Nendel 38 | Jørgen Eivind Olesen 37 | Taru Palosuo 44 | John R. Porter 42,45,46 | Eckart Priesack 39 | Dominique Ripoche 47 | Mikhail A. Semenov 48 | Claudio Stöckle 17 | Pierre Stratonovitch 48 | Thilo Streck 33 | Iwan Supit 49 | Fulu Tao 50,44 | Marijn Van der Velde 51 | Daniel Wallach 52 | Enli Wang 53 | Heidi Webber 30,38 AbstractWheat grain protein concentration is an important determinant of wheat quality for human nutrition that is often overlooked in efforts to improve crop production. We tested and applied a 32-multi-model ensemble to simulate global wheat yield and quality in a changing climate. Potential benefits of elevated atmospheric CO 2 concentration by 2050 on global wheat grain and protein yield are likely to be negated by impacts from rising temperature and changes in rainfall, but with considerable 156 |

Potential climate-related impacts on future crop yield are a major societal concern. Previous projections of the Agricultural Model Intercomparison and Improvement Project's Global Gridded Crop Model Intercomparison based on CMIP5 identified substantial climate impacts on all major crops, but associated uncertainties were substantial. Here we report new 21st-century projections using ensembles of latest-generation crop and climate models. Results suggest markedly more pessimistic yield responses for maize, soybean and rice compared to the original ensemble. Mean end-of-century maize productivity is shifted from +5% to −6% (SSP126) and from +1% to −24% (SSP585)-explained by warmer climate projections and improved crop model sensitivities. In contrast, wheat shows stronger gains (+9% shifted to +18%, SSP585), linked to higher CO 2 concentrations and expanded high-latitude gains. The 'emergence' of climate impacts consistently occurs earlier in the new projectionsbefore 2040 for several main producing regions. While future yield estimates remain uncertain, these results suggest that major breadbasket regions will face distinct anthropogenic climatic risks sooner than previously anticipated.

Understanding the drivers of yield levels under climate change is required to support adaptation planning and respond to changing production risks. This study uses an ensemble of crop models applied on a spatial grid to quantify the contributions of various climatic drivers to past yield variability in grain maize and winter wheat of European cropping systems (1984–2009) and drivers of climate change impacts to 2050. Results reveal that for the current genotypes and mix of irrigated and rainfed production, climate change would lead to yield losses for grain maize and gains for winter wheat. Across Europe, on average heat stress does not increase for either crop in rainfed systems, while drought stress intensifies for maize only. In low-yielding years, drought stress persists as the main driver of losses for both crops, with elevated CO2 offering no yield benefit in these years.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

To reduce the risks of climate change, governments agreed in the Paris Agreement to limit global temperature rise to less than 2.0 • C above pre-industrial levels, with the ambition to keep warming to 1.5 • C. Charting appropriate mitigation responses requires information on the costs of mitigating versus associated damages for the two levels of warming. In this assessment, a critical consideration is the impact on crop yields and yield variability in regions currently challenged by food insecurity. The current study assessed impacts of 1.5 • C versus 2.0 • C on yields of maize, pearl millet and sorghum in the West African Sudan Savanna using two crop models that were calibrated with common varieties from experiments in the region with management reflecting a range of typical sowing windows. As sustainable intensification is promoted in the region for improving food security, simulations were conducted for both current fertilizer use and for an intensification case (fertility not limiting). With current fertilizer use, results indicated 2% units higher losses for maize and sorghum with 2.0 • C compared to 1.5 • C warming, with no change in millet yields for either scenario. In the intensification case, yield losses due to climate change were larger than with current fertilizer levels. However, despite the larger losses, yields were always two to three times higher with intensification, irrespective of the warming scenario. Though yield variability increased with intensification, there was no interaction with warming scenario. Risk and market analysis are needed to extend these results to understand implications for food security.

This study assesses the ability of 21 crop models to capture the impact of elevated CO2 concentration ([CO2]) on maize yield and water use as measured in a 2-year Free Air Carbon dioxide Enrichment experiment conducted at the Thünen Institute in Braunschweig, Germany (Manderscheid et al., 2014). Data for ambient [CO2] and irrigated treatments were provided to the 21 models for calibrating plant traits, including weather, soil and management data as well as yield, grain number, above ground biomass, leaf area index, nitrogen concentration in biomass and grain, water use and soil water content. Models differed in their representation of carbon assimilation and evapotranspiration processes. The models reproduced the absence of yield response to elevated [CO2] under well-watered conditions, as well as the impact of water deficit at ambient [CO2], with 50% of models within a range of +/−1 Mg ha−1 around the mean. The bias of the median of the 21 models was less than 1 Mg ha−1. However under water deficit in one of the two years, the models captured only 30% of the exceptionally high [CO2] enhancement on yield observed. Furthermore the ensemble of models was unable to simulate the very low soil water content at anthesis and the increase of soil water and grain number brought about by the elevated [CO2] under dry conditions. Overall, we found models with explicit stomatal control on transpiration tended to perform better. Our results highlight the need for model improvement with respect to simulating transpirational water use and its impact on water status during the kernel-set phase