SUMMARYEleven widely used crop simulation models (APSIM, CERES, CROPSYST, COUP, DAISY, EPIC, FASSET, HERMES, MONICA, STICS and WOFOST) were tested using spring barley (Hordeum vulgare L.) data set under varying nitrogen (N) fertilizer rates from three experimental years in the boreal climate of Jokioinen, Finland. This is the largest standardized crop model inter-comparison under different levels of N supply to date. The models were calibrated using data from 2002 and 2008, of which 2008 included six N rates ranging from 0 to 150 kg N/ha. Calibration data consisted of weather, soil, phenology, leaf area index (LAI) and yield observations. The models were then tested against new data for 2009 and their performance was assessed and compared with both the two calibration years and the test year. For the calibration period, root mean square error between measurements and simulated grain dry matter yields ranged from 170 to 870 kg/ha. During the test year 2009, most models failed to accurately reproduce the observed low yield without N fertilizer as well as the steep yield response to N applications. The multi-model predictions were closer to observations than most single-model predictions, but multi-model mean could not correct systematic errors in model simulations. Variation in soil N mineralization and LAI development due to differences in weather not captured by the models most likely was the main reason for their unsatisfactory performance. This suggests the need for model improvement in soil N mineralization as a function of soil temperature and moisture. Furthermore, specific weather event impacts such as low temperatures after emergence in 2009, tending to enhance tillering, and a high precipitation event just before harvest in 2008, causing possible yield penalties, were not captured by any of the models compared in the current study.
In several regions of the world, climate change is expected to have severe impacts on agricultural systems. Changes in land management are one way to adapt to future climatic conditions, including land-use changes and local adjustments of agricultural practices. In previous studies, options for adaptation have mostly been explored by testing alternative scenarios. Systematic explorations of land management possibilities using optimization approaches were so far mainly restricted to studies of land and resource management under constant climatic conditions. In this study, we bridge this gap and exploit the benefits of multi-objective regional optimization for identifying optimum land management adaptations to climate change. We design a multi-objective optimization routine that integrates a generic crop model and considers two climate scenarios for 2050 in a mesoscale catchment on the Swiss Central Plateau with already limited water resources. The results indicate that adaptation will be necessary in the study area to cope with a decrease in productivity by 0-10 %, an increase in soil loss by 25-35 %, and an increase in N-leaching by 30-45 %. Adaptation options identified here exhibit conflicts between productivity and environmental goals, but compromises are possible. Necessary management changes include (i) adjustments of crop shares, i.e. increasing the proportion of early harvested winter cereals at the expense of irrigated spring crops, (ii) widespread use of reduced tillage, (iii) allocation of irrigated areas to soils with low water-retention capacity at lower elevations, and (iv) conversion of some prealpine grasslands to croplands. Keywords Agricultural land management Á Adaptation to climate change Á Crop modeling Á Regional optimization Á Multi-objective Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.