4.7 Article

Responses of crop yield and water use efficiency to climate change in the North China Plain

期刊

AGRICULTURAL WATER MANAGEMENT
卷 97, 期 8, 页码 1185-1194

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.agwat.2009.07.006

关键词

Climate generator model (CLIGEN); Crop yield; Climate change scenario; CERES model

资金

  1. Natural Science Foundation of China [40671033]
  2. China Meteorological Administration [CCSF2007-33]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Based on future climate change projections offered by IPCC, the responses of yields and water use efficiencies of wheat and maize to climate change scenarios are explored over the North China Plain. The climate change projections of 21st century under A2A, B2A and A1B are from HadCM3 global climate model. A climate generator (CLIGEN) is applied to generate daily weather data of selected stations and then the data is used to drive CERES-Wheat and Maize models. The impacts of increased temperature and CO2 on wheat and maize yields are inconsistent. Under the same scenario, wheat yield ascended due to climatic warming, but the maize yield descended. As a more probable scenario, climate change under B2A is moderate relative to A2A and A1B. Under B2A in 2090s, average wheat yield and maize yield will respectively increase 9.8% and 3.2% without CO2 fertilization in this region. High temperature not only affects crop yields, but also has positive effect on water use efficiencies, mainly ascribing to the evapotranspiration intensification. There is a positive effect of CO2 enrichment on yield and water use efficiency. If atmospheric CO2 concentration reaches nearly 600 ppm, wheat and maize yields will increase 38% and 12% and water use efficiencies will improve 40% and 25% respectively, in comparison to those without CO2 fertilization. However, the uncertainty of crop yield is considerable under future climate change scenarios and whether the CO2 fertilization may be realized is still needed further research. (C) 2009 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

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