| |
|
|
 | Acesso ao texto completo restrito à biblioteca da Embrapa Amazônia Oriental. Para informações adicionais entre em contato com cpatu.biblioteca@embrapa.br. |
|
Registro Completo |
|
Biblioteca(s): |
Embrapa Amazônia Oriental. |
|
Data corrente: |
01/10/2015 |
|
Data da última atualização: |
30/05/2022 |
|
Tipo da produção científica: |
Artigo em Periódico Indexado |
|
Autoria: |
ARAYAA, A.; HOOGENBOOM, G.; LUEDELING, E.; HADGU, K. M.; KISEKKA, I.; MARTORANO, L. G. |
|
Afiliação: |
A. Arayaa, Mekelle University; G. Hoogenboom, Washington State University; E. Luedeling, World Agroforestry Centre / University of Bonn; Kiros M. Hadgu, World Agroforestry Centre; Isaya Kisekka, Kansas State University; LUCIETA GUERREIRO MARTORANO, CPATU. |
|
Título: |
Assessment of maize growth and yield using crop models under present and future climate in southwestern Ethiopia. |
|
Ano de publicação: |
2015 |
|
Fonte/Imprenta: |
Agricultural and Forest Meteorology, v. 214/215, p. 252-265, Dec. 2015. |
|
DOI: |
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.agrformet.2015.08.259 |
|
Idioma: |
Inglês |
|
Conteúdo: |
Maize yield productivity in Ethiopia has been below the genetic potential?constrained, among other factors, by frequent moisture stress due to local weather variability. Changes in climate may exacerbate these limitations to productivity, but current research on projecting responses of maize yields to climate change in Ethiopia is inadequate. The research objectives of this project were to (1) calibrate and evaluate the performance of the APSIM-maize and DSSAT CSM-CERES-Maize models, and (2) assess the impact of climate change on future maize yield. The climate periods considered were near future (2010-2039), middle (2040-2069) and end of the 21st century (2070-2099). Climate simulations were conducted using 20 General Circulation Models (GCMs) and two Representative Concentration Pathways (RCPs; RCP4.5 and RCP8.5). Both crop models reasonably reproduced observations for time to anthesis, time to physiological maturity and crop yields, with values for the index of agreement of 0.86, 0.80 and 0.77 for DSSAT, and 0.50, 0.89 and 0.60 for APSIM. Similarly root mean square errors were moderate for days to anthesis (1.3 and 3.7 days, for DSSAT and APSIM, respectively), maturity (4.5 and 3.1 days), and yield (1.1 and 1.2 tons). Deviations of simulated from observed values were low for days to anthesis (DSSAT: −2.4?2.3%; APSIM: 0?6%) and days to maturity (DSSAT: −0.6?4.4%; APSIM: −1.9?3.3%) but relatively high for yield (DSSAT: −18.5?21.2%; APSIM: −19.1?37.1%). Overall the goodness-of-fit measures indicated that models were useful for assessing maize yield at the study site. Simulations for future climate scenarios projected slight increases in the median yield for the near future (1.7%?2.9% across models and RCPs), with uncertainty increasing toward mid-century (0.6?4.2%). By the end of the 21st century, projections ranged between yield decreases by 6.3% and increases by 4%. Differences between the RCPs were small, probably due to factor interactions, such as higher temperatures reducing the CO2-induced yield gains for the higher RCP. Uncertainties in studies on the impact of climate change on maize might arise mostly from the choice of crop model and GCM. Therefore, the use of multiple crop models along with multiple GCMs would be advisable in order to adequately consider uncertainties about future climate and crop responses and to provide comprehensive information to policy makers and planners. Overall, results of this study (based on two different crop simulation models across 20 GCMs, and two RCPs under similar crop management) consistently indicated a slight increase in yield. MenosMaize yield productivity in Ethiopia has been below the genetic potential?constrained, among other factors, by frequent moisture stress due to local weather variability. Changes in climate may exacerbate these limitations to productivity, but current research on projecting responses of maize yields to climate change in Ethiopia is inadequate. The research objectives of this project were to (1) calibrate and evaluate the performance of the APSIM-maize and DSSAT CSM-CERES-Maize models, and (2) assess the impact of climate change on future maize yield. The climate periods considered were near future (2010-2039), middle (2040-2069) and end of the 21st century (2070-2099). Climate simulations were conducted using 20 General Circulation Models (GCMs) and two Representative Concentration Pathways (RCPs; RCP4.5 and RCP8.5). Both crop models reasonably reproduced observations for time to anthesis, time to physiological maturity and crop yields, with values for the index of agreement of 0.86, 0.80 and 0.77 for DSSAT, and 0.50, 0.89 and 0.60 for APSIM. Similarly root mean square errors were moderate for days to anthesis (1.3 and 3.7 days, for DSSAT and APSIM, respectively), maturity (4.5 and 3.1 days), and yield (1.1 and 1.2 tons). Deviations of simulated from observed values were low for days to anthesis (DSSAT: −2.4?2.3%; APSIM: 0?6%) and days to maturity (DSSAT: −0.6?4.4%; APSIM: −1.9?3.3%) but relatively high for yield (DSSAT: −18.5?21.2%; APSIM: −19.1... Mostrar Tudo |
|
Palavras-Chave: |
Etiópia. |
|
Thesagro: |
Milho; Mudança Climática. |
|
Categoria do assunto: |
-- |
|
Marc: |
LEADER 03384naa a2200229 a 4500
001 2025627
005 2022-05-30
008 2015 bl uuuu u00u1 u #d
024 7 $ahttp://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.agrformet.2015.08.259$2DOI
100 1 $aARAYAA, A.
