Contrasting contributions of five factors to wheat yield growth in China by process-based and statistical models

被引:17
|
作者
Liu, Huan [1 ,2 ]
Xiong, Wei [3 ,4 ]
Mottaleb, Khondoker A. [5 ]
Krupnik, Timothy J. [6 ]
Burgueno, Juan [7 ]
Pequeno, Diego N. L. [5 ]
Wu, Wenbin [8 ]
机构
[1] Chengdu Univ Informat Technol, Coll Atmospher Sci, Chengdu 610103, Peoples R China
[2] Chinese Acad Agr Sci, Inst Environm & Sustainable Dev Agr, Beijing 100081, Peoples R China
[3] Henan Agr Univ, CIMMYT Henan Joint Ctr Wheat & Maize Improvement, Zhengzhou 450000, Peoples R China
[4] Int Maize & Wheat Improvement Ctr CIMMYT, Sustainable Intensificat Program, Texcoco 56237, Mexico
[5] Int Maize & Wheat Improvement Ctr CIMMYT, Integrated Dev Program, Texcoco 56237, Mexico
[6] Int Maize & Wheat Improvement Ctr CIMMYT, Sustainable Intensificat Program, Dhaka 1213, Bangladesh
[7] Int Maize & Wheat Improvement Ctr CIMMYT, Biometr & Stat Unit, Texcoco 56237, Mexico
[8] Chinese Acad Agr Sci, Inst Agr Resources & Reg Planning, Beijing 100081, Peoples R China
基金
中国国家自然科学基金;
关键词
Wheat; C-D production function; EPIC modelling; Contribution; China; CLIMATE TRENDS; GRAIN-YIELD; PRODUCTIVITY; CROP; MANAGEMENT; AGRICULTURE; TEMPERATURE; SENSITIVITY; CALIBRATION; IMPROVEMENT;
D O I
10.1016/j.eja.2021.126370
中图分类号
S3 [农学(农艺学)];
学科分类号
0901 ;
摘要
China's wheat growth from 1981 to 2015 was faster than most countries, characterized by notable linear growth and more than 100 % rise in yield. Understanding the reasons for such fast growth is essential for stakeholders in developing countries to gain insight and be able to establish efficient yield-increasing strategies for the future. Here, using a statistical function and a process-based crop model, we dissected, quantified and compared the contributions of five causal factors to China's national wheat yield growth. For past yield growth from 1981 to 2015, the Environmental Policy Integrated Climate (EPIC) model estimated that five drivers have contributed to national wheat yield growth by 57.4 % (fertilizer), 37.9 % (cultivar), 7.9 % (irrigation), -1.0 % (area), and -2.2 % (climate), while the Cobb-Douglas (C-D) production function estimated contributions of 79.8 %, 16.1 %, 8.0 %, -2.6 %, and -1.2 %, respectively. Furthermore, we conducted a temporal two-paired comparison of the yield contributions estimated by the two methods and explored the reasons for such difference. Results indicated that the distinct nature of the two methods and inconsistency of the input data resulted in the divergent estimations in amount and temporal scale. The way to decrease the uncertainty of each factor's contribution in each of the methods was to maintain consistency in input data, clearly understand the methods' assumptions, and include as many interactions as possible. In addition, utilization of an ensemble of multiple models was able to achieve a more robust assessment, especially with the inclusion of both statistical and process-based models. This study has for the first time systematically compared the applicability of the two methods in evaluating the contribution of the five drivers to yield, and provided instructions for improvements. Future researchers should pay attention to developing a consistent manner of integrating multiple approaches, which have the potential partly to offset the weakness of individual methods and thus lead to better estimations.
引用
收藏
页数:13
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Comparing process-based wheat growth models in their simulation of yield losses caused by plant diseases
    Bregaglio, Simone
    Willocquet, Laetitia
    Kersebaum, Kurt Christian
    Ferrise, Roberto
    Stella, Tommaso
    Ferreira, Thiago Berton
    Pavan, Willingthon
    Asseng, Senthold
    Savary, Serge
    [J]. FIELD CROPS RESEARCH, 2021, 265
  • [2] The contribution of spike photosynthesis to wheat yield needs to be considered in process-based crop models
    Zhang, Meng
    Gao, Yanmei
    Zhang, Yinghua
    Fischer, Tony
    Zhao, Zhigan
    Zhou, Xiaonan
    Wang, Zhimin
    Wang, Enli
    [J]. FIELD CROPS RESEARCH, 2020, 257
  • [3] Economic impacts of climate change on agriculture: a comparison of process-based and statistical yield models
    Moore, Frances C.
    Baldos, Uris Lantz C.
    Hertel, Thomas
    [J]. ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH LETTERS, 2017, 12 (06):
  • [4] A comparison of four process-based models and a statistical regression model to predict growth of Eucalyptus globulus plantations
    Miehle, Peter
    Battaglia, Michael
    Sands, Peter J.
    Forrester, David I.
    Feikema, Paul M.
    Livesley, Stephen J.
    Morris, Jim D.
    Arndt, Stefan K.
    [J]. ECOLOGICAL MODELLING, 2009, 220 (05) : 734 - 746
  • [5] OliveCan: A Process-Based Model of Development, Growth and Yield of Olive Orchards
    Lopez-Bernal, Alvaro
    Morales, Alejandro
    Garcia-Tejera, Omar
    Testi, Luca
    Orgaz, Francisco
    De Melo-Abreu, J. P.
    Villalobos, Francisco J.
    [J]. FRONTIERS IN PLANT SCIENCE, 2018, 9
  • [6] GLOBAL SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS OF WINTER WHEAT YIELD AND PROCESS-BASED VARIABLE WITH AQUACROP MODEL
    Xing, Huimin
    Xu, Xingang
    Yang, Fuqin
    Feng, Haikuan
    Yang, Guijin
    [J]. 2016 IEEE INTERNATIONAL GEOSCIENCE AND REMOTE SENSING SYMPOSIUM (IGARSS), 2016, : 5929 - 5932
  • [7] Fractal characteristics based on different statistical objects of process-based digital rock models
    Li, Xiaobin
    Luo, Miao
    Liu, Jiangping
    [J]. JOURNAL OF PETROLEUM SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING, 2019, 179 : 19 - 30
  • [8] Comparing and combining process-based crop models and statistical models with some implications for climate change
    Roberts, Michael J.
    Braun, Noah O.
    Sinclair, Thomas R.
    Lobell, David B.
    Schlenker, Wolfram
    [J]. ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH LETTERS, 2017, 12 (09):
  • [9] Heterogeneous impacts of excessive wetness on maize yields in China: Evidence from statistical yields and process-based crop models
    Liu, Weihang
    Li, Zitong
    Li, Yan
    Ye, Tao
    Chen, Shuo
    Liu, Yiqing
    [J]. AGRICULTURAL AND FOREST METEOROLOGY, 2022, 327
  • [10] FITTING PROCESS-BASED MODELS WITH STAND GROWTH DATA - PROBLEMS AND EXPERIENCES
    SIEVANEN, R
    BURK, TE
    [J]. FOREST ECOLOGY AND MANAGEMENT, 1994, 69 (1-3) : 145 - 156