Next Article in Journal
Variation of Residual Sexuality Rates along Reproductive Development in Apomictic Tetraploids of Paspalum
Next Article in Special Issue
Nitrapyrin Mitigates Nitrous Oxide Emissions, and Improves Maize Yield and Nitrogen Efficiency under Waterlogged Field
Previous Article in Journal
Efficacy of Biorational Products for Managing Diseases of Tomato in Greenhouse Production
Previous Article in Special Issue
The Involvement of Antioxidant Enzyme System, Nitrogen Metabolism and Osmoregulatory Substances in Alleviating Salt Stress in Inbred Maize Lines and Hormone Regulation Mechanisms
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Yield Response of Spring Maize under Future Climate and the Effects of Adaptation Measures in Northeast China

1
Key Lab for Agro-Environment, Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs, Institute of Environment and Sustainable Development in Agriculture, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Beijing 100081, China
2
College of Land and Environment, Shenyang Agricultural University, Shenyang 110866, China
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Plants 2022, 11(13), 1634; https://doi.org/10.3390/plants11131634
Submission received: 8 May 2022 / Revised: 11 June 2022 / Accepted: 13 June 2022 / Published: 21 June 2022
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Frontiers in Maize Ecophysiology)

Abstract

:
Agriculture production has been found to be the most sensitive sector to climate change. Northeast China (NEC) is one of the world’s major regions for spring maize production and it has been affected by climate change due to increases in temperature and decreases in sunshine hours and precipitation levels over the past few decades. In this study, the CERES-Maize model-v4.7 was adopted to assess the impact of future climatic change on the yield of spring maize in NEC and the effect of adaptation measures in two future periods, the 2030s (2021 to 2040) and the 2050s (2041 to 2060) relative to the baseline (1986 to 2005) under RCP4.5 and RCP8.5 scenarios. The results showed that increased temperatures and the decreases in both the precipitation level and sunshine hours in the NEC at six representative sites in the 2030s and 2050s periods based on RCP4.5 and RCP8.5 climate scenarios would shorten the maize growth durations by (1–38 days) and this would result in a reduction in maize yield by (2.5–26.4%). Adaptation measures, including altered planting date, supplemental irrigation and use of cultivars with longer growth periods could offset some negative impacts of yield decrease in maize. For high-temperature-sensitive cultivars, the adoption of early planting, cultivar change and adding irrigation practices could lead to an increase in maize yield by 23.7–43.6% and these measures were shown to be effective adaptation options towards reducing yield loss from climate change. The simulation results exhibited the effective contribution of appropriate adaptation measures in eliminating the negative impact of future climate change on maize yield.

1. Introduction

In China, maize is one of the most predominant grain crops grown for purposes of human food, animal feed, and as an industrial raw material [1]. The maize production area in Northeast China (NEC), where the famous Northeast Corn belt is located, accounts for 30% of total maize produced in China, thereby playing a pivotal role in ensuring food security in China [2]. Agriculture has been found to be the most sensitive sector to climate change despite the availability of developed technologies nowadays [3].
According to Yin et al., (2015) [1], in the past century, China’s air temperatures have increased by 0.5 to 0.8 °C and an increase of 2 °C has also been projected to occur in over 60% of all regions in China by the end of the 21st century. Additionally, elevations in atmospheric CO2 concentration (eCO2) could affect the carbon and nitrogen metabolism in the crops and soil nutrient cycling in the soil thus affecting soil fertility, leading to fluctuations in maize yield [4,5]. Northeast China (NEC) has been identified as one of the regions most affected by climate change [6], with recorded increases in temperature and decreases in sunshine hours and precipitation levels [7]. Over the past five decades, the effects of climate change have been felt in NEC with a recorded temperature increase of 0.38 °C per decade and this has resulted in a variation in maize production within the region [2]. As a ripple effect due to climate change, spring maize in NEC has recorded changes over the past few decades resulting in the shift of its maize growing area towards the higher latitudes [8]. Additionally, an increase in maize yield in NEC has been attributed to a variation in solar radiation that has been recorded during the maize growing season from May to September [3,9]. In NEC including Liaoning, Jilin and Heilongjiang provinces, yields were predicted to decrease for both rainfed and irrigated maize by 35% in 2080 under A2 scenario and 30% under B2 scenario [10]. The worst impact of climate change exhibited on maize yield among all the Representative Concentration Pathways (RCPs) without incorporating the effects of CO2 fertilization occurred under RCP8.5 scenario, with projected future decreases of 14% for the 2020s, 24% for the 2050s and 46% for the 2080s [1] and with another similar future projection decrease of 6.3% for the 2020s, 18.4% for the 2050s and 47.5% for the 2080s [2]. However, the actual yields in NEC showed a tendency to increase by 1.27 metric tons (t) per hectare (ha) per decade from 1961 to 2010 [11]. According to Wang et al., (2011) [12], the average maize yield in NEC is projected to decrease by more than 15% by 2050 based on 90% of the total 120 projected scenarios. Therefore, to evaluate the impact of future climate change on the yield of spring maize in NEC, we used the simulations based on different climate change and crop parameters to estimate future yield and the level of uncertainty using the CERES-Maize model.
Adaptation measures to mitigate the negative effect of climate change have been found to be very critical in ensuring food security [13,14]. According to the IPCC (2007) [13] Fourth Assessment Report on Climate Change and Tao et al. [15], a few adaptation strategies to cope with the future changing climate include adjusting sowing dates, changing cultivars and improving management practices such as irrigation, planting density and fertilizer application [11]. Additionally, the use of hybrid cultivars and longer season cultivars has helped improve the grain filling rate and yield of maize in NEC [16]. The adoption of several management measures as opposed to using a single mitigation measure has also been found to be effective in eliminating the negative impacts of climate change [17]. Therefore, it is important to examine what adaptation measures could be applied to mitigate against the impacts of climate change on spring maize production in NEC.
In this study, we used the CERES-Maize model (DSSAT) v4.7 to assess the impact of future climatic change on the yield of spring maize in Northeast China and the effect of adaptation measures under different parameters for two future periods, the 2030s (2021 to 2040) and the 2050s (2041 to 2060) relative to the baseline (1986 to 2005) under RCP4.5 and RCP8.5 scenarios. The latest RCP4.5 and RCP8.5 scenarios adopted in the Fifth Assessment Report (AR5) of the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) were applied in this chapter.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Study Sites

The study area of Northeast China consists of 3 provinces namely Liaoning, Jilin and Heilongjiang and covers an area of 793,300 km2 with an estimated population of about 109 million [2]. NEC lies among the Daxingan, Xiaoxingan and Changbai mountains, located at an elevation lower than 200 m (Figure 1). The region is characterized by a continental monsoon climate with an average air temperature between 15 and 25 °C and annual precipitation ranging between 400 and 650 mm, respectively [2]. The precipitation in NEC mostly occurs in summer and autumn coinciding with the maize growing period from May to September [1]. The terrain in NEC is fairly flat characterized by black and brown loamy fertile soil which has helped improve the drainage and fertility of the area [18]. To drive the CERES-Maize crop modeling software, suitable study sites that contain high-quality data were selected from the Agricultural Meteorological Experimental Stations (AMESs) as illustrated in Figure 1 and to enhance the performance of the CERES-Maize (DSSAT) V4.7 crop model, the suitable study sites were selected based on the criteria as described in Section 2.3.

