Impact assessment of soybean yield and water productivity in Brazil due to climate change

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eja.2021.126329Get rights and content

Highlights

  • We calibrated the DSSAT/CROPGRO for several soybean maturity groups.

  • Crop model showed good performance under different tropical conditions.

  • Water productivity increase can ensure the future growth of soybean yield.

  • Mean soybean yields increase likely in the future climate due to CO2 increase.

Abstract

In the next decades, the population is expected to rise by more than two billion people, and the projections of climate change have been considered as one of the greatest future challenges for world food security. Soybean represents more than 60 % of all plant protein produced in the world, and Brazil is the largest world exporter and the second-largest producer. In this paper, we simulated soybean yields for 16 strategically selected agroclimatic zones (CZs) to represent Brazilian production. Experiments conducted throughout the country were used to calibrate the CROPGRO-Soybean model for Brazilian conditions, for the main maturity groups used in Brazil, to simulate current and 40 future climate scenarios, provided by Coupled Model Intercomparison Project 5 (CMIP5) for 2050 in the both 4.5 and 8.5 representative concentration pathways (RCP). We found soybean yield varying by +1 to +32 % across 16 CZs in the average scenario of future climate when compared to the current yields. Yet, we found an increase of about 5% in the yield production risk for RCP 8.5. The main reason for such results was associated with the positive effect of increasing CO2 on crop water productivity, which overcomes the negative effects of temperature and water stress increases on rainfed Brazilian soybeans.

Introduction

The global population has grown dramatically in the last decades. Between 2017 and 2050, the world’s population is projected to rise from 7.7 billion to 9.8 billion (United Nations, 2017). Similarly, there is a projection of income increase across the developing world, which would imply an increase in demand for meat and dairy products by rates ranging from 50 to 100 % in the next decades (Thornton, 2010; Foley et al., 2011; Tilman et al., 2011; Clark and Tilman, 2017; Searchinger et al., 2019). This may result in grain price increases (Marchand et al., 2016), which might worsen food insecurity in the world’s poorest countries (Sternberg, 2012; D’Amour et al., 2016).

Soybean (Glycine max L.) is currently the world's most important food protein source, and so it is crucial for food security. Soybean is main source of high-quality vegetable protein for the production of food of animal origin (Speedy, 2002; Thomson, 2019). In the past twenty years, Brazil had one of the most significant expansions of agricultural land use (Zalles et al., 2019), and has established itself as the world's largest soybean producer, with over 38 million hectares of soybean production (CONAB, 2017), being the main economic product of Brazil (Ministério da Economia, 2020).

Climate change is expected to affect agriculture worldwide in the next decade (Zabel et al., 2019; Baldos et al., 2020). General circulation models (GCMs) are central to climate change research (Field, 2014) and can be coupled to the cropping system model (CSM) to investigate the scientific hypotheses about the impacts of climate change on agriculture (Rosenzweig et al., 2013; He et al., 2017). The CSM-CROPGRO-Soybean (Boote et al., 1998) is one of the more robust and widely model used to simulate crop production systems. The model has a modular structure (Jones et al., 2001), which consider process of carbon and nitrogen balance (Godwin and Allan, 1991; Godwin and Singh, 1998), soil water balance (Ritchie, 1998; Silva et al., 2021); and it is able to simulate evapotranspiration (Boote et al., 2008; Cuadra et al., 2021), crop water productivity (Dias et al., 2020; Edreira et al., 2018; Er-Raki et al., 2020; Timsina et al., 2008), soybean growth and development (Boote et al., 1998; Bhatia et al., 2008), and crop production under climate change conditions (Adhikari et al., 2016; Antolin et al., 2021; Bao et al., 2015; Fava et al., 2020; Quansah et al., 2020; Souza et al., 2019).

Climate change effects on soybean have been globally studied in recent papers (Schauberger et al., 2017; Lee and Mccann, 2019; Mourtzinis et al., 2019). In Brazil, Rio et al. (2016) found a decrease in the yield of up to 35 % for the southern Brazilian region, while Justino et al. (2013) found an increase of up to 60 % for the Midwest and northern Brazilian regions. These researches, however, lack consistency in modeling frameworks, did not cover the whole country using a consistent protocol, and did not consider the regional variability in terms of genetics and farming systems.

In this paper, we used a large experimental dataset collected in the several key-producing regions of Brazil for calibrating a process-based crop model and then simulated 40 future climate scenarios to prospect the soybean yield and water productivity in Brazil, for 2050. For those simulations, we have considered the future atmospheric dioxide carbon concentration ([CO2]), maturity group, sowing date window, and soil water content across environments to represent the climate change impact around Brazil. Our main goal was to evaluate the effects of future climate scenarios on rainfed soybean yield and water productivity and propose strategies to cope with possible future climate limitations.