245 $aAssessment of maize growth and yield using crop models under present and future climate in southwestern Ethiopia.$h[electronic resource]
260 $c2015
520 $aMaize yield productivity in Ethiopia has been below the genetic potential?constrained, among other factors, by frequent moisture stress due to local weather variability. Changes in climate may exacerbate these limitations to productivity, but current research on projecting responses of maize yields to climate change in Ethiopia is inadequate. The research objectives of this project were to (1) calibrate and evaluate the performance of the APSIM-maize and DSSAT CSM-CERES-Maize models, and (2) assess the impact of climate change on future maize yield. The climate periods considered were near future (2010-2039), middle (2040-2069) and end of the 21st century (2070-2099). Climate simulations were conducted using 20 General Circulation Models (GCMs) and two Representative Concentration Pathways (RCPs; RCP4.5 and RCP8.5). Both crop models reasonably reproduced observations for time to anthesis, time to physiological maturity and crop yields, with values for the index of agreement of 0.86, 0.80 and 0.77 for DSSAT, and 0.50, 0.89 and 0.60 for APSIM. Similarly root mean square errors were moderate for days to anthesis (1.3 and 3.7 days, for DSSAT and APSIM, respectively), maturity (4.5 and 3.1 days), and yield (1.1 and 1.2 tons). Deviations of simulated from observed values were low for days to anthesis (DSSAT: −2.4?2.3%; APSIM: 0?6%) and days to maturity (DSSAT: −0.6?4.4%; APSIM: −1.9?3.3%) but relatively high for yield (DSSAT: −18.5?21.2%; APSIM: −19.1?37.1%). Overall the goodness-of-fit measures indicated that models were useful for assessing maize yield at the study site. Simulations for future climate scenarios projected slight increases in the median yield for the near future (1.7%?2.9% across models and RCPs), with uncertainty increasing toward mid-century (0.6?4.2%). By the end of the 21st century, projections ranged between yield decreases by 6.3% and increases by 4%. Differences between the RCPs were small, probably due to factor interactions, such as higher temperatures reducing the CO2-induced yield gains for the higher RCP. Uncertainties in studies on the impact of climate change on maize might arise mostly from the choice of crop model and GCM. Therefore, the use of multiple crop models along with multiple GCMs would be advisable in order to adequately consider uncertainties about future climate and crop responses and to provide comprehensive information to policy makers and planners. Overall, results of this study (based on two different crop simulation models across 20 GCMs, and two RCPs under similar crop management) consistently indicated a slight increase in yield.
650 $aMilho
650 $aMudança Climática
653 $aEtiópia
700 1 $aHOOGENBOOM, G.
700 1 $aLUEDELING, E.
700 1 $aHADGU, K. M.
700 1 $aKISEKKA, I.
700 1 $aMARTORANO, L. G.
773 $tAgricultural and Forest Meteorology$gv. 214/215, p. 252-265, Dec. 2015.