2.2. DSSAT-CERES-Maize Crop Model

The most recent version of CERES-Maize (DSSAT v4.7) crop model was used to simulate spring maize development, growth and yield in China as a function of weather data, soil characteristics, crop management practices, crop genotype and phenotype (Figure 2). This new version of CERES-Maize (DSSAT v4.7) is the best in comparison to all the other previous versions of CERES-Maize (DSSAT) models since it has more added functions and data that help in the simulation process [19]. According to the report from The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) [20], this model was cited as one of the best tools that can be integrated with other tools to simulate and evaluate climate change effects on crop production. Input data on crop management practices to be included are: crop type, cultivar, planting date, planting density, planting space and rows, fertilizer type and rate of application, irrigation method and amount and tillage practices [21]. Weather data to be included are: temperature (minimum and maximum), precipitation, humidity and solar radiation. Soil data to be included are: soil type, soil texture, soil pH, soil moisture, soil organic carbon and soil nitrogen levels [22].

2.3. Criteria for Site Selection in Validating the Model

To validate the DSSAT-CERES-Maize crop model, we used some measured data to validate the model before carrying out future modeling. The criteria for validating the model were based on the following:
  • Maize cultivars must have been cultivated for a minimum of 3 years and at the same time they should not have been stressed by either diseases, pests, insects or severe climatic events.
  • Records must be available on good field management practices, e.g., adjusting sowing dates, row spacing, cultivar change and irrigation.
  • The location of the study sites should be near the Agricultural Meteorological Experimental Stations (AMESs) to ensure easy accessibility to accurate weather observation data.

2.4. Climate Scenario and Climate Data

In this particular study, two climate scenarios RCP4.5 and RCP8.5 were used to investigate the possible effects of anthropogenic and natural activities on future climate variability [23]. Based on a wide range of possible radiative forcing’s (W/m2) and greenhouse gas emissions and concentrations, the Fifth Assessment Report (AR5) of the IPCC adopted four RCPs, namely RCP2.6, RCP4.5, RCP6.0 and RCP8.5 [2,24,25]. RCP2.6 is a low-level greenhouse gas emission scenario, RCP4.5 and RCP6.0 are both medium-level greenhouse gas emission scenarios and RCP8.5 is a high-level greenhouse gas emission scenario [23]. The basis of selecting the following two RCPs (RCP4.5 and RCP8.5) for this study was to help compare the impacts of CO2 emitted to the atmosphere at different RCP scenarios on climate variables.

2.5. Crop Model Input Data

Weather data: To operate the CERES-Maize crop model, weather input data for the selected sites were captured from the China Meteorological Data Network for each of the selected Agricultural Meteorological Experimental Stations (AMESs; http://data.cma.cn/, accessed on 7 May 2022). The weather input data included: daily maximum and minimum air temperatures, daily precipitation, daily humidity and daily solar radiation. The trend in daily solar radiation for each of the selected weather stations was calculated from the observed sunshine hours using the Angstrom Prescott equation [24]. Observed weather data and future climate scenario data were the two types of weather data that were used for calibration and validation of the CERES-Maize crop model. RCP scenario data (RCP4.5 and RCP8.5) generated by GCM-HadGEM2-ES model were adopted for baseline (1986 to 2005) and for the two future periods, the 2030s (2021 to 2040) and the 2050s (2041 to 2060), for maize yield simulations. The datasets on weather and climate were downscaled to a high spatial resolution of 0.5° × 0.5° (55.5 km × 55.5 km) and finally bias-corrected before being incorporated into the CERES-Maize model. Grid weather data (0.5° × 0.5°) were produced by our research group using the PRECISE model authorized by the British Hadley Center, which was downscaled based on the GCM-HadGEM2-ES.
Soil data: The CERES-Maize (DSSAT v4.7) model required soil input data which included soil color, soil texture, soil particle size, soil organic carbon, soil pH, soil nitrogen levels, soil bulk density, soil type, soil cation exchange and soil drainage [26]. These data were acquired from the local AMESs and from the Chinese soil scientific database (http://vdb3.soil.csdb.cn, accessed on 7 May 2022).
Crop observation and management data: The input data on crop management practices for the selected study sites for the period 1985 to 2005 were provided by the Institute of Crop Sciences of Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences (http://ics.caas.cn/en/, accessed on 7 May 2022) acquired from the AMESs within the study area. The study station sites that were used to provide the maize data were selected based on the following criteria to ensure credibility of the data output: (1) availability of up-to-date records on maize crop management practices, (2) the maize cultivars to be selected must have been planted for a minimum of 3 years and (3) the maize cultivars should not have been stressed by either diseases, pests, insects or severe climatic events [1]. The crop management input data were used to provide the following parameters for the CERES-Maize (DSSAT v4.7) model: crop type, cultivar, planting date, planting density, planting space, planting rows, fertilizer type, rate of fertilizer application, irrigation method, amount of irrigation, harvesting date and tillage practices [21].

2.6. Genetic Coefficients

Genetic coefficients in the DSSAT crop model are outlined as a set of parameters that explain the interrelationship between crop genotype and environmental conditions [23]. There are six genetic coefficients embedded within the CERES-Maize (DSSAT v4.7) model that help characterize a crop cultivar (Table 1, namely P1, P2, P5, G2, G3 and PHINT. These genetic coefficients help to explain the crop phenological stages, growth and development processes involved [2,20]. A coefficient estimator module embedded within DSSAT known as GLUE (Generalized Likelihood Uncertainty Estimation) was developed to help estimate the genotype-specific coefficients of all crop cultivars incorporated within the DSSAT model [1,25].

2.7. Model Calibration and Validation

The process of calibration of the CERES-Maize aims to obtain reasonable estimates of model genetic coefficients by comparing simulated data with the observed data [26]. Model validation is a process of assessing the ability of the calibrated model to simulate characteristics of the selected cultivar (Table 2) by comparison between the simulated and observed parameters. If the validation results are unsatisfactory, model calibration would be rerun to obtain a new set of genetic coefficients until the deviations between simulated and observed values are within acceptable limits. In this study, observed data of one representative cultivar from each site were used to calibrate the crop model with GLUE module, and two or more years’ independent data were used to validate the CERES-Maize model. Performance of the model was evaluated by comparing simulated values and observations of days to flowering (from sowing to flowering), days to maturity (length of maize life cycle), maize yields and biomass. The following statistical indicators were used for the evaluation: (i) normalized root mean square error (NRMSE), presenting relative error magnitude, and (ii) predicted deviation (PD), indicating possible over or underestimation.
N R M S E =   i = 1 n S i O i 2 n   0.5 o ¯
P D i = S i O i   / O i
where S i and O i are simulated and observed variables, respectively; o ¯ is the mean value of the observed data; n is the number of comparisons; and i is each comparison. The simulation was considered excellent if NRMSE is <10%, good if NRMSE is >10% and <20%, fair if NRMSE is >20% and <30% and poor if NRMSE is >30% [2]. Additionally, a negative PD value indicates underprediction, while a positive one indicates overprediction [2,21].

Method to Manage the Uncertainty of Simulations

The GLUE (Generalized Likelihood Uncertainty Estimation) program is used to estimate genotype-specific coefficients for the DSSAT crop models. It is a Bayesian estimation method that uses Monte Carlo sampling from prior distributions of the coefficients and a Gaussian likelihood function to determine the best coefficients based on the simulated and observed yield values [27]. The uncertainties in predictions of the impact of future climate change on the yield of spring maize in the main production areas of China were evaluated using the existing field corn genotype coefficient and soil parameter database contained within the DSSAT and field data collected from the agrometeorological stations near the study sites [28]. Using the GLUE Select program, more than 3000 runs were initiated so as to refine the results since less than 3000 runs would not likely give reliable results [29]. A sensitivity analysis involving the use of the Morris and Sobol sensitivity analysis methods was performed on the DSSAT v4.7 CERES-Maize model input parameters: cultivar selection, cultivar coefficients, crop management including planting date, spacing and plant density, soil profile and weather data. In general, a sensitivity analysis is the study of how a model evaluates the sensitivity of model outputs based on the variation in the input variables and genotype-specific parameters [30].
The Morris method is a global sensitivity analysis method based on screening analysis, using individually randomized one-factor-at-a-time (OAT) designs, by calculating the input parameters to perform sensitivity analysis on the basic effects of the output results. This method effectively balances the efficiency and accuracy of calculation. It is useful for models with many input parameters and a large computational load [31].
Sobol is a global sensitivity analysis method based on variance, which is determined by decomposing the variance of output variables. It uses the ANOVA-based decomposition to quantitatively evaluate the impact of each input parameter and the interaction between the parameters on the output variable [31]. Additionally, the method of Sobol is able to estimate the total sensitivity index, defined as the sum of all effects (including first-order and higher-order) involving the input factor of interest [32].