Section snippets

Determination of representative areas and agroclimatic zones

We used the official statistical data on soybean production and area in Brazil provided by the Brazilian Institute of Geography and Statistics (IBGE, 2016). Following the protocol described by Van Wart et al. (2013), we defined 16 agroclimatic zones (CZs) for representing the production area in the country (Fig. 1). Such classification was based on three factors: (i) crop degree days, calculated using basal temperature fixed at 0 °C (Van Wart et al., 2013); (ii) annual dryness index, calculated

Simulated soybean phenology, growth, and development

We observed good accuracy in simulations for the MG 6.0, MG 7.0, and MG 8.0 across the phenological stages; the maximum difference was five days between the simulated and the observed values (Table 5).

In our calibration procedure for PI-1, PI-2, and TE-1, we minimized RMSE, maximized d-index, and visually evaluated whether the trait adjustments better described the observed growing season mainly for leaf area index, canopy dry matter, and grain weight. Based on these indicators, we obtained the

Discussion

Our findings pointed out that Southern Brazil would have a higher average increase in soybean yield under climate change scenarios (Fig. 2). These results are in the opposite direction to Deconto (2008) and Rio et al. (2016), who did not consider the effect of [CO2] increase in the atmosphere and its impact on the soybean growth process (Sakurai et al., 2014). Still, Rio et al. (2016) observed a reduction in the soybean crop cycle length, which agreed with our results, and this is a consequence

Conclusions

A surge in climate warming accelerated the soybean crop life cycle, but the average variation for the RCP 4.5 and RCP 8.5 scenarios for most GCMs showed a yield increase in future climate scenarios for all CZs. The yield risk increased in some parts of the Central-West and Northeast regions of the country and decreased in the North, South, and Southeast regions for RCP 8.5. The wide difference between the lower and upper limits of the scenarios showed uncertainty for climate change and

Author contributions section

Evandro Henrique Figueiredo Moura da Silva:

Conceptualization and conducted whole research (experimental and farm data collection in Piracicaba/SP, model calibration, climate impact analyses and write-up of manuscript)

Luis Alberto Silva Antolin:

Climate scenarios and agroclimatic zones generation, and programming algorithms in R

Alencar Junior Zanon

Experimental and farm data collection in Cruz Alta/RS and review the manuscript

Aderson Soares Andrade Junior

Experimental and farm data collection in

Declaration of Competing Interest

No conflict of interest exists.

Acknowledgments

Funding sources include the Research Foundation of the State of São Paulo (FAPESP 2015/25702-3; 2017/23468-9; 2019/18303-6, 2017/20925-0, 2017/50445-0), Brazilian Research Council (CNPq 300916/2018-3 and 425174/2018-2), and Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior – Brasil (CAPES) for the scholarships.

References (87)

  • J.W. Jones et al.

    The DSSAT cropping system model

    Eur. J. Agron.

    (2003)
  • K. Loague et al.

    Statistical and graphical methods for evaluating solute transport models: overview and application

    J. Contam. Hydrol.

    (1991)
  • C. Rosenzweig et al.

    The agricultural model intercomparison and improvement project (AgMIP): protocols and pilot studies

    Agric. For. Meteorol.

    (2013)
  • M. Salmerón et al.

    Simplifying the prediction of phenology with the DSSAT-CROPGRO-soybean model based on relative maturity group and determinacy

    Agric. Syst.

    (2016)
  • T. Sternberg

    Chinese drought, bread and the Arab Spring

    Appl. Geogr.

    (2012)
  • J. Timsina et al.

    Evaluation of options for increasing yield and water productivity of wheat in Punjab, India using the DSSAT-CERES-Wheat model

    Agric. Water Manag.

    (2008)
  • F.N. Tubiello et al.

    Simulating the effects of elevated CO2 on crops: approaches and applications for climate change

    Eur. J. Agron.

    (2002)
  • J. Van Wart et al.

    Use of agro-climatic zones to upscale simulated crop yield potential

    Field Crop Research

    (2013)
  • E.A. Ainsworth et al.

    A meta‐analysis of elevated [CO2] effects on soybean (Glycine max) physiology, growth and yield

    Glob. Chang. Biol.

    (2002)
  • G. Alagarswamy et al.

    Evaluating the CROPGRO–soybean model ability to simulate photosynthesis response to carbon dioxide levels

    Agron. J.

    (2006)
  • L.H. Allen et al.

    Soybean dry matter allocation under subambient and superambient levels of carbon dioxide

    Agron. J.

    (1991)
  • L.F. Alliprandini et al.

    Understanding soybean maturity groups in Brazil: environment, cultivar classification, and stability

    Crop Sci.

    (2009)
  • L.A. Antolin et al.

    Impact assessment of common bean availability in Brazil under climate change scenarios

    Agric. Syst.

    (2021)
  • U.L.C. Baldos et al.

    The research cost of adapting agriculture to climate change: a global analysis to 2050

    Agric. Econ.

    (2020)
  • Y. Bao et al.

    Potential adaptation strategies for rainfed soybean production in the south-eastern USA under climate change based on the CSM-CROPGRO-Soybean model

    J. Agric. Sci.

    (2015)
  • R. Battisti et al.

    Drought tolerance of Brazilian soybean cultivars simulated by a simple agrometeorological yield model

    Exp. Agric.

    (2015)
  • C.J. Bernacchi et al.

    Decreases in stomatal conductance of soybean under open-air elevation of [CO2] are closely coupled with decreases in ecosystem evapotranspiration

    Plant Physiol.

