Abstract
The outputs of a general circulation model (GCM) and a regional climate model (RCM) were used as inputs for crop models to predict the impact of climate change and CO 2 concentration (2×CO 2 scenario) on crops and their water use in Spain. Two basins representative of irrigated agriculture were chosen to compare the phenology, aboveground biomass, yield, evapotranspiration (ET), and irrigation requirements for winter wheat ( Triticum aestivum L.), winter barley ( Hordeum vulgare L.), and maize ( Zea mays L.) under (i) a GCM‐derived climate scenario and (ii) a RCM climate output. Spatial and temporal differences in crop performance could be enhanced by the higher resolution of the RCM. Crop phenology simulated in a 1×CO 2 RCM scenario was closer to the observed phenology than the GCM‐derived one. In the 1×CO 2 scenario, vegetative phenophases were shorter and reflected the higher air temperatures in the RCM. In the 2×CO 2 GCM and RCM scenarios, the crop duration, ET, and irrigation requirements diminished, with no significant changes in the yield and biomass between scenarios of the same model. The higher temperatures in the RCM‐derived scenarios led to higher development rates and shorter phenophases. Nevertheless, the biomass was greater than in the GCM‐derived scenarios, especially in C3 crops. Higher temperatures in the southern areas led to a lack of vernalization in the future climate scenario, which was only detected by the RCM‐DSSAT (Decision Support System for Agrotechnology Transfer). The use of direct output of the GCM is questionable given the orography, land cover, and size of the Iberian Peninsula, and it makes the use of high‐resolution models necessary.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. Read at the source ↗
The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.
Claims 10
Claim · model-written summary
Under the 2xCO2 GCM and RCM scenarios, crop duration, ET and irrigation requirements were simulated to diminish.
- Taxon
- winter wheat ( Triticum aestivum L.), winter barley ( Hordeum vulgare L.), and maize ( Zea mays L.)
.jpg?width=60)
Hordeum vulgare
Triticum aestivum
Zea mayse0 - Treatment
- 2×CO 2 GCM and RCM scenariose1
- Outcome
- crop duration, ET, and irrigation requirementse1
- Direction
- diminishede1
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
.jpg?width=500)
Verbatim
e0“winter wheat ( Triticum aestivum L.), winter barley ( Hordeum vulgare L.), and maize ( Zea mays L.)”
e1“In the 2×CO 2 GCM and RCM scenarios, the crop duration, ET, and irrigation requirements diminished”
Claim · model-written summary
Simulated biomass under RCM-derived scenarios was greater than under GCM-derived scenarios, especially in C3 crops.
- Taxon
- winter wheat ( Triticum aestivum L.), winter barley ( Hordeum vulgare L.), and maize ( Zea mays L.)Hordeum vulgareTriticum aestivumZea mayse0
- Treatment
- RCM‐derived scenariose1
- Outcome
- biomasse4
- Direction
- greatere4
- Qualifier
- especially in C3 cropse4
- Comparator
- GCM‐derived scenariose4
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“winter wheat ( Triticum aestivum L.), winter barley ( Hordeum vulgare L.), and maize ( Zea mays L.)”
e4“the biomass was greater than in the GCM‐derived scenarios, especially in C3 crops”
e1“The higher temperatures in the RCM‐derived scenarios led to higher development rates and shorter phenophases”
Claim · model-written summary
Crop phenology simulated under the 1xCO2 RCM scenario was closer to observed phenology than under the GCM-derived scenario.
- Taxon
- winter wheat ( Triticum aestivum L.), winter barley ( Hordeum vulgare L.), and maize ( Zea mays L.)Hordeum vulgareTriticum aestivumZea mayse0
- Treatment
- 1×CO 2 RCM scenarioe3
- Outcome
- Crop phenologye3
- Direction
- closere3
- Comparator
- GCM‐derived onee3
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“winter wheat ( Triticum aestivum L.), winter barley ( Hordeum vulgare L.), and maize ( Zea mays L.)”
e3“Crop phenology simulated in a 1×CO 2 RCM scenario was closer to the observed phenology than the GCM‐derived one”
Claim · model-written summary
Under the 2xCO2 GCM and RCM scenarios, yield and biomass showed no significant change between scenarios of the same model.
- Taxon
- winter wheat ( Triticum aestivum L.), winter barley ( Hordeum vulgare L.), and maize ( Zea mays L.)Hordeum vulgareTriticum aestivumZea mayse0
- Treatment
- 2×CO 2 GCM and RCM scenariose1
- Outcome
- yield and biomasse2
- Direction
- no significant changese2
- Comparator
- scenarios of the same modele2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“winter wheat ( Triticum aestivum L.), winter barley ( Hordeum vulgare L.), and maize ( Zea mays L.)”
e1“In the 2×CO 2 GCM and RCM scenarios”
e2“with no significant changes in the yield and biomass between scenarios of the same model”
Claim · model-written summary
Direct GCM output is questionable for this region, so high-resolution models are necessary.