3. Results

3.1. Changes in the Major Meteorological Elements by the 2030s and 2050s in Northeast China

Table 3 shows projected changes in annual average temperature, precipitation and solar radiation relative to the baseline under RCP4.5 and RCP8.5 at Boli, Hailun, Tonghua, Huadian, Wafangdian and Dengta during the future periods (2030s and 2050s) compared with the baseline (1986–2005). In Heilongjiang, Jilin and Liaoning provinces, where the six study sites are located, the projected mean temperature during the 2030s and 2050s was set to change by a range of between −2.14 and 2.56 °C and −1.11 and 3.64 °C, respectively, under RCP4.5. The change in mean temperature during the 2030s and 2050s under RCP8.5 for the study sites ranged between −2.21 and 2.39 °C and −0.85 and 3.85 °C, respectively, which was higher than that under RCP4.5 especially for the 2050s due to the high CO2 concentration estimated for this period. Under RCP4.5, the annual average precipitation was projected to increase by a range of between 6.6 and 24.68% and −1.94 and 25.24% during the 2030s and 2050s, respectively. While precipitation under RCP8.5 was projected to change by a range of between −6.06 and 23.01% and −3.35 and 23.43% for the future periods 2030s and 2050s, respectively, which is an increase compared to RCP4.5 for the future periods in all the six study sites. The solar radiation compared to the baseline for the six study sites was projected to decrease by a range of between −6.0 and −23.24% and −4.82 and −23.44% for the 2030s and 2050s durations, respectively, under RCP4.5 and projected to further decrease with a range of between −7.32 and −24.58% and −7.35 and −24.43% for the 2030s and 2050s durations, respectively, under RCP8.5.

3.2. Model Calibration and Validation

Genetic Parameters Estimation

Calibration results of the six maize cultivars in Hailun, Boli, Huadian, Tonghua, Wafangdian and Dengta using the CERES-Maize model (Table 1) projected a set of six genetic cultivar coefficients (Table 4) for each of the maize cultivars. Six genetic coefficients (P1, P2, P5, G2, G3 and PHINT) are used by the CERES-Maize model to characterize or define the maize cultivar. Table 1 provides the definitions of the six genetic parameters, with four of the parameters (P1, P2, P5 and PHINT) controlling the timing of the phenological stages, while the other two parameters (G2 and G3) characterizing the potential yield under optimal conditions. Two statistical indicators were used for the evaluation: (i) normalized root mean square error (NRMSE), presenting relative error magnitude, and (ii) predicted deviation (PD), indicating possible over- or underestimation. The statistical indicators were calculated as shown in Section 2.3. The simulated values for maize yield were considered excellent if NRMSE is <10%, good if NRMSE is >10% and < 20%, fair if NRMSE is >20% and <30% and poor if NRMSE is >30% (Table 4). The NMRSE for the time to flowering, time to maturity and maize yield for all the six maize cultivars ranged between 0.5 and 9.9% which is considered excellent apart from only one site in Wafangdian which had a value of 10.8% which is considered good (Table 4). The predicted deviation values for all the six maize cultivars regarding the difference between simulated and observed time to flowering, time to maturity and maize yield ranged between −5.1 and 8.8% (Table 4). In conclusion, the CERES-Maize model was able to simulate grain yield under various agricultural management strategies and soil conditions, which suggests that this model could be applied in NEC.

3.3. Impact of Future Climate Change on Maize Yield by the 2030s and 2050s

3.3.1. Impact on the Time-to-Flowering

The time-to-flowering which is the period from sowing to flowering in days was compared based on the six different genetic coefficient parameters to establish the variation based on different climate change scenarios. The modeling results showed that maize phenology for the six cultivars based on the different genetic coefficients under scenarios RCP4.5 and RCP8.5 presented a decreasing trend for the number of days to flowering (Figure 3) if no adaptation measure was adopted. This reduction in the number of days to flowering is attributed to the projected increase in temperature and reduction in solar radiation under RCP4.5 and 8.5 for the future period between 2021 to 2060 (Table 3). Additionally, the difference in CO2 levels between RCP4.5 (medium-level greenhouse gas emission) compared to RCP8.5 (high-level greenhouse gas emission) contributed to the large reduction in the number of days to flowering for maize under RCP8.5 versus RCP4.5. The reduction in the number of days to flowering ranged from 1 day under parameter 6 in Hailun for the 2030s period to 11 days under parameter 3 in Boli for the 2050s period under RCP4.5, and also under RCP8.5 it ranged from an increase of 1 day under parameter 4 in Tonghua for the 2030s period to a reduction of 14 days under parameter 2 in Huadian for the 2050s period (Figure 3). Both Boli and Huadian recorded the largest reduction in the number of days to flowering in Heilongjiang and Jilin provinces of N.E China, respectively, and this was mainly attributed to the projected rise in mean temperature based on both scenarios RCP4.5 and RCP8.5 (Table 3). In Liaoning Province, Wafangdian recorded 12 days, the largest reduction in the number of days to flowering compared to Dengta which had 8 days and this was mainly attributed to the projected increase in temperature under RCP4.5 and 8.5 for the future period between 2021 to 2060 (Table 3).

3.3.2. Impact on the Time-to-Maturity

The time-to-maturity, which is the length of the maize life cycle in days, was compared based on the six different genetic coefficient parameters to establish the variation based on different climate change scenarios. The simulated days to maturity for all the study sites based on the six different genetic coefficient paraments for each site recorded a decrease that ranged from 7 days under parameter 6 in Hailun in the 2030s to 36 days under parameter 1 and 3 in Hailun in the 2050s both under RCP4.5, also under RCP8.5 the simulated days to maturity projected a decline ranging from 11 days under parameter 6 in Hailun in the 2030s to 38 days under parameter 1 and 2 in Hailun and Wafangdian, respectively, in the 2050s (Figure 4). As a result of the warming climate projected for all the study sites in Northeast China in the 2030s and 2050s, both based on RCP scenarios of 4.5 and 8.5 (Table 3), crop development has been hastened and consequently inducing earlier flowering and maturity dates (Figure 3 and Figure 4) under the different parameters. The other contributing factor was the variation in the level of CO2 between RCP4.5 (medium-level greenhouse gas emission) and RCP8.5 (high-level greenhouse gas emission) that contributed to the highest reduction in the time-to-maturity for maize under RCP8.5 versus RCP4.5. In Heilongjiang Province, the highest predicted reduction in the time-to-maturity was in Hailun under parameter 1 at 38 days compared to Boli which was predicted to decrease 35 days under parameter 1 for the future period between 2021 to 2060. In Jilin Province, the highest predicted reduction in the time-to-maturity was in Huadian under parameter 2 at 33 days compared to Tonghua in which it was 32 days under parameter 4 for the future period between 2021 to 2060. In Liaoning Province, the highest predicted reduction in the time-to-maturity was at 38 days in Wafangdian under parameter 2 compared to Dengta where the predicted reduction was 35 days under parameter 2 for the future period between 2021 to 2060.

