Abstract
The United States southern and central High Plains including western Kansas are experiencing declining ground water supplies from the Ogallala as a result of withdrawals for irrigation exceeding annual recharge, this situation will be exacerbated by future climate change. The purpose of this simulation based study was to 1) assess the impact of future climate change on maize (Zea mays L.) yield in western Kansas; and 2) evaluate and understand the possible impacts of climate change on maize irrigation water productivity, transpiration, evapotranspiration and days to maturity. The Crop Estimation through Resource and Environment Synthesis (CERES-Maize) crop model within the Decision Support System for Agrotechnology Transfer Cropping Systems Model (DSSAT-CSM) was used in combination with multiple Global Climate Models under two Representative Concentration Pathways (RCPs), and two irrigation scenarios [full (450 mm) and deficit (300)] under three planting dates [early (20th April), normal (5th May) and late (15th May)]. Results showed that maize yield during the mid-21st century will decline relative to the present on average by 18–33% under RCP4.5 and 37–46% under RCP8.5. The yield decline might be caused mainly by shortening of the growing period (9–18% decline in days to maturity), attributed to elevated temperatures. The reduction in transpiration relative to the baseline reached 15% for RCP8.5 under deficit irrigation whereas the reduction was minimal (1–7%) under full irrigation. Indicating that significant yield reductions might occur due to combined effects of deficit irrigation and shortening of the maturity period. Yield increase due to elevated CO2 concentration [CO2] might be masked by the increased temperatures. The current study showed large disparity in simulated yield among the various GCMs. Planting date did not substantially improve yield but there was less simulation variability among GCMs with early planting compared to normal and late planting. There was no substantial difference among the planting dates for water productivity, however, there was a slight tendency of improvement in irrigation water productivity for deficit irrigation under early planting compared to normal and late planting. Under all planting dates and RCPs, the irrigation water productivity of maize under deficit irrigation was slightly higher than that under full irrigation. The difference in irrigation water productivity of maize between the deficit and full irrigation was larger for early compared to normal and late planting. These differences justify that early planting may be suitable under future climate compared to late planting even though the simulated yield with early planting under similar RCPs and irrigation levels are not significantly different from late planting.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by. 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 13
Claim · model-written summary
Projected maize yield declines 18–33% under RCP4.5.
Zea maysOrganisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“maize yield during the mid-21st century will decline relative to the present on average by 18–33% under RCP4.5”
Claim · model-written summary
Projected maize yield declines 37–46% under RCP8.5.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“maize (Zea mays L.) yield”
e1“37–46% under RCP8.5”
e2“maize yield during the mid-21st century will decline relative to the present”
Claim · model-written summary
Days to maturity decline 9–18% with elevated temperatures.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“maize (Zea mays L.) yield”
e1“9–18% decline in days to maturity”
e2“attributed to elevated temperatures”
Claim · model-written summary
Transpiration falls 15% under RCP8.5 with deficit irrigation relative to baseline.
- Outcome
- transpiratione1
- Direction
- reductione1
- Value
- 15%e1
- Qualifier
- RCP8.5 under deficit irrigatione1
- Comparator
- the baselinee1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“maize (Zea mays L.) yield”
e1“The reduction in transpiration relative to the baseline reached 15% for RCP8.5 under deficit irrigation”
Claim · model-written summary
Transpiration falls only 1–7% under full irrigation.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“maize (Zea mays L.) yield”
e1“reduction was minimal (1–7%) under full irrigation”
e2“The reduction in transpiration relative to the baseline”
Claim · model-written summary
Simulated yield varied greatly across climate models.
- Outcome
- simulated yielde1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“maize (Zea mays L.) yield”
e1“large disparity in simulated yield among the various GCMs”
Claim · model-written summary
Planting date did not substantially improve yield.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“maize (Zea mays L.) yield”
e1“Planting date did not substantially improve yield”
Claim · model-written summary
Early planting reduced simulation variability among climate models versus normal and late planting.
- Treatment
- early plantinge1
- Outcome
- simulation variability among GCMse1
- Direction
- lesse1
- Comparator
- normal and late plantinge1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“maize (Zea mays L.) yield”
e1“there was less simulation variability among GCMs with early planting compared to normal and late planting”
Claim · model-written summary
Water productivity showed no substantial difference among planting dates.
- Treatment
- planting datese1
- Outcome
- water productivitye1
- Direction
- no substantial differencee1
- Comparator
- planting datese1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“maize (Zea mays L.) yield”
e1“There was no substantial difference among the planting dates for water productivity”
Claim · model-written summary
Under deficit irrigation, early planting tended to improve irrigation water productivity over normal and late planting.
- Treatment
- early plantinge1
- Outcome
- irrigation water productivitye1
- Direction
- improvemente1
- Qualifier
- deficit irrigatione1
- Comparator
- normal and late plantinge1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“maize (Zea mays L.) yield”
e1“slight tendency of improvement in irrigation water productivity for deficit irrigation under early planting compared to normal and late planting”
Claim · model-written summary
Deficit irrigation gave slightly higher water productivity than full irrigation across planting dates and pathways.
- Treatment
- deficit irrigatione0
- Outcome
- irrigation water productivitye0
- Direction
- highere0
- Comparator
- full irrigatione0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the irrigation water productivity of maize under deficit irrigation was slightly higher than that under full irrigation”
Claim · model-written summary
The productivity difference between deficit and full irrigation was larger with early planting.
- Outcome
- difference in irrigation water productivitye1
- Direction
- largere1
- Qualifier
- between the deficit and full irrigatione1
- Comparator
- normal and late plantinge1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“maize (Zea mays L.) yield”
e1“The difference in irrigation water productivity of maize between the deficit and full irrigation was larger for early compared to normal and late planting”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors judge early planting suitable under future climate.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“maize (Zea mays L.) yield”
e1“early planting may be suitable under future climate compared to late planting”
The same questions in other papers
sowing time · physiology: water · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
4 papers in the same direction as this paper · 4 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- negative
- negative
5 papers more in this group
See all 9 papers →sowing time · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
90 papers in the same direction as this paper · 178 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
265 papers more in this group
See all 269 papers →irrigation · physiology: water · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
283 papers in the same direction as this paper · 39 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- negative
- negative
320 papers more in this group
See all 324 papers →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.