Download
Esconder MarcMostrar Marc Completo |
|
Registro original: |
Embrapa Amazônia Oriental (CPATU) |
|
|
Biblioteca |
ID |
Origem |
Tipo/Formato |
Classificação |
Cutter |
Registro |
Volume |
Status |
URL |
Voltar
|
|
|
Registro Completo
|
Biblioteca(s): |
Embrapa Solos. |
|
Data corrente: |
18/06/2010 |
|
Data da última atualização: |
19/12/2018 |
|
Tipo da produção científica: |
Boletim de Pesquisa e Desenvolvimento |
|
Autoria: |
BACA, J. F. M.; TOSTO, S. G.; CLAESSEN, M. E. C.; RAMALHO FILHO, A.; BRANDÃO, E. S.; COSTA, J. R. P. F. da. |
|
Afiliação: |
JESUS FERNANDO MANSILLA BACA, CNPS; SERGIO GOMES TOSTO, CNPM; MARIE ELIZABETH CHRISTINE CLAESSEN, CNPS; ANTONIO RAMALHO FILHO, CNPS; ELIZABETH SANTOS BRANDÃO, CNPS; JULIO ROBERTO PINTO F DA COSTA, CNPS. |
|
Título: |
Avaliação de impacto ambiental: o caso do Sistema Brasileiro de Classificação de Solos: SiBCS. |
|
Ano de publicação: |
2005 |
|
Fonte/Imprenta: |
Rio de Janeiro: Embrapa Solos, 2005. |
|
Páginas: |
51 p. |
|
Série: |
(Embrapa Solos. Boletim de pesquisa e desenvolvimento, 86). |
|
ISSN: |
1678-0892 |
|
Idioma: |
Português |
|
Conteúdo: |
As discussões sobre as questões ambientais nestas últimas décadas têm trazido grandes preocupações para a humanidade, devido ao fato de que esta vem se apropriando dos recursos naturais de forma desordenada, onde sua capacidade de regeneração está abaixo do nível de exploração. A avaliação de impactos ambientais, além de sua imposição legal, possui também razões de ordem econômica, social, ecológica e ética na busca de um meio ambiente saudável. Conforme resolução do Conselho Nacional do Meio Ambiente (Conama), considera-se impacto ambiental qualquer alteração das propriedades físicas, químicas e biológicas do meio ambiente, causada por qualquer forma de matéria ou energia (MIRRA, 1998). Este trabalho foi desenvolvido por uma equipe de pesquisadores da Embrapa Solos com o objetivo de avaliar os impactos ambientais do Sistema Brasileiro de Classificação dos Solos, tendo como base o trabalho desenvolvido por Rodrigues et al. (2000) e Rodrigues et al. (2002), buscando-se uma participação ativa dos usuários da tecnologia. |
|
Thesagro: |
Classificação do Solo; Impacto Ambiental. |
|
Categoria do assunto: |
P Recursos Naturais, Ciências Ambientais e da Terra |
|
URL: |
https://ainfo.cnptia.embrapa.br/digital/bitstream/item/188869/1/CNPS-BPD-86-2005.pdf
|
|
Marc: |
LEADER 01796nam a2200229 a 4500
001 1855619
005 2018-12-19
008 2005 bl uuuu 00u1 u #d
022 $a1678-0892
100 1 $aBACA, J. F. M.
245 $aAvaliação de impacto ambiental$bo caso do Sistema Brasileiro de Classificação de Solos: SiBCS.$h[electronic resource]
260 $aRio de Janeiro: Embrapa Solos$c2005
300 $a51 p.
490 $a(Embrapa Solos. Boletim de pesquisa e desenvolvimento, 86).
520 $aAs discussões sobre as questões ambientais nestas últimas décadas têm trazido grandes preocupações para a humanidade, devido ao fato de que esta vem se apropriando dos recursos naturais de forma desordenada, onde sua capacidade de regeneração está abaixo do nível de exploração. A avaliação de impactos ambientais, além de sua imposição legal, possui também razões de ordem econômica, social, ecológica e ética na busca de um meio ambiente saudável. Conforme resolução do Conselho Nacional do Meio Ambiente (Conama), considera-se impacto ambiental qualquer alteração das propriedades físicas, químicas e biológicas do meio ambiente, causada por qualquer forma de matéria ou energia (MIRRA, 1998). Este trabalho foi desenvolvido por uma equipe de pesquisadores da Embrapa Solos com o objetivo de avaliar os impactos ambientais do Sistema Brasileiro de Classificação dos Solos, tendo como base o trabalho desenvolvido por Rodrigues et al. (2000) e Rodrigues et al. (2002), buscando-se uma participação ativa dos usuários da tecnologia.
650 $aClassificação do Solo
650 $aImpacto Ambiental
700 1 $aTOSTO, S. G.
700 1 $aCLAESSEN, M. E. C.
700 1 $aRAMALHO FILHO, A.
700 1 $aBRANDÃO, E. S.
700 1 $aCOSTA, J. R. P. F. da
Download
Esconder MarcMostrar Marc Completo |
|
Registro original: |
Embrapa Solos (CNPS) |
|
|
Biblioteca |
ID |
Origem |
Tipo/Formato |
Classificação |
Cutter |
Registro |
Volume |
Status |
Fechar
|
| Expressão de busca inválida. Verifique!!! |
|
|
