Journal cover Journal topic
Geoscientific Model Development An interactive open-access journal of the European Geosciences Union
Journal topic

Journal metrics

Journal metrics

  • IF value: 5.154 IF 5.154
  • IF 5-year value: 5.697 IF 5-year
    5.697
  • CiteScore value: 5.56 CiteScore
    5.56
  • SNIP value: 1.761 SNIP 1.761
  • IPP value: 5.30 IPP 5.30
  • SJR value: 3.164 SJR 3.164
  • Scimago H <br class='hide-on-tablet hide-on-mobile'>index value: 59 Scimago H
    index 59
  • h5-index value: 49 h5-index 49
Volume 6, issue 2
Geosci. Model Dev., 6, 495-515, 2013
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-6-495-2013
© Author(s) 2013. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.
Geosci. Model Dev., 6, 495-515, 2013
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-6-495-2013
© Author(s) 2013. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.

Development and technical paper 19 Apr 2013

Development and technical paper | 19 Apr 2013

Modeling agriculture in the Community Land Model

B. Drewniak1, J. Song2, J. Prell1, V. R. Kotamarthi1, and R. Jacob3 B. Drewniak et al.
  • 1Environmental Science Division, Argonne National Laboratory, 9700 S. Cass Ave, Argonne, IL 60439, USA
  • 2Northern Illinois University, Department of Geography, Davis Hall, Room 118, DeKalb, IL 60115, USA
  • 3Mathematics and Computer Science Division, Argonne National Laboratory, 9700 S. Cass Ave, Argonne, IL 60439, USA

Abstract. The potential impact of climate change on agriculture is uncertain. In addition, agriculture could influence above- and below-ground carbon storage. Development of models that represent agriculture is necessary to address these impacts. We have developed an approach to integrate agriculture representations for three crop types – maize, soybean, and spring wheat – into the coupled carbon–nitrogen version of the Community Land Model (CLM), to help address these questions. Here we present the new model, CLM-Crop, validated against observations from two AmeriFlux sites in the United States, planted with maize and soybean. Seasonal carbon fluxes compared well with field measurements for soybean, but not as well for maize. CLM-Crop yields were comparable with observations in countries such as the United States, Argentina, and China, although the generality of the crop model and its lack of technology and irrigation made direct comparison difficult. CLM-Crop was compared against the standard CLM3.5, which simulates crops as grass. The comparison showed improvement in gross primary productivity in regions where crops are the dominant vegetation cover. Crop yields and productivity were negatively correlated with temperature and positively correlated with precipitation, in agreement with other modeling studies. In case studies with the new crop model looking at impacts of residue management and planting date on crop yield, we found that increased residue returned to the litter pool increased crop yield, while reduced residue returns resulted in yield decreases. Using climate controls to signal planting date caused different responses in different crops. Maize and soybean had opposite reactions: when low temperature threshold resulted in early planting, maize responded with a loss of yield, but soybean yields increased. Our improvements in CLM demonstrate a new capability in the model – simulating agriculture in a realistic way, complete with fertilizer and residue management practices. Results are encouraging, with improved representation of human influences on the land surface and the potentially resulting climate impacts.

Publications Copernicus
Download
Citation