3.3.3. Impact on Maize Yield

The percentage change in maize yield relative to the baseline was calculated based on the average maize yields for the 2030s and 2050s in reference to the future climate change scenarios RCP4.5 and RCP8.5 without considering any adaptation measure for the different genetic coefficients for all the six study sites (Figure 5). The simulation results showed that the overall mean maize yield would have a percentage decrease that ranged from 2.5% in Dengta under parameter 1 for the 2030s period to 25.4% in Wafangdian under parameter 3 for the 2050s period under RCP4.5. Moreover, under RCP8.5, the predicted percentage reduction in mean yield would be even higher, ranging from 2.9% in Dengta under parameter 4 for the 2030s period to 26.4% in Boli under parameter 6 for the 2050s (Figure 5). In Heilongjiang Province, the highest predicted reduction in maize yield was in Boli under parameter 6 at 26.4% compared to Hailun in which yield reduction was predicted to be 17.5% under parameter 3 for the future period between 2021 and 2060. In Jilin Province, the highest reduction in predicted maize yield was in Huadian under parameter 1 at 26.1% compared to Tonghua with 20.7% reduction under parameter 1 for the future period between 2021 and 2060. In Liaoning Province, the highest predicted reduction in maize yield level was in Wafangdian under parameter 3 at 26.3% compared to Dengta with a 10.5% reduction under parameter 6 for the future period between 2021 and 2060. Because maize is a C4 plant, the impact of elevated CO2 under RCP8.5 (high-level greenhouse gas emission) compared to RCP4.5 (medium-level greenhouse gas emission) did not have any significant impact on the maize yield since the highest reductions in maize yield levels were recorded under RCP8.5. The other factor that contributed to the high reduction in maize yield under RCP8.5 for the future periods of the 2030s and 2050s was attributed to the projected increase and reduction in temperature and solar radiation, respectively, under RCP8.5 compared to RCP4.5 for the future period between 2021 and 2060 (Table 3).

3.4. Effect of Adaptation Measures on Maize Yield Based on Different Model Parameters

3.4.1. Effect of Changing Planting Dates on Maize Yield

As shown in Figure 6, maize yield at Boli, Hailun, Tonghua, Huadian, Wafangdian and Dengta study sites would decrease by 0 to 10.1% if the planting dates were advanced by 5 to 15 days under RCP4.5 for the 2030s period, while maize yield would increase by 0 to 12.3% if the planting dates were delayed by 5 to 15 days under RCP4.5 for the 2030s period based on all the different genetic coefficient parameters. According to the simulation, delaying plating dates by 5 to 15 days would result in grain yield increases since this would help the maize crop avoid thermal stress during its key developmental stages. The level of grain yield increases also varied based on the two RCP scenarios, i.e., RCP4.5 (medium-level greenhouse gas emission) and RCP8.5 (high-level greenhouse gas emission) that had varying CO2 levels. The highest reduction and increase in maize yield after advancing and delaying the planting dates by 5 to 15 days were recorded in Jilin followed by Liaoning and then Heilongjiang Province.
According to Figure 7, maize yield at Boli, Hailun, Tonghua, Huadian, Wafangdian and Dengta study sites would decrease by 0 to 14.8% if the planting dates were advanced by 5 to 15 days under RCP4.5 for the 2050s period, while maize yield would increase by 0 to 19.4% if the planting dates were delayed by 5 to 15 days under RCP4.5 for the 2050s period based on all the different genetic coefficient parameters. The highest reduction in maize yield after advancing the planting dates by 5 to 15 days was recorded in Liaoning followed by Heilongjiang and then Jilin Province. While the highest increase in maize yield after delaying the planting dates by 5 to 15 days was recorded in Jilin followed by Heilongjiang and then Liaoning Province.
As shown in Figure 8, maize yield at Boli, Hailun, Tonghua, Huadian, Wafangdian and Dengta would decrease by 0 to 9.5% if the planting dates were advanced by 5 to 15 days under RCP8.5 for the 2030s period, while maize yield would increase by 0 to 11.9% if the planting dates were delayed by 5 to 15 days under RCP8.5 for the 2030s period based on all the different genetic coefficient parameters. The highest reduction in maize yield after advancing the planting dates by 5 to 15 days was recorded in Jilin followed by Heilongjiang and then Liaoning Province. While the highest increase in maize yield after delaying the planting dates by 5 to 15 days was recorded in Jilin followed by Liaoning and then Heilongjiang Province.
According to Figure 9, maize yield at Boli, Hailun, Tonghua, Huadian, Wafangdian and Dengta study sites would decrease by 0 to 14% if the planting dates were advanced by 5 to 15 days under RCP8.5 for the 2050s period, meanwhile if the planting dates were delayed by 5 to 15 days under RCP8.5 for the 2050s period, maize yield would increase by 0 to 21.6% based on all the different genetic coefficient parameters. The highest reduction in maize yield after advancing the planting dates by 5 to 15 days was recorded in Heilongjiang followed by Liaoning and then Jilin Province. While the highest increase in maize yield after delaying the planting dates by 5 to 15 days was recorded in Heilongjiang followed by Jilin and then Liaoning Province.

3.4.2. Effect of Adding Irrigation Practices on Maize Yield

Under irrigation practices and early planting by 5 to 15 days, the maize yield at Boli, Hailun, Tonghua, Huadian, Wafangdian and Dengta sites declined by 0 to 8.5% under RCP4.5 for the 2030s period, meanwhile under irrigation practices and delayed planting by 5 to 15 days at the Boli, Hailun, Tonghua, Huadian, Wafangdian and Dengta sites, the maize yield levels increased by 0 to 12.2% under RCP4.5 for the 2030s period (Figure 10). The highest reduction in maize yield after advancing the planting dates by 5 to 15 days was recorded in Jilin followed by Heilongjiang and then Liaoning Province. While the highest increase in maize yield after delaying the planting dates by 5 to 15 days was recorded in Jilin followed by Heilongjiang and then Liaoning Province.
The maize yield levels for Boli, Hailun, Tonghua, Huadian, Wafangdian and Dengta under irrigation practices under RCP4.5 for the 2050s period decreased by 0 to 11% when the planting dates were advanced by 5 to 15 days, but when delaying the planting dates by 5 to 15 days the maize yields for Boli, Hailun, Tonghua, Huadian, Wafangdian and Dengta increased by 0 to 24.4% under RCP4.5 for the 2050s period (Figure 11). The highest reduction in maize yield after advancing the planting dates by 5 to 15 days was recorded in Liaoning followed by Jilin and then Heilongjiang Province. While the highest increase in maize yield after delaying the planting dates by 5 to 15 days was recorded in Heilongjiang followed by Jilin and then Liaoning Province.
The maize yield levels for Boli, Hailun, Tonghua, Huadian, Wafangdian and Dengta under RCP8.5 for the future 2030s period under irrigation practices based on advanced planting dates of 5 to 15 days showed a decrease of between 0 and 13.3%, meanwhile after adjusting to the delayed planting dates of 5 to 15 days, the maize yield levels for the Boli, Hailun, Tonghua, Huadian, Wafangdian and Dengta sites increased by 0 to 13.8% (Figure 12). The highest reduction in maize yield after advancing the planting dates by 5 to 15 days was recorded in Liaoning followed by Jilin and then Heilongjiang Province. While the highest increase in maize yield after delaying the planting dates by 5 to 15 days was recorded in Jilin followed by Liaoning and then Heilongjiang Province.
Under RCP8.5 for the future 2050s period under irrigation practices based on early planting of 5 to 15 days for Boli, Hailun, Tonghua, Huadian, Wafangdian and Dengta, the maize yield levels decreased by 0 to 10.7%, meanwhile delaying the planting dates by 5 to 15 days for Boli, Hailun, Tonghua, Huadian, Wafangdian and Dengta, the maize yield levels increased by 0 to 19% (Figure 13). The highest reduction in maize yield after advancing the planting dates by 5 to 15 days was recorded in Jilin followed by Heilongjiang and then Liaoning Province. While the highest increase in maize yield after delaying the planting dates by 5 to 15 days was recorded in Jilin followed by Liaoning and then Heilongjiang Province.