    (2007)
  • K.J. Boote et al.

    The CROPGRO model for grain legumes

  • K.J. Boote et al.

    Experience with water balance, evapotranspiration, and predictions of water stress effects in the CROPGRO model

  • K.J. Boote et al.

    Putting mechanisms into crop production models

    Plant Cell Environ.

    (2013)
  • A.L. Brenkert et al.

    Model Documentation for the MiniCAM

    (2003)
  • M. Clark et al.

    Comparative analysis of environmental impacts of agricultural production systems, agricultural input efficiency, and food choice

    Environ. Res. Lett.

    (2017)
  • CONAB

    Safra Brasileira De Grãos

    (2017)
  • S. Cuadra et al.

    Energy balance in the DSSAT-CSM-CROPGRO model

    Agric. For. Meteorol.

    (2021)
  • C.B. D’Amour et al.

    Teleconnected food supply shocks

    Environ. Res. Lett.

    (2016)
  • J.G. Deconto

    Aquecimento Global E a Nova Geografia Da Produção Agrícola No Brasil

    (2008)
  • G.V.S. Dias et al.

    Simulação da pegada hídrica da soja no Mato Grosso baseada em projeções de mudanças climáticas

    Agrometeoros

    (2020)
  • D.W. Drag et al.

    Soybean photosynthetic and biomass responses to carbon dioxide concentrations ranging from pre-industrial to the distant future

    J. Exp. Bot.

    (2020)
  • M.L. Duffy et al.

    Importance of Laplacian of low-level warming for the response of precipitation to climate change over tropical oceans

    J. Clim.

    (2020)
  • J.I.R. Edreira et al.

    Water productivity of rainfed maize and wheat: a local to global perspective

    Agric. For. Meteorol.

    (2018)
  • S. Er-Raki et al.

    Parameterization of the AquaCrop model for simulating table grapes growth and water productivity in an arid region of Mexico

    Agric. Water Manag.

    (2020)
  • S.A.Q. Fava et al.

    Simulação de cenários agrícolas futuros para algodoeiro com base em projeções de mudanças climáticas

    Agrometeoros

    (2020)
  • W.R. Fehr et al.

    Stages of Soybean Development

    (1977)
  • Cited by (21)

    • OSTRICH-CROPGRO multi-objective optimization methodology for calibration of the growing dynamics of a second-generation transgenic soybean tolerant to high temperatures and dry growing conditions

      2023, Agricultural Systems
      Citation Excerpt :

      Additionally, we tested the calibrated model for climate change future scenarios. In accordance with Moura et al. (2021), we found an increase in the yield production for RCP 4.5 and RCP 8.5. The cited authors found that for RCP 4.5 with an increase of rainfall of 16.5% the yield production increases by 52.6%, and for RCP 8.5 with an increase of rainfall in 16.3% the yield production increases by 68.6%.

    • Historical and projected impacts of climate change and technology on soybean yield in China

      2022, Agricultural Systems
      Citation Excerpt :

      We selected the DSSAT-CROPGRO-Soybean model in this search, which has been proved to perform well in simulating the soybean phenology, development, and yield formation (Timsina et al., 2007; Boote et al., 2017). Many studies had used DSSAT-CROPGRO-Soybean model to simulate soybean cultivars traits based on the genetic parameters (da Silva et al., 2021; Perondi et al., 2022). In order to better understand the changes in crop yields due to climate change and technology changes, some researchers had developed a Bayesian model.

    • Evaluation of models for simulating soybean growth and climate sensitivity in the U.S. Mississippi Delta

      2022, European Journal of Agronomy
      Citation Excerpt :

      Specifically, CROPGRO-Soybean from the Decision Support System for Agrotechnology Transfer (DSSAT) (Hoogenboom et al., 2019a; b; Jones et al., 2003) has been successfully used to simulate soybean development, growth over time, and final seed yield over a broad range of environmental conditions (Boote et al., 1997; Sexton et al., 1998; Sau et al., 1999; Alagarswamy et al., 2006). It has also been widely used to predict seed yield response under projected climate change conditions (Bao et al., 2015; Quansah et al., 2020; Silva et al., 2021). SoySim is a more recently developed model which combines existing approaches (e.g., a C3-based biochemical photosynthesis framework (Farquhar et al., 1980)) with newer algorithms, such as a non-linear temperature dependency based on the beta equation for phenology (Setiyono et al., 2007), a logistic function for simulating leaf area expansion rate (Setiyono et al., 2008), simulation of seed number as governed by developmental stages, and growth of individual seeds per pod (Setiyono et al., 2010).

    • Predicting soybean evapotranspiration and crop water productivity for a tropical environment using the CSM-CROPGRO-Soybean model

      2022, Agricultural and Forest Meteorology
      Citation Excerpt :

      Nand et al. (2016) documented that the SBUILD was unable to accurately simulate soil water content in tropical soils with high clay content. To respond to this scientific limitation, Silva et al. (2021) calibrated the soil water-holding traits using measurements of SWC in several depths. After soil calibration, the authors documented the good performance for the prediction of SWC during the model evaluation procedure.

    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text