447-1 DATA Aggregation Effects in Regional YIELD Simulations.

See more from this Division: ASA Section: Climatology and Modeling
See more from this Session: AgMIP: Advances in Crop & Soil Model Intercomparison and Improvement Oral

Wednesday, November 9, 2016: 2:05 PM
Phoenix Convention Center North, Room 228 A

Holger Hoffmann1, Kurt C. Kersebaum2, Gang Zhao3, Senthold Asseng4, Marco Bindi5, Davide Cammarano6, Julie Constantin7, Elsa Coucheney8, Rene Dechow9, Luca Doro10, Henrik Eckersten11, Thomas Gaiser12, Balazs Grosz9, Edwin Haas13, Belay T. Kassie14, Ralf Kiese15, Steffen Klatt13, Matthias Kuhnert16, Elisabet Lewan8, Marco Moriondo5, Claas Nendel17, Helene Raynal18, Pier Paolo Roggero19, Reimund Paul Rötter20, Stefan Siebert1, Carmen Sosa8, Xenia Specka21, Fulu Tao22, Edmar Teixeira23, Giacomo Trombi24, Jagadeesh Yeluripati25, Eline Vanuytrecht26, Daniel Wallach27, Enli Wang28, Lutz Weihermueller29, Zhigan Zhao30 and Frank Ewert31, (1)Institute of Crop Science and Resource Conservation (INRES), University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany
(2)ZALF - Leibniz Centre for Agricultural Landscape Research, Muencheberg, GERMANY
(3)INRES, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany
(4)221 Frazier Rogers Hall, PO Box 110570, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL
(5)University of Florence, Florence, Italy
(6)Invergowrie, James Hutton Institute, Dundee, Scotland
(7)UMR INRA-ENSAT 1248 AGIR - AGroécologie, Innovations & teRritoires, INRA - Centre de recherche de Toulouse, Castanet-Tolosan, France
(8)Department of Soil and Environment, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Uppsala, Sweden
(9)Climate Smart Agriculture, Thünen Institute, Braunschweig, Germany
(10)Texas Agrilife Research-Blackland Center, Temple, TX
(11)Department of Crop Production Ecology, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Uppsala, Sweden
(12)Institute of Crop Science and Resource Conservation, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany
(13)Institute of Meteorology and Climate Research, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, Garmisch-Partenkirchen, Germany
(14)Agricultural and Biological Engineering, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL
(15)Institute for Meteorology and Climate Research, Atmospheric Environmental Research (IMK-IFU), Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, Garmisch-Partenkirchen, Germany
(16)Biological and Environmental Sciences, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, United Kingdom
(17)ZALF - Leibniz Centre for Agricultural Landscape Research, Muencheberg, Germany
(18)UMR INRA-ENSAT 1248 AGIR - AGroécologie, Innovations & teRritoires, INRA, Castanet-Tolosan, France
(19)Università degli studi di Sassari, Sassari, Italy
(20)Department of Crop Sciences, University of Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany
(21)Instutute of Landscape Biogeochemistry, Leibniz Centre for Agricultural Landscape Research, Müncheberg, Germany
(22)Climate Impacts Group, Natural Resources Institute Finland, Helsinki, Finland
(23)Sustainable Production, The New Zealand Institute for Plant & Food Research Limited, Lincoln, New Zealand
(24)Department of Agri-Food Production and Environmental Sciences, University of Florence, Firenze, Italy
(25)Information and Computational Sciences Group, The James Hutton Institute, Aberdeen, United Kingdom
(26)Department of Earth and Environmental Sciences, KU Leuven University, Leuven, Belgium
(27)UMR 1248 AGIR, INRA - National Institute of Agronomic Research, Castanet Tolosan, FRANCE
(28)CSIRO, Canberra, ACT 2601, Australia
(29)Agrosphere Institute, Forschungszentrum Juelich GmbH, Juelich, GERMANY
(30)Agriculture, China Agricultural University, Beijing, China
(31)Leibniz Centre for Agricultural Landscape Research, Müncheberg, GERMANY
Abstract:
Regional yield simulations with process-based models often rely on input data of coarse spatial resolution (Ewert et al., 2015; Zhao et al., 2015). Using aggregated data as input for process-based models entails the risks of introducing so-called aggregation errors (AE). Such AE depend on the model structure in combination with the aggregation method, the type of aggregated data as well as its spatial heterogeneity. While the regional crop yield bias is usually <5 % on average over all years, it may increase in single years (Hoffmann et al. 2015), depending on the model. Here we present a model intercomparison on AE for a range of environmental conditions with varying combinations of aggregated climate, soil and crop management data for two crops grown under varying production situations.

Multi-model ensemble runs were conducted with soil, climate and crop management input data at resolutions from 1 to 100 km for the state of North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany. Climate data was spatially averaged. Soil data was aggregated by area majority. Aggregated crop management data was obtained by applying management rules on aggregated climate data. Winter wheat and silage maize yields of 1982-2011 were simulated with 11 models for potential, water-limited and water-nitrogen-limited production after calibration to average regional sowing date, harvest date and crop yield.

Regional yields were reproduced by the models on average, regardless of input data type and resolution. However, large AE were observed in dry years as well as due to soil aggregation. AE due to aggregated management data were comparatively lower. Finally, models differed considerably in AE. The results highlight the interactions between model, data and aggregation method with AE, emphasizing the importance of models intercomparison analyses.

See more from this Division: ASA Section: Climatology and Modeling
See more from this Session: AgMIP: Advances in Crop & Soil Model Intercomparison and Improvement Oral

Previous Abstract | Next Abstract >>