3.4.3. Effect of Replacing Cultivar on Maize Yield

According to the impact simulations, the late-maturing cultivar Dongdan60 at the Dengta site had a longer growing period of 141 days compared to the shorter season cultivars 4zao6 at Boli and Limin15 at Huadian that had 136 days and 139 days, respectively, and a lower decrease in yield relative to the cultivars at higher latitudes. Thus, this cultivar was selected to be an adaptation measure to replace the shorter season cultivars 4zao6 at Boli and Limin15 at Huadian, which were predicted to suffer higher yield reductions under future climate conditions. A late-maturing cultivar Dongdan60 at the Dengta site in Liaoning Province of Northeast China was selected to replace the early and medium-maturing maize cultivars 4zao6 and Limin15 grown at Boli in Heilongjiang Province and Huadian in Jilin Province, respectively (Figure 14). According to the simulation results, if the local maize cultivar 4zao6 at Boli is replaced by Dongdan60, the maize yield would increase by 18.9% under RCP4.5 for the 2030s period, increase by 23.6% under RCP4.5 for the 2050s period, increase by 16.5% under RCP8.5 for the 2030s period and increase by 15.6% under RCP8.5 for the 2050s period based on parameter 4 (optimal treatment parameter) (Figure 14). In addition, changing the maize cultivar Limin15 at Huadian site with Dongdan60 would increase the maize yields by 13.9% under RCP4.5 for the 2030s period, increase by 15.9% under RCP4.5 for the 2050s period, increase by 10.8% under RCP8.5 for the 2030s period and increase by 9.7% under RCP8.5 for the 2050s period based on parameter 1 (optimal treatment parameter) (Figure 14). Compared to the local cultivars, the new late-maturing cultivar introduced from the lower altitude site under the same climate and soil conditions caused the maize yields to increase significantly. The late-maturing cultivar cultivated at a lower altitude has a longer growing period and as such it would take advantage of the increased temperatures resulting in yield increase as opposed to the local maize cultivar which would be affected by the increased temperatures resulting in yield reduction. Thus, more benefits would result from the development of new crop cultivars that are tolerant of high temperatures with higher thermal requirements.

3.4.4. Effect of Adopting Multiple Measures on Maize Yield

Upon adopting early planting dates, irrigation practices and cultivar change, which entailed adopting the late-maturing cultivar Dongdan60 to replace the early and medium-maturing maize cultivars 4zao6 at Boli and Limin15 grown at Boli in Heilongjiang Province and Huadian in Jilin Province, respectively (Figure 15), an exponential percentage increase in maize yield was recorded at both sites. In Boli, upon adoption of all three adaptation measures, the maize yield levels were projected to increase by 38.9% under RCP4.5 for the 2030s period, increase by 43.6% under RCP4.5 for the 2050s period, increase by 36.5% under RCP8.5 for the 2030s period and increase by 35.6% under RCP8.5 for the 2050s period based on parameter 4 (optimal treatment parameter) (Figure 15). In Huadian, upon adoption of all three adaptation measures, the maize yield levels were projected to increase by 27.9% under RCP4.5 for the 2030s period, increase by 29.9% under RCP4.5 for the 2050s period, increase by 24.8% under RCP8.5 for the 2030s period and increase by 23.7% under RCP8.5 for the 2050s period based on parameter 1 (optimal treatment parameter) (Figure 15). As a result, the benefits of climate change such as the increased temperatures can be exploited by adopting maize cultivars with a longer growth period and integrating the other two adaptation measures of changing planting dates and irrigation practices.

4. Discussion

4.1. Possible Future Meteorological Elements in NEC

At the six representative sites in NEC, analyses indicate that the projected annual average temperature during the 2030s and 2050s under RCP4.5 and RCP8.5 is predicted to change by a range of −2.21 to 3.85 °C. This is consistent with the findings of Yin et al., (2015) [22] in which an increase of 2 °C is predicted to occur in over 60% of all regions in China by the end of the 21st century. Previous studies have predicted that solar radiation in NEC will decrease [7]. In agreement with this, based on our projected simulations for the 2030s and 2050s periods under RCP4.5 and RCP8.5 NEC, a change of −7.35 to 24.58% was predicted. The annual average precipitation according to our simulation was projected to change by −6.06 to 25.24% for the 2030s and 2050s periods under RCP4.5 and RCP8.5, which agrees with previous findings for NEC [1] of projected increases in precipitation by 6.8, 11.1 and 14.4% and 7.2, 12.9 and 23.7% under RCP2.6 and RCP8.5 for the 2020s, 2050s and 2080s periods, respectively.

4.2. Impact of Future Climate Change on Maize Yield under Different Parameters

In NEC, maize production is largely dependent on rainfall and according to Na et al., (2021) [11] the impact of changing climate will have a significant effect on maize yield. The agriculture systems in Northeast China are more sensitive to climate warming and this has limited the adaptability of agro-ecosystems to the changing climate [33]. As a result of climate warming in NEC, the resultant effect has been a recorded variation in maize production due to accelerated crop development leading to a reduction in the length of the growing season [2]. According to our results, increased temperatures and a decrease in sunshine hours and precipitation levels at Boli, Hailun, Tonghua, Huadian, Wafangdian and Dengta for the 2030s and 2050s periods based on RCP4.5 and RCP8.5 climate scenarios would shorten the maize growth durations by (1–38 days) and this would result in a reduction in maize yield by (2.5–26.4%). Our results were consistent with the findings of Li et al. [34] where maize yield reduction was recorded in some regions of China under projected global warming by 1.5 °C and 2.0 °C.

4.3. Effect of Adaptaion Measures on Maize Yield

Adaptation measures to mitigate the negative effect of climate change are very critical in ensuring food security [11,12]. However, climate warming will increase temperatures and extend the length of the potential growing period of crops if other resources are not limited. Our findings indicated that an effective management option to counteract the negative warming effects and reduce maize yield loss due to the sensitive nature of cultivars to high temperatures is to use early planting, change to more heat-tolerant cultivars and add irrigation practice [35]. Upon adoption of the adaptation measures tested in this study, the maize yield levels in NEC were projected to increase by a range of 23.7 to 43.6% for the 2030s and 2050s period under RCP4.5 and RCP8.5. Our findings were consistent with the studies of Xu et al. [16] and Na et al. [11] which indicated that the use of maize varieties with longer growing periods among other adaptation measures can help increase maize yield under future climate change. Future research studies should analyze the influence of soil conditions, human resource, market price and local production levels that might influence the variation in maize yields, factors that were not considered in this study.

5. Conclusions

Using the CERES-Maize model v4.7, six sets of genetic parameters were generated and the results showed that time-to-flowering and time-to-maturity of maize would be shortened by 1 to 14 days and 7 to 38 days, respectively, from 2021 to 2060 relative to 1986 to 2005, based on the future climate at six representative sites in NRC. Additionally, the simulation results showed that increased temperatures and a decrease in precipitation levels and sunshine hours during the 2030s and 2050s would shorten maize growth durations and this would result in more yield reduction under RCP 8.5 than RCP 4.5. Simulation indicated that adaptation measures, including changing planting dates, adding irrigation practice and replacing cultivar, would increase maize yield to varying degrees of between (23.7 and 43.6%) at both Boli and Huadian sites in Northeast China for the 2030s and 2050s periods under RCP 4.5 and RCP 8.5.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization: J.K.K., S.W., K.L. and L.G.; methodology, J.K.K., K.L. and L.G.; software, J.K.K., J.P. and K.L.; validation, J.K.K., J.P., K.L. and L.G.; formal analysis, J.K.K.; investigation, J.K.K.; resources, J.K.K., S.W., J.P., K.L. and L.G.; data processing, J.K.K., J.P., K.L. and L.G.; writing—original draft preparation, J.K.K.; writing—review and editing K.L. and L.G.; visualization, J.K.K.; supervision, K.L. and L.G.; project administration, K.L. and L.G.; funding acquisition, L.G. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by the National Key R&D program of China Approval No. 2019YFA0607403 and 2017YFD0300301. The Agricultural Science and Technology Innovation Program of the Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences also supported this study.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

China Meteorological Agricultural Meteorological Experimental Stations (AMESs; http://data.cma.cn/) (accessed on 20 May 2020); Chinese soil scientific database (http://vdb3.soil.csdb.cn) (accessed on 10 June 2020); Institute of Crop Sciences of Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences (http://ics.caas.cn/en/) (accessed on 15 February 2020).

