Predicting Irrigated and Rainfed Rice Yield Under Projected Climate Change Scenarios in the Eastern Region of India
- 1k Downloads
Numerous estimates for the coming decades project changes in precipitation resulting in more frequent droughts and floods, rise in atmospheric CO2 and temperature, extensive runoff leading to leaching of soil nutrients, and decrease in freshwater availability. Among these changes, elevated CO2 can affect crop yields in many ways. It is imperative to understand the consequences of elevated CO2 on the productivity of important agricultural crop species in order to devise adaptation and mitigation strategies to combat impending climate change. In this study, we have modeled rice phenology, growth phase, and yield with the “Decision Support System for Agrotechnology Transfer (DSSAT) CERES rice model” and arrived at predicted values of yield under different CO2 concentrations at four different locations in Eastern India out of which three locations were irrigated and one location was rainfed. The ECHAM climate scenario, Model for Interdisciplinary Research on Climate (MIROC)3.0 climate scenario, and ensemble models showed different levels of yield increase with a clear reduction in yield under rainfed rice as compared to irrigated rice. A distinct regional and cultivar difference in response of rice yield to elevated CO2 was seen in this study. Results obtained by simulation modeling at different climate change scenarios support the hypothesis that rice plant responses to elevated CO2 are through stimulation of photosynthesis. Realization of higher yields is linked with source sink dynamics and partitioning of assimilates wherein sink capacity plays an important role under elevated CO2 conditions.
KeywordsClimate change Simulation modeling Elevated CO2 Sink capacity Photosynthesis
- 2.Baker, J. T., Allen, L. H., Jr., & Boote, K. J. (1996). Assessment of rice response to global climate change: CO2 and temperature. In G. W. Koch & H. A. Mooney (Eds.), Carbon dioxide and terrestrial ecosystems (pp. 256–282). San Diego: Academic.Google Scholar
- 4.Collier, M. A., Dix, M. R., & Hirst, A. C. (2007). CSIRO Mk3 climate system model and meeting the strict IPCC AR4 data requirements. MODSIM07 International Congress on Modelling and Simulation: land, water & environmental management: integrated systems for sustainability: Christchurch, 10–13 December 2007: Proceedings, Christchurch, N.Z.Google Scholar
- 8.Hoogenboom, G., Wilkens, P. W., Thornton, P. K., Jones, J. W., Hunt, L. A., & Imamura, D. T. (1999). Decision support system for agrotechnology transfer 3.5. In G. Hoogenboom, P. W. Wilkens, & G. Y. Tsuji (Eds.), DSSAT version 3, vol. 4 (ISBN 1-886684-04-9) (pp. 1–36). Honolulu: University of Hawaii.Google Scholar
- 9.IPCC. (2007). Contribution of working group I to the fourth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
- 10.Jones P.G., Thornton P.K. and Heinke J. (2011). Generating characteristic daily weather data using downscaled climate model data from the IPCC fourth assessment. https://hc.box.net/shared/f2gk053td8.
- 13.K-1 Model Developers, 2004. K-1 coupled model (MIROC) description. K-1 technical report 1, Hasumi, H., Emori, S. (Eds.), Center for Climate System Research, University of Tokyo, Tokyo, JapanGoogle Scholar
- 21.Penning de Vries, F., Jansen, D., ten Berge, H., & Bakema, A. (1989). Simulation of eco-physiological processes of growth in several annual crops. Wageningen: Pudoc.Google Scholar
- 23.Ritchie, J. T. (1998). Soil water balance and plant stress. In G. Y. Tsuji, G. Hoogenboom, P. K. Thornton (Eds.), Understanding options for agricultural production. Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht, pp. 41/54.Google Scholar
- 24.Roeckner, A., Brokopf, R., Esch, M., et al. (2003). The atmospheric general circulation model ECHAM5. Part I: model description. MPI Report 349. Hamburg: Max Planck Institute for Meteorology. 127 pp.Google Scholar
- 25.Roeckner, E., Arpe, K., Bengtsson, L., Brinkop, S., Dümenil, L., Esch, M., Kirk, E., Lunkeit, F., Ponater, M., Rockel, B., Suasen, R., Schlese, U., Schubert, S. and Windelband, M. (1992). Simulation of the present-day climate with the ECHAM4 model: impact of model physics and resolution. Max-Planck Institute for Meteorology, Report No. 93, Hamburg, Germany, 171pp.Google Scholar
- 26.Roeckner, E., Arpe, K., Bengtsson, L., Christoph, M., Claussen, M., Dümenil, L., Esch, M., Giorgetta, M., Schlese, U. and Schulzweida, U. (1996). The atmospheric general circulation model ECHAM-4: model description and simulation of present-day climate. Max-Planck Institute for Meteorology, Report No. 218, Hamburg, Germany, 90pp.Google Scholar
- 28.Stocker, T. F., Qin, D., Plattner, G. K., Tignor, M., Allen, S. K., Boschung, J., & Midgley, B. M. (2013). IPCC, 2013: climate change 2013: the physical science basis. Contribution of working group I to the fifth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change.Google Scholar