Modelling the climate change impact of mitigation (RCP 2.6) and high emission (RCP 8.5) scenarios on maize yield and possible adaptation measures in different agroclimatic zones of Punjab, India

BACKGROUND A simulation study was performed for assessing climate change impact on maize under Representative Concentration Pathways (RCPs 2.6 and 8.5) for Punjab, India. The study area comprised five agroclimatic zones (AZs) including seven locations. The bias corrected temperature and rainfall dat...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of the science of food and agriculture 2023-11, Vol.103 (14), p.6984-6994
Hauptverfasser: Kothiyal, Shivani, Prabhjyot‐Kaur, Sandhu, Sandeep Singh, Kaur, Jatinder
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:BACKGROUND A simulation study was performed for assessing climate change impact on maize under Representative Concentration Pathways (RCPs 2.6 and 8.5) for Punjab, India. The study area comprised five agroclimatic zones (AZs) including seven locations. The bias corrected temperature and rainfall data from four models (CSIRO‐Mk‐3‐6‐0, FIO‐ESM, IPSL‐CM5A‐MR and Ensemble) were used as input in CERES‐Maize model which was run with constant management practices for two Punjab maize hybrids (PMH 1 and PMH 2). The maize yield for upcoming 70 years (2025–2095) was simulated and its deviations from the baseline (2010–2021) yield were computed under optimized sowing (early‐May to early‐July) and current sowing (end‐May to end‐June) period. RESULTS With current sowing dates, the maize yield declined under both RCP 2.6 and RCP 8.5 scenarios, respectively in all the AZs, that is, by 4–23% and 60–80% in AZ II, by 5–60% and 60–90% in AZ III, by 9–30% and 50–90% in AZ IV and by 13–40% and 30–90% in AZ V. Though yield decline was lesser under RCP 2.6 as compared to RCP 8.5, but still it indicates that adaptive strategy such as shifting of sowing dates may be helpful in stabilizing the maize yield. CONCLUSION The results for iterative combinations of sowing period revealed that early June sowing in AZ II for both the hybrids, mid‐ to end‐June (Ludhiana and Amritsar) and end‐May to mid‐June (Patiala) sowings for PMH 1 were able to nullify the negative impact of climate change. Maize cultivation in AZ IV and AZ V would not be a suitable venture for farmers of the region. © 2023 Society of Chemical Industry.
ISSN:0022-5142
1097-0010
DOI:10.1002/jsfa.12779