Acknowledgments

We would especially like to thank the Graduate School of Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences and the Institute of Agro-Environment and Sustainable Development for the support they have given in carrying out the research through the two supervisors Guo Liping and Kuo Li. Special thanks should be given to China Meteorological Data Network, Chinese Soil Scientific Database and the Institute of Crop Sciences of Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences for providing data on climate, soil and maize, respectively.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Lin, Y.; Wu, W.; Ge, Q. CERES-Maize model-based simulation of climate change impacts on maize yields and potential adaptive measures in Heilongjiang Province, China. J. Sci. Food Agric. 2015, 95, 2838–2849. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Lin, Y.; Feng, Z.; Wu, W.; Yang, Y.; Zhou, Y.; Xu, C. Potential impacts of climate change and adaptation on maize in Northeast China. Agron. J. 2017, 109, 1476–1490. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  3. Kuo, W. Simulation of Potential Productivity and Cultivation Measures by CERES Maize Model Based on Climate Factors in N.E China. Master’s Thesis, Shandong Agricultural University, Taian, China, 2016. [Google Scholar]
  4. Ma, F.; Li, M.; Wei, N.; Dong, L.; Zhang, X.; Han, X.; Li, K.; Guo, L. Impacts of Elevated Atmospheric CO2 and N Fertilization on N2O Emissions and Dynamics of Associated Soil Labile C Components and Mineral N in a Maize Field in the North China Plain. Agronomy 2022, 12, 432. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Diao, T.; Peng, Z.; Niu, X.; Yang, R.; Ma, F.; Guo, L. Changes of soil microbes related with carbon and nitrogen cycling after long-term CO2 enrichment in a typical Chinese maize field. Sustainability 2020, 12, 1250. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  6. Zhao, J.; Yang, X.; Liu, Z.; Lv, S.; Wang, J.; Dai, S. Variations in the potential climatic suitability distribution patterns and grain yields for spring maize in Northeast China under climate change. Clim. Chang. 2016, 137, 29–42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Chen, X.; Chen, F.; Chen, Y.; Gao, Q.; Yang, X.; Yuan, L.; Zhang, F.; Mi, G. Modern maize hybrids in Northeast China exhibit increased yield potential and resource use efficiency despite adverse climate change. Glob. Chang. Biol. 2012, 19, 923–936. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Tan, J.; Yang, P.; Liu, Z.; Wu, W.; Zhang, L.; Li, Z.; You, L.; Tang, H.; Li, Z. Spatio-temporal dynamics of maize cropping system in Northeast China between 1980 and 2010 by using spatial production allocation model. J. Geogr. Sci. 2014, 24, 397–410. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Zhao, J.; Yang, X.; Lin, X.; Sassenrath, G.F.; Dai, S.; Lv, S.; Chen, X.; Chen, F.; Mi, G. Radiation interception and use efficiency contributes to higher yields of newer maize hybrids in Northeast China. Agron. J. 2015, 107, 1473–1480. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Tao, F.; Zhang, Z.; Liu, J.; Yokozawa, M. Modelling the impacts of weather and climate variability on crop productivity over a large area: A new super-ensemble-based probabilistic projection. Agric. For. Meteorol. 2009, 149, 1266–1278. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Mi, N.; Cai, F.; Zhang, S.; Zhang, Y.; Ji, R.; Chen, N.; Ji, Y.; Wang, D. Thermal time requirements for maize growth in Northeast China and their effects on yield and water supply under climate change conditions. Water 2021, 13, 2612. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Wang, M.; Li, Y.; Ye, W.; Bornman, J.F.; Yan, X. Effects of climate change on maize production, and potential adaptation measures: A case study in Jilin province, China. Clim. Res. 2011, 46, 223–242. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  13. IPCC. (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change): Contribution of Working Group II to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. In Climate Change 2007: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability; IPCC: Geneva, Switzerland, 2007. [Google Scholar]
  14. Tao, F.; Zhang, Z. Adaptation of maize production to climate change in North China Plain: Quantify the relative contributions of adaptation options. Eur. J. Agron. 2010, 33, 103–116. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Liu, Z.; Hubbard, K.G.; Lin, X.; Yang, X. Negative effects of climate warming on maize yield are reversed by the changing of sowing date and cultivar selection in Northeast China. Glob. Chang. Biol. 2013, 19, 3481–3492. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  16. Xu, F.; Wang, B.; He, C.; Liu, D.L.; Feng, P.; Yao, N.; Zhang, R.; Xu, S.; Xue, J.; Feng, H.; et al. Optimizing sowing date and planting density can mitigate the impacts of future climate on maize yield: A case study in the Guanzhong plain of China. Agronomy 2021, 11, 1452. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Cuculeanu, V.; Marica, A.; Simota, C. Climate change impact on agricultural crops and adaptation options in Romania. Clim. Res. 1999, 12, 153–160. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  18. Meng, E.C.H.; Hu, R.; Shi, X.; Zhang, S. Maize in China: Production Systems, Constraints, and Research Priorities; CIMMYT: México-Veracruz, Mexico, 2006. [Google Scholar]
  19. Tao, F.; Zhang, Z. Climate change, wheat productivity and water use in the North China Plain: A new super-ensemble-based probabilistic projection. Agric. For. Meteorol. 2013, 170, 146–165. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. UNFCCC. Compendium on Methods and Tools to Evaluate Impacts of, and Vulnerability and Adaptation to, Climate Change UNFCCC (Issue February). 2008. Available online: https://unfccc.int/files/adaptation/nairobi_workprogramme/compendium_on_methods_tools/application/pdf/20080307_compendium_m_t_complete.pdf,2008.02 (accessed on 7 May 2022).
  21. Xiong, W.; Matthews, R.; Holman, I.; Lin, E.; Xu, Y. Modelling China’s potential maize production at regional scale under climate change. Clim. Change 2007, 85, 433–451. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Yin, Y.; Tang, Q.; Liu, X. A multi-model analysis of change in potential yield of major crops in China under climate change. Earth Syst. Dyn. 2015, 6, 45–59. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  23. Sorech, E.; Kibebew, K.; Gebre, H. Climate Characterization and Modelling the Impacts (Issue March). Master’s Thesis, Haramaya University, Haramaya, Ethiopia, 2016. [Google Scholar]