- Taxon
- winter wheat ( Triticum aestivum L.), winter barley ( Hordeum vulgare L.), and maize ( Zea mays L.)Hordeum vulgareTriticum aestivumZea mayse0
- Outcome
- use of high‐resolution modelse5
- Qualifier
- given the orography, land cover, and size of the Iberian Peninsulae5
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“winter wheat ( Triticum aestivum L.), winter barley ( Hordeum vulgare L.), and maize ( Zea mays L.)”
e5“The use of direct output of the GCM is questionable given the orography, land cover, and size of the Iberian Peninsula, and it makes the use of high‐resolution models necessary”
Claim · model-written summary
Higher temperatures in southern areas of the future scenario led to a lack of vernalization, detected only by the RCM-DSSAT model.
- Taxon
- winter wheat ( Triticum aestivum L.), winter barley ( Hordeum vulgare L.), and maize ( Zea mays L.)Hordeum vulgareTriticum aestivumZea mayse0
- Outcome
- vernalizatione6
- Qualifier
- only detected by the RCM‐DSSATe6
- Setting
- southern arease6
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“winter wheat ( Triticum aestivum L.), winter barley ( Hordeum vulgare L.), and maize ( Zea mays L.)”
e6“Higher temperatures in the southern areas led to a lack of vernalization in the future climate scenario, which was only detected by the RCM‐DSSAT”
Claim · model-written summary
Spatial and temporal differences in crop performance could be enhanced by the higher resolution of the RCM.
- Taxon
- winter wheat ( Triticum aestivum L.), winter barley ( Hordeum vulgare L.), and maize ( Zea mays L.)Hordeum vulgareTriticum aestivumZea mayse0
- Treatment
- higher resolution of the RCMe1
- Outcome
- Spatial and temporal differences in crop performancee1
- Direction
- could be enhancede1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“winter wheat ( Triticum aestivum L.), winter barley ( Hordeum vulgare L.), and maize ( Zea mays L.)”
e1“Spatial and temporal differences in crop performance could be enhanced by the higher resolution of the RCM”
Claim · model-written summary
Under the 1xCO2 RCM scenario, vegetative phenophases were shorter, reflecting higher air temperatures.
- Taxon
- winter wheat ( Triticum aestivum L.), winter barley ( Hordeum vulgare L.), and maize ( Zea mays L.)Hordeum vulgareTriticum aestivumZea mayse0
- Treatment
- 1×CO 2 scenarioe7
- Outcome
- vegetative phenophasese7
- Direction
- shortere7
- Qualifier
- reflected the higher air temperatures in the RCMe7
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“winter wheat ( Triticum aestivum L.), winter barley ( Hordeum vulgare L.), and maize ( Zea mays L.)”
e7“In the 1×CO 2 scenario, vegetative phenophases were shorter and reflected the higher air temperatures in the RCM”
Claim · model-written summary
Under RCM-derived scenarios, higher temperatures led to higher development rates.
- Taxon
- winter wheat ( Triticum aestivum L.), winter barley ( Hordeum vulgare L.), and maize ( Zea mays L.)Hordeum vulgareTriticum aestivumZea mayse0
- Treatment
- RCM‐derived scenariose1
- Outcome
- development ratese1
- Direction
- highere1
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“winter wheat ( Triticum aestivum L.), winter barley ( Hordeum vulgare L.), and maize ( Zea mays L.)”
e1“The higher temperatures in the RCM‐derived scenarios led to higher development rates and shorter phenophases”
Claim · model-written summary
Under RCM-derived scenarios, higher temperatures led to shorter phenophases.
- Taxon
- winter wheat ( Triticum aestivum L.), winter barley ( Hordeum vulgare L.), and maize ( Zea mays L.)Hordeum vulgareTriticum aestivumZea mayse0
- Treatment
- RCM‐derived scenariose1
- Outcome
- phenophasese1
- Direction
- shortere1
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“winter wheat ( Triticum aestivum L.), winter barley ( Hordeum vulgare L.), and maize ( Zea mays L.)”
e1“The higher temperatures in the RCM‐derived scenarios led to higher development rates and shorter phenophases”
The same questions in other papers
co2 · yield · Zea mays (maize)Results differ
10 papers in the same direction as this paper · 41 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
48 papers more in this group
See all 52 papers →co2 · quality: phytochemicals · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
2 papers in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- negative
- positive
1 paper more in this group
See all 5 papers →co2 · quality: phytochemicals · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
4 papers in the same direction as this paper · 6 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- no effect
- no effect
7 papers more in this group
See all 11 papers →climate site · yield · Hordeum vulgare (barley)Positive and negative results
9 papers in the same direction as this paper · 10 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
16 papers more in this group
See all 20 papers →co2 · yield · Hordeum vulgare (barley)Positive and negative results
4 papers in the same direction as this paper · 20 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
21 papers more in this group
See all 25 papers →climate site · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
81 papers in the same direction as this paper · 72 in the opposite direction
- negative
- positive
- positive
150 papers more in this group
See all 154 papers →climate site · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
77 papers in the same direction as this paper · 102 in the opposite direction
- negative
- positive
- positive
176 papers more in this group
See all 180 papers →co2 · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
28 papers in the same direction as this paper · 174 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
199 papers more in this group
See all 203 papers →8 of 9 groups shown: named compounds and organisms first, then groups whose results differ (checked claim by claim), then those with positive and negative results, then the smaller groups.
Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.