An Agriculture Perspective

State of the Science

Risk Management Policy

Forecasting into the Future

• Distribution of agricultural crops is not expected to change significantly. Changes in rainfall amounts have caused a shift in South Dakota and North Dakota.

• Emissions of GHG will be affected more by management and the interaction with climate.

• Extreme events in temperature and precipitation, impacts on agriculture

Climate – Crop Models

• Extreme events in temperature and precipitation, seasonality

• Seasonal shifts in precipitation (upper Midwest increase in spring precipitation, decrease in summer precipitation)

• Role of the soil is overlooked from a water availability and nutrient source

• Continued degradation of soil resource on a worldwide basis, potential for erosion in the spring

Water Requirements

Corn Water Use Efficiency

Water Use (mm)

200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900

Yie

ld (

kg h

a-1)

8000

10000

12000

14000

16000

18000

20000

22000

24000

26000

28000

Water Deficit:need 120 mm more water to grow 300 bu corn

Information Needed

• Spatial scale– Crop reporting district or county level

• Temporal scale– Daily timesteps with emphasis on extremes

• Examine agriculture from the perspective of a crop calendar– Planting decisions– Growth impacts– Harvest decisions

Biophysical Modeling

• Interaction among parameters driving plant growth

• Effect of plant stress on grain, fruit, or forage quality

• Effect of climate stress on plants and the interactions with weeds, insects, and diseases

• Water availability to plants (role of soil is overlooked)

Priorities

• Understand how risk intersects with the dynamics of agricultural systems

• Understand the interactions among driving variables and crop or animal responses

• Understand how uncertainty interacts with the spatial and temporal dynamics of agricultural systems

US Corn Production

South Dakota Crop Distribution

South Dakota Crop Area Harvested

Year

1860 1880 1900 1920 1940 1960 1980 2000 2020

Are

a (A

cres

)

0

1e+6

2e+6

3e+6

4e+6

5e+6

6e+6

WheatCornSoybeanSunflower

North Dakota Crop DistributionNorth Dakota Crop Area Harvested

Year

1860 1880 1900 1920 1940 1960 1980 2000 2020

Are

a H

arve

sted

(A

cres

)

0.0

2.0e+6

4.0e+6

6.0e+6

8.0e+6

1.0e+7

1.2e+7

1.4e+7

WheatCornSoybeanSunflower

Midwest Corn

Indiana Corn

Deviation from Maximum Yield

0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7

Fre

quen

cy

0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

Iowa Corn

Deviation from Maximum Yield

0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7

Fre

quen

cy

0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

Illinois Corn

Deviation from Maximum Yield

0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7

Fre

quen

cy

0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

Kansas Corn

Deviation from Maximum Yield

0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7

Fre

quen

cy

0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

Winter Wheat

Kansas Winter Wheat

Deviation from Maximum Yield

0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8

Fre

quen

cy

0.00

0.05

0.10

0.15

0.20

0.25

South Dakota Winter Wheat

Deviation from Maximum Yield

0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8F

requ

ency

0.00

0.05

0.10

0.15

0.20

0.25

Urea vs ESNCT-CC rotation, 2008

DOY: 121 151 181 211 241 271 301

N2O

flu

xes

(g N

ha

-1 d

-1)

0

20

40

60

80

100

120Check (no N added)Urea (246 kg N/ha)ESN (246 kg N/ha)

N applied May 19, DOY 139

Month: M J J A S O N

NT-CC rotation, 2008

DOY: 121 151 181 211 241 271 301

N2O

flu

xes

(g N

ha-1

d-1

)

-10

0

10

20

30

40

50

60Check, no N addedUrea, 246 kg N/haESN, 246 kg N/ha

Month: M J J A S O N

N applied May 19, DOY 139

Urea vs ESN

-Fertilizer applied May 5 (DOY 125) at rate of 112 kg N / ha-Peak N2O emissions observed on May 27 (DOY 147) and on June 23 (DOY 174).

Daily N2O Emissions

Day of Year 2009

120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280

g N

2O

-N h

a-1 d

-1

0

100

200

300

400

CheckUANUAN+AgESNSuper U

Peak N2O emissions that occurred on May 27 and June 23 accounted for 6.7%, 17.6%, 24.5%, 32.9% and 26.5% of the cumulative seasonal N2O emissions for the Check, UAN, UAN+Ag, Super U and ESN treatments, respectively.

No significant difference in cumulative fluxes when peak emissions are excluded.

Cumulative N2O Emissions

May 5 - October 5, 2009

kg N

2O-N

ha-1

0

2

4

6

8

10

Excluding Peak EventsIncluding Peak Events

Check UAN UAN+Ag Super U ESN

Spring Precipitation (Ames)

Ames Spring Precipitation

Year

1880 1900 1920 1940 1960 1980 2000 2020

Pre

cipi

tatio

n (in

ches

)

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

20

22

Spring Precip (March-May)Mean Spring Precip

Nighttime Temperatures (Ames)

Ames Minimum Temperature - Summer

Year

1880 1900 1920 1940 1960 1980 2000 2020

Tem

pera

ture

(F

)

54

56

58

60

62

64

66

Summer Temp (June-Aug)Mean Summer Temp

Soybean Production Field Late August 2005

Soil Water Availability

Organic Matter (%)

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Ava

ilab

le W

ate

r C

on

ten

t (%

)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

Data Points Sand, AWC = 3.8 + 2.2 OMSilt Loam, AWC = 9.2 + 3.7 OMSilty clay loam, AWC = 6.3 + 2.8 OM

Hudson, 1994

Crop response to the environment is a complex set of interactions among light, temperature, CO2, and water. Future development of biophysical models will have to account for these interactions.