz S, Smith J (2004) Estimating global impacts from climate change. Glob Environ Change 14:201–218
IPCC (2001a) Climate change 2001: impacts, adaptation, and vulnerability. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 913–967
IPCC (2001b) Climate change 2001: the scientific basis. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
IPCC (2007) Climate Change 2007: impacts, adaptation and vulnerability. In: Parry ML, Canziani OF, Palutikof JP, van der Linden PJ, Hanson CE (eds) Contribution of working group II to the fourth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1000 pp. Available at www.ipcc.ch
Jones RN (2000) Managing uncertainty in climate change projections—issues for impact assessment. Clim Change 45:403–419
Jones CA, Kiniry JR (1986) CERES-Maize: a simulation model of maize growth and development. Texas A&M University Press, College Station
Jones JW, Hoogenboom G, Porter CH, Boote KJ, Batchelor WD, Hunt LA, Wilkens PW, Singh U, Gijsman AJ, Ritchie JT (2003) The DSSAT cropping system model. Eur J Agron 18:235–265
Leemans R, Eickhout B (2004) Another reason for concern: regional and global impacts on ecosystems for different levels of climate change. Glob Environ Change 14:219–228
Lin E, Xiong W, Ju H, Xu Y, Li Y, Bai L, Xie L (2005) Climate change impacts on crop yield and quality with CO2 fertilization in China. Philos Trans R Soc B 360:2149–2154
Lobell DB (2007) Changes in diurnal temperature range and national cereal yields. Agric For Meteorol 145:229–238
Lobell DB, Burke MB (2008) Why are agricultural impacts of climate change so uncertain? The importance of temperature relative to precipitation. Environ Res Lett 3:034007
Lopez-Cedron FX, Boote KJ, Ruiz-Nogueira B, Sau F (2005) Testing CERES-Maize versions to estimate maize production in a cool environment. Eur J Agron 23:89–102
Long SP, Ainsworth EA, Rogers A, Ort DR (2004) Rising atmospheric carbon dioxide: plants FACE the future. Ann Rev Plant Bio 55:591–628
Marletto V, Zinoni F, Criscuolo L, Fontana G, Marchesi S, Morgillo A, Van Soetendael M, Ceotto E, Andersen U (2005) Evaluation of downscaled DEMETER multi-model ensemble seasonal hindcasts in a northern Italy location by means of a model of wheat growth and soil water balance. Tellus A 57:488–497
Mitchell TD, Carter TR, Jones PD, Hulme M, New M (2004) A comprehensive set of high-resolution grids of monthly climate for Europe and the globe: the observed record (1901–2000) and 16 scenarios (2001–2100). Working Paper 55, Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research, University of East Anglia, Norwich
Murphy JM, Sexton DMH, Barnett DN, Jones GS, Webb MJ, Collins M, Stainforth DA (2004) Quantification of modelling uncertainties in a large ensemble of climate change simulations. Nature 430:768–772
National Soil Survey Office (1993) Soil species of China, vols. 1–5. Chinese Agricultural Press, Beijing
Patwardhan A, Schneider SH, Semenov SM (2003) Assessing the science to address UNFCCC Article 2 (IPCC Concept Paper, available at http://www.ipcc.ch/activity/cct3.pdf)
Ritchie JT (1985) A user-oriented model of the soil water balance in wheat. In: Fry E, Atkin TK (eds) Wheat growth and modeling. NATO-ASI Series. Plenum, New York, pp 293–305
Semenov MA (2007) Development of high-resolution UKCIP02-based climate change scenarios in the UK. Agric For Meteor 144:127–138
Semenov MA, Brooks RJ, Barrow EM, Richardson CW (1998) Comparison of the WGEN and LARS-WG stochastic weather generators for diverse climates. Clim Res 10:95–107
Smith SJ, Thomson AM, Rosenberg NJ, Izaurralde RC, Brown RA, Wigley TML (2005) Climate change impacts for the conterminous USA: an integrated assessment. Part I. Scenarios and context. Clim Change 69:7–25
Tao F, Yokozawa M, Zhang Z, Hayashi Y, Grassl H, Fu C (2004) Variability in climatology and agricultural production in China in association with East Asia Monsoon and EL NiÑo southern oscillation. Clim Res 28:23–30
Tao F, Hayashi Y, Zhang Z, Sakamoto T, Yokozawa M (2008a) Global warming, rice production and water use in China: developing a probabilistic assessment. Agric For Meteor 148:94–110
Tao F, Yokozawa M, Liu J, Zhang Z (2008b) Climate–crop yield relationships at province scale in China and the impacts of recent climate trend. Clim Res 38:83–94
Tao F, Zhang Z, Liu J, Yokozawa M (2009) Modelling the impacts of weather and climate variability on crop productivity over a large area: a new super-ensemble-based probabilistic projection. Agric For Meteorol 149:1266–1278
Tebaldi C, Lobell DB (2008) Towards probabilistic projections of climate change impacts on global crop yields. Geophys Res Lett 35:L08705. doi:10.1029/2008GL033423
von Caemmerer S, Furbank RT (2003) The C-4 pathway: an efficient CO2 pump. Photosynthesis Res 77:191–207
Wang J, Lin E (1996) The impacts of potential climate change and climate variability on simulated maize production in China. Water Air Soil Pollut 92:75–85
Warren R (2006) Impacts of global climate change at different annual mean global temperature increases. In: Schellnhuber HJ, Cramer W, Nakicenovic N, Wigley T, Yohe G (eds) Avoiding dangerous climate change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 93–131
Xiong W, Matthews R, Holman I, Lin E, Xu Y (2007) Modeling China’s potential maize production at regional scale under climate change. Clim Change 85:433–451
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Tao, F., Zhang, Z. Impacts of climate change as a function of global mean temperature: maize productivity and water use in China. Climatic Change 105, 409–432 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-010-9883-9
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-010-9883-9