4.7 Article

Evaluating the impacts of land management and climate variability on crop production and nitrate export across the Upper Mississippi Basin

期刊

GLOBAL BIOGEOCHEMICAL CYCLES
卷 17, 期 3, 页码 -

出版社

AMER GEOPHYSICAL UNION
DOI: 10.1029/2001GB001808

关键词

nitrogen; Mississippi River; agriculture; crop yield; nitrate flux; aquatic biogeochemistry

向作者/读者索取更多资源

[1] The increased use of nitrogen (N) fertilizers in the Mississippi Basin since the 1950s is partially responsible for an increase in crop production, but also a massive increase in nitrate export by the Mississippi River. We used the IBIS terrestrial ecosystem model, including new maize and soybean submodels, and the HYDRA hydrological transport model to investigate the role of climate variability, land cover and N-fertilizer application on crop yield, N cycling and nitrate export in the Upper Mississippi Basin from 1974 - 1994. Simulated annual mean maize and soybean yields were both within 20% of USDA historical estimates in over 80% of the crop-growing counties. There was also strong agreement between simulated and USGS estimated annual nitrate export for the Mississippi River at Clinton, Iowa (r(2) = 0.81), the outlet of the basin, and the Minnesota River at Jordan, Minnesota (r(2) = 0.78). The model also indicated a 30% increase in N-fertilizer application across the basin would have caused only a 4% increase in mean maize yield, but a 53% increase in mean dissolved inorganic nitrogen ( DIN) leaching, while a 30% decrease in N-fertilizer application would have caused a 10% decrease in maize yield, but a 37% decrease in DIN leaching. At higher levels of N-fertilizer usage, nitrate export becomes increasingly sensitive to the hydrologic conditions, particularly when there is ample residual N in the soil. Therefore any effort to reduce nitrate export without significantly affecting crop yields would have to account for previous soil-N conditions and climate variability.

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