  24. Angatrom, A. Solar and terrestrial radiation. Report to the international commission for solar research on actinometric investigations of solar and atmospheric radiation. Q. J. R. Meteorol. Soc. 1924, 50, 121–126. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Xia, J.; Ning, L.; Wang, Q.; Chen, J.; Wan, L.; Hong, S. Vulnerability of and risk to water resources in arid and semi-arid regions of West China under a scenario of climate change. Clim. Chang. 2017, 144, 549–563. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Ngwira, A.R.; Aune, J.B.; Thierfelder, C. DSSAT modelling of conservation agriculture maize response to climate change in Malawi. Soil Tillage Res. 2014, 143, 85–94. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Röll, G.; Memic, E.; Graeff-Hönninger, S. Implementation of an automatic time-series calibrationmethod for the DSSAT wheatmodels to enhance multi-model approaches. Agron. J. 2020, 112, 3891–3912. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Jia, H.C.; Pan, D.H.; Li, J.; Zhang, W.; Ghulam, R. Risk assessment of maize drought disaster in southwest China using the Environmental Policy Integrated Climate model. J. Mt. Sci. 2016, 13, 465–475. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Jones, J.W.; Hoogenboom, G.; Boote, K.J.; Poter, C.H. Influence of likelihood function choice for estimating crop model parameters using the generalized likelihood uncertainty estimation method. Agric. Syst. 2010, 103, 256–264. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Moreno-Cadena, L.P.; Hoogenboom, G.; Fisher, M.J.; Ramirez-Villegas, J.; Prager, S.D.; Becerra Lopez-Lavalle, L.A.; Pypers, P.; Mejia de Tafur, M.S.; Wallach, D.; Muñoz-Carpena, R.; et al. Importance of genetic parameters and uncertainty of MANIHOT, a new mechanistic cassava simulation model. Eur. J. Agron. 2020, 115, 126031. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Saltelli, A.; Ratto, M.; Andres, T.; Campolongo, F.; Cariboni, J.; Gatelli, D.; Saisana, M.; Tarantola, S. Global Sensitivity Analysis: The Primer; John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.: London, UK, 2008. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  32. DeJonge, K.C.; Ascough, J.C.; Ahmadi, M.; Andales, A.A.; Arabi, M. Global sensitivity and uncertainty analysis of a dynamic agroecosystem model under different irrigation treatments. Ecol. Model. 2012, 231, 113–125. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Hao, X.; He, W.; Lam, S.K.; Li, P.; Zong, Y.; Zhang, D.; Li, F.Y. Enhancement of no-tillage, crop straw return and manure application on field organic matter content overweigh the adverse effects of climate change in the arid and semi-arid Northwest China. Agric. For. Meteorol. 2020, 295, 108199. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Li, K.; Xiong, W.; Pan, J.; Lin, E.; Li, Y.; Han, X. Evaluation of China’s corn yield trend under the background of future warming of 1.5 °C and 2.0 °C. China Agric. Meteorol. 2018, 39, 765–777. [Google Scholar]
  35. Zhao, J.; Yang, X. Spatial patterns of yield-based cropping suitability and its driving factors in the three main maize-growing regions in China. Int. J. Biometeorol. 2019, 63, 1659–1668. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Figure 1. Geographical distribution of study sites in Northeast China.
Figure 1. Geographical distribution of study sites in Northeast China.
Plants 11 01634 g001
Figure 2. Sketch of the structure of CERES crop model.
Figure 2. Sketch of the structure of CERES crop model.
Plants 11 01634 g002
Figure 3. Changes in maize time-to-flowering (days) under future climate scenarios based on different treatment parameters compared with the baseline at Boli, Hailun, Tonghua, Huadian, Wafangdian and Dengta.
Figure 3. Changes in maize time-to-flowering (days) under future climate scenarios based on different treatment parameters compared with the baseline at Boli, Hailun, Tonghua, Huadian, Wafangdian and Dengta.
Plants 11 01634 g003
Figure 4. Changes in maize time-to-maturity (days) under future climate scenarios based on different treatment parameters compared with the baseline at Boli, Hailun, Tonghua, Huadian, Wafangdian and Dengta.
Figure 4. Changes in maize time-to-maturity (days) under future climate scenarios based on different treatment parameters compared with the baseline at Boli, Hailun, Tonghua, Huadian, Wafangdian and Dengta.
Plants 11 01634 g004
Figure 5. Changes in maize yield (%) under future climate scenarios based on different treatment parameters compared with the baseline at Boli, Hailun, Tonghua, Huadian, Wafangdian and Dengta.
Figure 5. Changes in maize yield (%) under future climate scenarios based on different treatment parameters compared with the baseline at Boli, Hailun, Tonghua, Huadian, Wafangdian and Dengta.
Plants 11 01634 g005
Figure 6. Maize yield on the changed planting dates under RCP4.5 (2030s) based on different treatment parameters compared with the baseline at Boli, Hailun, Tonghua, Huadian, Wafangdian and Dengta.
Figure 6. Maize yield on the changed planting dates under RCP4.5 (2030s) based on different treatment parameters compared with the baseline at Boli, Hailun, Tonghua, Huadian, Wafangdian and Dengta.
Plants 11 01634 g006
Figure 7. Maize yield on the changed planting dates under RCP4.5 (2050s) based on different treatment parameters compared with the baseline at Boli, Hailun, Tonghua, Huadian, Wafangdian and Dengta.
Figure 7. Maize yield on the changed planting dates under RCP4.5 (2050s) based on different treatment parameters compared with the baseline at Boli, Hailun, Tonghua, Huadian, Wafangdian and Dengta.
Plants 11 01634 g007
Figure 8. Maize yield on the changed planting dates under RCP8.5 (2030s) based on different treatment parameters compared with the baseline at Boli, Hailun, Tonghua, Huadian, Wafangdian and Dengta.
Figure 8. Maize yield on the changed planting dates under RCP8.5 (2030s) based on different treatment parameters compared with the baseline at Boli, Hailun, Tonghua, Huadian, Wafangdian and Dengta.
Plants 11 01634 g008
Figure 9. Maize yield on the changed planting dates under RCP8.5 (2050s) based on different treatment parameters compared with the baseline at Boli, Hailun, Tonghua, Huadian, Wafangdian and Dengta.
Figure 9. Maize yield on the changed planting dates under RCP8.5 (2050s) based on different treatment parameters compared with the baseline at Boli, Hailun, Tonghua, Huadian, Wafangdian and Dengta.
Plants 11 01634 g009
Figure 10. Maize yield on the changed planting dates under RCP4.5 (2030s) under automatic irrigation based on different treatment parameters compared with the baseline at Boli, Hailun, Tonghua, Huadian, Wafangdian and Dengta.
Figure 10. Maize yield on the changed planting dates under RCP4.5 (2030s) under automatic irrigation based on different treatment parameters compared with the baseline at Boli, Hailun, Tonghua, Huadian, Wafangdian and Dengta.
Plants 11 01634 g010
Figure 11. Maize yield on the changed planting dates under RCP4.5 (2050s) under automatic irrigation based on different treatment parameters compared with the baseline at Boli, Hailun, Tonghua, Huadian, Wafangdian and Dengta.
Figure 11. Maize yield on the changed planting dates under RCP4.5 (2050s) under automatic irrigation based on different treatment parameters compared with the baseline at Boli, Hailun, Tonghua, Huadian, Wafangdian and Dengta.
Plants 11 01634 g011
Figure 12. Maize yield on the changed planting dates under RCP8.5 (2030s) under automatic irrigation based on different treatment parameters compared with the baseline at Boli, Hailun, Tonghua, Huadian, Wafangdian and Dengta.
Figure 12. Maize yield on the changed planting dates under RCP8.5 (2030s) under automatic irrigation based on different treatment parameters compared with the baseline at Boli, Hailun, Tonghua, Huadian, Wafangdian and Dengta.
