Crop models are essential tools for assessing the threat of climate change to local and global food production 1 . Present models used to predict wheat grain yield are highly uncertain when simulating how crops respond to temperature 2 . Here we systematically tested 30 di erent wheat crop models of the Agricultural Model Intercomparison and Improvement Project against field experiments in which growing season mean temperatures ranged from 15 • C to 32 • C, including experiments with artificial heating. Many models simulated yields well, but were less accurate at higher temperatures. The model ensemble median was consistently more accurate in simulating the crop temperature response than any single model, regardless of the input information used. Extrapolating the model ensemble temperature response indicates that warming is already slowing yield gains at a majority of wheat-growing locations. Global wheat production is estimated to fall by 6% for each • C of further temperature increase and become more variable over space and time.Understanding how different climate factors interact and impact food production 3 is essential when reaching decisions on how to adapt to the effects of climate change. To implement such strategies the contribution of various climate variables on crop yields need to be separated and quantified. For instance, a change in temperature will require a different adaptation strategy than a change in rainfall 4 . Temperature changes alone are reported to have potentially large negative impacts on crop production 5 , and hotspots-locations where plants suffer from high temperature stress-have been identified across the globe 6,7 . Crop simulation models are useful tools in climate impact studies as they deal with multiple climate factors and how they interact with various crop growth and yield formation processes that are sensitive to climate. These models have been applied in many studies, including the assessment of temperature impacts on crop production 1,8 . However, none of the crop models have been tested systematically against experiments at different temperatures in field conditions. Although many glasshouse and controlled-environment temperature experiments have been described, they are often not suitable for model testing as the heating of root systems in pots 9 and effects on micro-climate differ greatly from field conditions 10 . Detailed information on field experiments with a wide range of sowing dates and infrared heating recently became available for wheat 11,12 . Such experiments are well suited for testing the ability of crop models to quantify temperature responses under field conditions. Testing the temperature responses of crop models is particularly important for assessing the impact of climate change on wheat production, because the largest uncertainty in simulated impacts on yield arises from increasing temperatures 2 .In a 'Hot Serial Cereal' (HSC) well-irrigated and fertilized experiment with a single cultivar, the observed days after sowing (DAS) to maturity declined...

Projections of climate change impacts on crop yields are inherently uncertain(1). Uncertainty is often quantified when projecting future greenhouse gas emissions and their influence on climate(2). However, multi-model uncertainty analysis of crop responses to climate change is rare because systematic and objective comparisons among process-based crop simulation models(1,3) are difficult(4). Here we present the largest standardized model intercomparison for climate change impacts so far. We found that individual crop models are able to simulate measured wheat grain yields accurately under a range of environments, particularly if the input information is sufficient. However, simulated climate change impacts vary across models owing to differences in model structures and parameter values. A greater proportion of the uncertainty in climate change impact projections was due to variations among crop models than to variations among downscaled general circulation models. Uncertainties in simulated impacts increased with CO2 concentrations and associated warming. These impact uncertainties can be reduced by improving temperature and CO2 relationships in models and better quantified through use of multi-model ensembles. Less uncertainty in describing how climate change may affect agricultural productivity will aid adaptation strategy development and policymaking

Antle, J. M.; Nelson, G. C.; Porter, C.; Janssen, S.; Basso, B.; Ewert, F.; Wallach, D.; Baigorria, G.; and Winter, J. M., "The Agricultural Model Intercomparison and Improvement Project (AgMIP): Protocols and pilot studies" (2013 a b s t r a c tThe Agricultural Model Intercomparison and Improvement Project (AgMIP) is a major international effort linking the climate, crop, and economic modeling communities with cutting-edge information technology to produce improved crop and economic models and the next generation of climate impact projections for the agricultural sector. The goals of AgMIP are to improve substantially the characterization of world food security due to climate change and to enhance adaptation capacity in both developing and developed countries. Analyses of the agricultural impacts of climate variability and change require a transdisciplinary effort to consistently link state-of-the-art climate scenarios to crop and economic models. Crop model outputs are aggregated as inputs to regional and global economic models to determine regional vulnerabilities, changes in comparative advantage, price effects, and potential adaptation strategies in the agricultural sector. Climate, Crop Modeling, Economics, and Information Technology Team Protocols are presented to guide coordinated climate, crop modeling, economics, and information technology research activities around the world, along with AgMIP Cross-Cutting Themes that address uncertainty, aggregation and scaling, and the development of Representative Agricultural Pathways (RAPs) to enable testing of climate change adaptations in the context of other regional and global trends. The organization of research activities by geographic region and specific crops is described, along with project milestones. Pilot results demonstrate AgMIP's role in assessing climate impacts with explicit representation of uncertainties in climate scenarios and simulations using crop and economic models. An intercomparison of wheat model simulations near Obregón, Mexico reveals inter-model differences in yield sensitivity to [CO 2 ] with model uncertainty holding approximately steady as concentrations rise, while uncertainty related to choice of crop model increases with rising temperatures. Wheat model simulations with midcentury climate scenarios project a slight decline in absolute yields that is more sensitive to selection of crop model than to global climate model, emissions scenario, or climate scenario downscaling method. A comparison of regional and national-scale economic simulations finds a large sensitivity of projected yield changes to the simulations' resolved scales. Finally, a global economic model intercomparison example demonstrates that improvements in the understanding of agriculture futures arise from integration of the range of uncertainty in crop, climate, and economic modeling results in multi-model assessments.

Potential consequences of climate change on crop production can be studied using mechanistic crop simulation models. While a broad variety of maize simulation models exist, it is not known whether different models diverge on grain yield responses to changes in climatic factors, or whether they agree in their general trends related to phenology, growth, and yield. With the goal of analyzing the sensitivity of simulated yields to changes in temperature and atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations [CO2 ], we present the largest maize crop model intercomparison to date, including 23 different models. These models were evaluated for four locations representing a wide range of maize production conditions in the world: Lusignan (France), Ames (USA), Rio Verde (Brazil) and Morogoro (Tanzania). While individual models differed considerably in absolute yield simulation at the four sites, an ensemble of a minimum number of models was able to simulate absolute yields accurately at the four sites even with low data for calibration, thus suggesting that using an ensemble of models has merit. Temperature increase had strong negative influence on modeled yield response of roughly -0.5 Mg ha(-1) per °C. Doubling [CO2 ] from 360 to 720 μmol mol(-1) increased grain yield by 7.5% on average across models and the sites. That would therefore make temperature the main factor altering maize yields at the end of this century. Furthermore, there was a large uncertainty in the yield response to [CO2 ] among models. Model responses to temperature and [CO2 ] did not differ whether models were simulated with low calibration information or, simulated with high level of calibration information.