4.7 Article

Optimizing agronomic practices to harness climate change impacts on potato production in tropical highland regions

期刊

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF AGRONOMY
卷 152, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.eja.2023.127021

关键词

Adaptation; Agroecosystem; Climate change; GHG emissions; Potato; Tropical highlands

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study used simulation experiments to evaluate the effects of planting time, nitrogen rate, and crop variety choice on potato productivity in Ethiopia. The results showed that shifting planting time forward and changing the nitrogen application rate had greater productivity benefits than switching varieties. In the mid-century climate period, early planting of medium and long maturity varieties with higher nitrogen rates showed potential adaptation benefits.
A simulation experiment was conducted to evaluate the effects of planting time, nitrogen rate, and crop variety choice on potato productivity and to assess the adaptation role of these practices in a changing climate in the northwestern tropical highlands of Ethiopia. The study used agroecosystem (AES) as the lens for spatial analysis. Thirty years of simulations were performed for the baseline (1981-2010), near-term (2011-2040), and midcentury (2041-2070) climate periods using a calibrated and validated SUBSTOR-Potato (DSSAT) model. The results showed that shifting planting time forward and changing the nitrogen application rate had greater productivity benefits than switching varieties in all climate periods and AESs. Late planting and higher nitrogen rates increased tuber yield during the near-term climate period. However, in the mid-century climate period, early planting of both medium and long maturity varieties with higher nitrogen rates showed potential adaptation benefits despite its negative impact on yield in the current climate. This result highlights the distinction between optimal management under current conditions and practices that are truly adaptive to climate change.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据