Plants 11 01634 g012
Figure 13. Maize yield on the changed planting dates under RCP8.5 (2050s) under automatic irrigation based on different treatment parameters compared with the baseline at Boli, Hailun, Tonghua, Huadian, Wafangdian and Dengta.
Figure 13. Maize yield on the changed planting dates under RCP8.5 (2050s) under automatic irrigation based on different treatment parameters compared with the baseline at Boli, Hailun, Tonghua, Huadian, Wafangdian and Dengta.
Plants 11 01634 g013
Figure 14. Changes in maize yield (%) after cultivar change with Dongdan60 under future climate scenarios based on one set of optimal treatment parameters compared with the baseline for Boli and Huadian.
Figure 14. Changes in maize yield (%) after cultivar change with Dongdan60 under future climate scenarios based on one set of optimal treatment parameters compared with the baseline for Boli and Huadian.
Plants 11 01634 g014
Figure 15. Changes in maize yield (%) after early planting, automatic irrigation and cultivar change with Dongdan60 under future climate scenarios based on one set of optimal treatment parameters compared with the baseline for Boli and Huadian.
Figure 15. Changes in maize yield (%) after early planting, automatic irrigation and cultivar change with Dongdan60 under future climate scenarios based on one set of optimal treatment parameters compared with the baseline for Boli and Huadian.
Plants 11 01634 g015
Table 1. Definition of genetic coefficients used in the CERES-Maize (DSSAT v4.7) model.
Table 1. Definition of genetic coefficients used in the CERES-Maize (DSSAT v4.7) model.
CoefficientDefinitionUnit
P1Thermal time from seedling emergence to the end of the juvenile phase (above a base temperature of 8°C) during which the plant is not responsive to changes in photoperiod °C days
P2Extent to which development is delayed for each hour increase in photoperiod above the longest photoperiod at which development proceeds at a maximum rate (which is considered to be 12.5 h). days
P5Thermal time from silking to physiological maturity (expressed in degree days above a base temperature of 8°C). °C days
G2Maximum possible number of kernels per plant.Number
G3Kernel filling rate during the linear grain filling stage and under optimum conditions. Mg day−1
PHINTPhyllochron interval: the interval in thermal time between successive leaf tip appearances °C days
Table 2. Selected maize cultivar study sites for calibration and validation within the DSSAT v4.7 crop model.
Table 2. Selected maize cultivar study sites for calibration and validation within the DSSAT v4.7 crop model.
ProvinceSiteLatitude
(N)
Longitude
(E)
Altitude
(m)
Maize CultivarType of MaturityYears
HeilongjiangBoli45.45130.35220.54zao6Early2005, 2006 *, 2008
Hailun47.26126.58239.2Haiyu 6Medium2005, 2006, 2007 *
JilinTonghua41.4125.44384.3Jidan 159Medium2006, 2008 *, 2009
Huadian 42.59126.45263.3Limin15Medium2006, 2007, 2008 *
LiaoningWafangdian39.38122.01118.5Lianyu 6Late2006 *, 2007, 2008
Dengta41.25123.1942Dongdan 60Late2006 *, 2007, 2008
* Indicates the years (observed records) used for calibration of the crop model.
Table 3. Study sites projected changes in annual average temperature, precipitation and solar radiation relative to the baseline under RCP4.5 and RCP8.5.
Table 3. Study sites projected changes in annual average temperature, precipitation and solar radiation relative to the baseline under RCP4.5 and RCP8.5.
ProvinceStudy SiteMean Temperature (°C)Precipitation (mm) (%)Solar Radiation (MJ m−2 d−1) (%)
HeilongjiangBoliScenarios2030s2050s2030s2050s2030s2050s
RCP 4.50.181.3024.6821.20−8.72−8.54
RCP 8.50.081.5715.0113.51−8.72−10.26
HailunRCP 4.51.702.9212.98−1.94−6.00−4.82
RCP 8.51.643.195.524.15−7.32−7.35
JilinTonghuaRCP 4.5−2.14−1.1123.1625.24−23.24−23.44
RCP 8.5−2.21−0.8512.5522.73−24.58−24.43
HuadianRCP 4.52.563.646.602.11−9.89−10.05
RCP 8.52.393.85−6.06−0.07−11.78−11.28
LiaoningWafangdianRCP 4.51.782.878.6515.76−16.15−15.51
RCP 8.51.983.3723.0123.43−16.97−16.22
DengtaRCP 4.51.943.038.332.58−9.15−9.51
RCP 8.51.923.35−4.28−3.35−10.50−9.84
Table 4. Calculated genetic coefficients for the study sites and respective maize cultivars.
Table 4. Calculated genetic coefficients for the study sites and respective maize cultivars.
Calculated Genetic Coefficients of Each Maize CultivarTime-to-FloweringTime-to-MaturityMaize
Yield
SiteParameterCultivar *P1P2P5G2G3PHINTNRMSE (%)PD (%)NRMSE (%)PD (%)NRMSE (%)PD (%)
Boli14zao61950.136069797.63494.61.43.23.74.51.5
Boli24zao61720.506559787.09492−1.42.81.51.6−4.2
Boli34zao61550.526829837.06492.71.42.83.71−3.0
Boli44zao61650.526489807.20492−1.43.21.51.5−1.3
Boli54zao61550.806509777.21492−1.42.81.51.1−2.8
Boli64zao61650.566429757.454921.43.23.76.51.3
Hailun1Haiyu 62170.3065698315.60492.65.12.5−2.83.95.3
Hailun2Haiyu 62220.1263192416.48492.65.12.5−2.84.16.1
Hailun3Haiyu 61581.1560184015.77494.92.53.5−3.52.18.8
Hailun4Haiyu 62030.4674995116.35492.65.12.5−2.83.76.8
Hailun5Haiyu 61631.4092597116.12492.65.12.5−3.53.36.9
Hailun6Haiyu 61970.6492096416.21492.65.12.5−3.53.37.2
Tonghua1Jidan 1593010.246768278.676490.80.00.5−2.15.80.1
Tonghua2Jidan 1592810.6969857411.46490.80.02.1−0.75.80.2
Tonghua3Jidan 1592930.526857469.282490.80.01.1−1.47.70.1
Tonghua4Jidan 1592591.156807019.938490.80.00.7−2.16.91.4
Tonghua5Jidan 1592670.8668665210.5490.80.01.1−1.45.80.1
Tonghua6Jidan 1592321.736908148.425490.80.01.4−1.46.81.5
Huadian1Limin151861.615819708.75491.1−1.13.85.06.91.8
Huadian2Limin152280.205909759.454492.5−3.42072.1
Huadian3Limin151721.595849459.915492.5−3.4207.11.3
Huadian4Limin152170.586049349.242492.5−3.4207.11.3
Huadian5Limin151761.765979499.345492.5−3.4207.11.5
Huadian6Limin151971.225999459.413492.5−3.4207.11.6
Wafangdian1Lianyu 62961.2174070811.64491.72.32.6−0.74.9−1.0
Wafangdian2Lianyu 62961.4267997814.99491.72.32.1−5.010.8−7.5
Wafangdian3Lianyu 629317368188.928492.30.01.1−3.58.5−5.1
Wafangdian4Lianyu 63081.1270793515.72491.72.31.1−3.58−4.6
Wafangdian5Lianyu 62961.1971549016.23491.72.31.1−2.86.7−3.8
Wafangdian6Lianyu 62801.5372758413.87491.72.31.5−2.15.4−1.5
Dengta1Dd603100.7776146016.09491.63.62−2.1108.6
Dengta2Dd603220.187799628.295491.62.42−2.87.36.6
Dengta3Dd603110.6578048214.25491.63.61.109.97.5
Dengta4Dd602911.0777941516.28492.22.40.5−2.89.63.4
Dengta5Dd602951.0178743715.56492.83.60.51.49.97.8
Dengta6Dd603230.098149587.33491.62.421.46.54.9
* Dongdan60 is abbreviated Dd60.
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Koimbori, J.K.; Wang, S.; Pan, J.; Guo, L.; Li, K. Yield Response of Spring Maize under Future Climate and the Effects of Adaptation Measures in Northeast China. Plants 2022, 11, 1634. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants11131634

AMA Style

Koimbori JK, Wang S, Pan J, Guo L, Li K. Yield Response of Spring Maize under Future Climate and the Effects of Adaptation Measures in Northeast China. Plants. 2022; 11(13):1634. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants11131634

Chicago/Turabian Style

Koimbori, Jackson K., Shuai Wang, Jie Pan, Liping Guo, and Kuo Li. 2022. "Yield Response of Spring Maize under Future Climate and the Effects of Adaptation Measures in Northeast China" Plants 11, no. 13: 1634. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants11131634

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop