1. AgMIP Regional Team Crop-Climate Modeling Webinar Ken Boote, Cheryl Porter, Alex Ruane, Wei Xiong, Sonali McDermid, John Dimes, etc. March 29, 2016 Phase 2 – Reviewing CM1 and CM2 (Climate Scenarios)

2. Crop/Climate Modeling Webinar Goals 2  Evaluate Phase 2 crop model simulations of climate scenario impacts.  Review Crop Model Simulations of Climate Impacts  Discuss deadlines, Uploads to ftp site  April 3: Final CM1 and CM2 simulations submitted  Review simulated climate impacts (CM1 and CM2)  Tools for creating box-and-whisker plots?  What do the economists need?  Identify areas where help of climate scientists and crop modelers is needed.  3 teams out of 7 have submitted CM1 and CM2 simulations  Actions: 1) Send updated ppt with correct change ratio, 2) Make r- scripts for box-and-whisker plots, 3) Send timeline to all

3. March 25 (new) Deadline for submitting CM1 and CM2 3 March 25 - Deadline to submit CM1 analysis (current management, current climate, 30 years) and CM2 analyses (5 future climate scenarios with current management, 30 years) to the ftp site. CM1, CM2 files: Harmonized data (aceb, dome, alnk, acmo files) Include box and whisker diagrams comparing outputs from each analysis. (These can be done using FACE-IT.) Visualization: Box and whisker diagrams of absolute yields using “per farm” mean of 30 years, where the variation in box-and-whisker is from farms: Baseline, plus 5 climates, done for two crop models Box and whisker plot of climate change ratio (CCR), where CCR = per-farm 30-year mean(future) / per-farm 30-year mean(base): Baseline, plus 5 climates, done for two crop models. Some analysis of the 6 climates (base, hot-dry, cool-wet, etc.)

4. Box-and-Whisker Plot Chickpea Example: Absolute Yield Ignore that the two models are different. Calibration not done. Beware when many farms are at zero yield

5. Concern for probability of exceedance with many “zero” yields Beware when many farms are at zero yield. Economists need climate change ratio. Not possible if you have zero yield. Here caused by APSIM failure at low N. Solved by higher initial N.

6. Box-and-Whisker Plot Chickpea Example: Climate Change Ratio Need to understand why a crop model goes up or down on CCR

7. Box-and-Whisker Plot Chickpea Example: Climate Change Ratio Need to understand why a crop model goes up or down on CCR

8. South India Selection of 5 GCMs for Impact Assessment: Mid century RCP 8.5 Choice of Models under different climate caterory for Impact assessment Cool/Wet: MIROC 5 (O) Cool/Dry : inmcm4 (L) Hot/Wet : CanESM2 (D) Hot/Dry : IPSL-CM5A-MR (N) Middle : HadGEM2-AO (Y)

9. South India: Base and future maize and rice productivity, 2 models & 5 climates Rice farms - Base and future rice productivity I would put base climate on plot to right

10. Maize farms - Impact of climate change on maize productivity Rice farms - Impact of climate change on rice productivity South India: Base and future maize and rice climate change ratio, 2 models & 5 climates

11. Simulated yield (kg/ha)Yield Change (%) APSIMDSSATAPSIMDSSAT Baseline 41564674 GLXFCool/Dry4608472210.891.0 GMXFHot/Wet32584827-21.613.3 GQXFHot/Dry35164726-15.391.1 GSXFCool/Wet38545160-7.2610.4 GYXFMiddle39695011-4.507.2 11 Comparison of wheat yield under baseline and future climate scenario RCP4.5 – mid term IGB Example of Table: Absolute Yield and Change Ratio Table works, but does not give concept of variability.

12. Comparison of wheat yield under baseline and future climate scenario RCP8.5 – mid term Simulated yield (kg/ha)Yield Change (%) APSIMDSSATAPSIMDSSAT Baseline 41564674 IAXFMiddle39854936-4.15.6 ICXFHot/Wet32324949-22.25.9 IPXFCool/Dry35155199-15.411.2 IQXFHot/Dry34154819-17.83.1 ITXFCool/Wet38035188-8.511.0 IGB Example of Table: Absolute Yield and Change Ratio Table works, but does not give concept of variability.

13. Review: January 22 Deadline 13 Requested (not complete?): Upload CM0 (historical) and CTWN analyses to ftp site for review by DSSAT and APSIM modelers. CM0 files: Survey data, domes, linkage files, model inputs, model outputs, harmonized data (aceb, dome, alnk, acmo files). Use the directory structure described in the Handbook Appendix 3 Include a probability of exceedance graph with both models and observed data for the CM0 analyses. All modifications made to adjust simulated outputs must be made in the data or DOMEs such that simulated outputs can be replicated from the harmonized data inputs. CTWN files: Survey data, domes, linkage files, acmos, model inputs, model outputs. Include box and whisker diagrams for the standard CTWN sensitivity analyses.

14. Climate Team Planning for Dakar Request from Alex and DFID –Do you know of any longer-term 10-plus years of yield data (network of trials, district level, national level) available for your regions? –Alex and DFID wish to document the extent to which crop models are able to simulate seasonal weather variation, including extremes (drought, heat, etc.). –This is not possible in single year yield survey data. Long-term historical yield data provided by SAAMIP, IGB, and South India.

15. The Most Important Issues Discovered from CTWN Issues learned from CTWN and survey plots –# 1 Problem: Setting of SLSC=SOM3 and SLFIC=Finert. These set yield at zero N. Must have both models predicting same “low” yield levels at zero N. Experience so far: needed high SLSC=SOM3 of 0.96 to 0.98 to mimic degraded soil. SLFIC=? If this is off, models will differ on the other plots (CO2, temperature, rainfall). –# 2 Problem: High initial N (in survey file) can also cause lack of response to fertilizer N as well as differences among models. –# 3 Problem: Cultivar yield potential set too high, can give very high yield at 180 kg N/ha. Sets asymptote. –Model differences in temperature response, gives opposite (negative vs. positive) response to scenarios. Last Slide