No abstract

Simulation models are extensively used to predict agricultural productivity and greenhouse gas emissions. However, the uncertainties of (reduced) model ensemble simulations have not been assessed systematically for variables affecting food security and climate change mitigation, within multi-species agricultural contexts. We report an international model comparison and benchmarking exercise, showing the potential of multi-model ensembles to predict productivity and nitrous oxide (N O) emissions for wheat, maize, rice and temperate grasslands. Using a multi-stage modelling protocol, from blind simulations (stage 1) to partial (stages 2-4) and full calibration (stage 5), 24 process-based biogeochemical models were assessed individually or as an ensemble against long-term experimental data from four temperate grassland and five arable crop rotation sites spanning four continents. Comparisons were performed by reference to the experimental uncertainties of observed yields and N O emissions. Results showed that across sites and crop/grassland types, 23%-40% of the uncalibrated individual models were within two standard deviations (SD) of observed yields, while 42 (rice) to 96% (grasslands) of the models were within 1 SD of observed N O emissions. At stage 1, ensembles formed by the three lowest prediction model errors predicted both yields and N O emissions within experimental uncertainties for 44% and 33% of the crop and grassland growth cycles, respectively. Partial model calibration (stages 2-4) markedly reduced prediction errors of the full model ensemble E-median for crop grain yields (from 36% at stage 1 down to 4% on average) and grassland productivity (from 44% to 27%) and to a lesser and more variable extent for N O emissions. Yield-scaled N O emissions (N O emissions divided by crop yields) were ranked accurately by three-model ensembles across crop species and field sites. The potential of using process-based model ensembles to predict jointly productivity and N O emissions at field scale is discussed.

The potential of mathematical models is widely acknowledged for examining components and interactions of natural systems, estimating the changes and uncertainties on outcomes, and fostering communication between scientists with different backgrounds and between scientists, managers and the community. For favourable reception of models, a systematic accrual of a good knowledge base is crucial for both science and decision-making. As the roles of models grow in importance, there is an increase in the need for appropriate methods with which to test their quality and performance. For biophysical models, the heterogeneity of data and the range of factors influencing usefulness of their outputs often make it difficult for full analysis and assessment. As a result, modelling studies in the domain of natural sciences often lack elements of good modelling practice related to model validation, that is correspondence of models to its intended purpose. Here we review validation issues and methods currently available for assessing the quality of biophysical models. The review covers issues of validation purpose, the robustness of model results, data quality, model prediction and model complexity. The importance of assessing input data quality and interpretation of phenomena is also addressed. Details are then provided on the range of measures commonly used for validation. Requirements for a methodology for assessment during the entire model-cycle are synthesised. Examples are used from a variety of modelling studies which mainly include agronomic modelling, e.g. crop growth and development, climatic modelling, e.g. climate scenarios, and hydrological modelling, e.g. soil hydrology, but the principles are essentially applicable to any area. It is shown that conducting detailed validation requires multi-faceted knowledge, and poses substantial scientific and technical challenges. Special emphasis is placed on using combined multiple statistics to expand our horizons in validation whilst also tailoring the validation requirements to the specific objectives of the application.

Biogeochemical simulation models are important tools for describing and quantifying the contribution of agricultural systems to C sequestration and GHG source/sink status. The abundance of simulation tools developed over recent decades, however, creates a difficulty because predictions from different models show large variability. Discrepancies between the conclusions of different modelling studies are often ascribed to differences in the physical and biogeochemical processes incorporated in equations of C and N cycles and their interactions. Here we review the literature to determine the state-of-the-art in modelling agricultural (crop and grassland) systems. In order to carry out this study, we selected the range of biogeochemical models used by the CN-MIP consortium of FACCE-JPI (http://www.faccejpi.com): APSIM, CERES-EGC, DayCent, DNDC, DSSAT, EPIC, PaSim, RothC and STICS. In our analysis, these models were assessed for the quality and comprehensiveness of underlying processes related to pedo-climatic conditions and management practices, but also with respect to time and space of application, and for their accuracy in multiple contexts. Overall, it emerged that there is a possible impact of ill-defined pedo-climatic conditions in the unsatisfactory performance of the models (46.2%), followed by limitations in the algorithms simulating the effects of management practices (33.1%). The multiplicity of scales in both time and space is a fundamental feature, which explains the remaining weaknesses (i.e. 20.7%). Innovative aspects have been identified for future development of C and N models. They include the explicit representation of soil microbial biomass to drive soil organic matter turnover, the effect of N shortage on SOM decomposition, the improvements related to the production and consumption of gases and an adequate simulations of gas transport in soil. On these bases, the assessment of trends and gaps in the modelling approaches currently employed to represent biogeochemical cycles in crop and grassland systems appears an essential step for future research.

No abstract

No abstract

Abstract. The process-based biogeochemical model Biome-BGC was enhanced to improve its ability to simulate carbon, nitrogen, and water cycles of various terrestrial ecosystems under contrasting management activities. Biome-BGC version 4.1.1 was used as a base model. Improvements included addition of new modules such as the multilayer soil module, implementation of processes related to soil moisture and nitrogen balance, soil-moisture-related plant senescence, and phenological development. Vegetation management modules with annually varying options were also implemented to simulate management practices of grasslands (mowing, grazing), croplands (ploughing, fertilizer application, planting, harvesting), and forests (thinning). New carbon and nitrogen pools have been defined to simulate yield and soft stem development of herbaceous ecosystems. The model version containing all developments is referred to as Biome-BGCMuSo (Biome-BGC with multilayer soil module; in this paper, Biome-BGCMuSo v4.0 is documented). Case studies on a managed forest, cropland, and grassland are presented to demonstrate the effect of model developments on the simulation of plant growth as well as on carbon and water balance.

Grassland-based ruminant production systems are integral to sustainable food production in Europe, converting plant materials indigestible to humans into nutritious food, while providing a range of environmental and cultural benefits. Climate change poses significant challenges for such systems, their productivity and the wider benefits they supply. In this context, grassland models have an important role in predicting and understanding the impacts of climate change on grassland systems, and assessing the efficacy of potential adaptation and mitigation strategies. In order to identify the key challenges for European grassland modelling under climate change, modellers and researchers from across Europe were consulted via workshop and questionnaire. Participants identified fifteen challenges and considered the current state of modelling and priorities for future research in relation to each. A review of literature was undertaken to corroborate and enrich the information provided during the horizon scanning activities. Challenges were in four categories relating to: 1) the direct and indirect effects of climate change on the sward 2) climate change effects on grassland systems outputs 3) mediation of climate change impacts by site, system and management and 4) cross-cutting methodological issues. While research priorities differed between challenges, an underlying theme was the need for accessible, shared inventories of models, approaches and data, as a resource for stakeholders and to stimulate new research. Developing grassland models to effectively support efforts to tackle climate change impacts, while increasing productivity and enhancing ecosystem services, will require engagement with stakeholders and policy-makers, as well as modellers and experimental researchers across many disciplines. The challenges and priorities identified are intended to be a resource 1) for grassland modellers and experimental researchers, to stimulate the development of new research directions and collaborative opportunities, and 2) for policy-makers involved in shaping the research agenda for European grassland modelling under climate change.