Soybean production in 2025 and 2050 in the southeastern USA based on the SimCLIM and the CSM-CROPGRO-Soybean models

Transcription

1 The following supplement accompanies the article Soybean production in 225 and 25 in the southeastern USA based on the SimCLIM and the CSM-CROPGRO-Soybean models Yawen Bao, Gerrit Hoogenboom*, Ron McClendon, Peter Urich *Corresponding author: Climate Research 63: (215) Supplementary Materials: Table S1: Comparison of the performance of General Circulation Models for scenario A1B for Tifton, Georgia. CMIP3 a Country SimCLIM b Monthly Precipitation Monthly Mean Temperature h c p D d h p D BCCR-BCM2. Norway BCCRBCM CGCM3.1(T47) Canada CCCMA CCSM3 USA CCSM CNRM-CM3 France CNRM-CM CSIRO-Mk3. Australia CSIRO CSIRO-Mk3.5 Australia CSRIO ECHO-G Germany/Korea ECHO---G FGOALS-g1. China FGOALS1G GFDL-CM2. USA GFDLCM GFDL-CM2.1 USA GFDLCM GISS-EH USA GISS EH GISS-ER USA GISS ER INM-CM3. Russia INMCM IPSL-CM4 France IPSL_CM MIROC3.2(hires) Japan MIROC-HI MIROC3.2(medres) Japan MIROCMED ECHAM5/MPI-OM Germany MPIECH MRI-CGCM2.3.2 Japan MRI-232A PCM USA NCARPCM UKMO-HadCM3 UK UKHADCM UKMO-HadGEM1 UK UKHADGEM Sources: Wigley 28, Collier et al. 27 a: CMIP3 is the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project phase three. b: SimCLIM is an Integrated Assessment Model that was used in this study c: If h=1, reject the null hypothesis that the two groups of data are from the same continuous data; otherwise, the null hypothesis is accepted. d: D is the maximum difference between the two groups of data (observed vs. projected). 1

2 Table S2: CO 2 concentration (ppm) projected for 225 and 25 for the six scenarios based on the Special Report on Emission Scenarios (SRES). Year SRES Scenario 225 (ppm) 25 (ppm)

3 4 BCCR-BCM2. CGCM3.1(T47) CCSM CNRM-CM3 CSIRO-Mk3. CSIRO-Mk ECHO--G FGOALS-g1. GFDL-CM GFDL-CM2.1 GISS-EH GISS-ER INM-CM-3. IPSL-CM4 MIROC3.2(hires) MIRO3.2(medres) ECHAM5/MPI-OM MRI-CGCM PCM UKMO-HadCM3 UKMO-HadGEM1 2-2 JAN FEB MAR APRMAY JUN JUL AUGSEPOCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APRMAY JUN JUL AUG SEPOCT NOVDEC JAN FEB MAR APRMAY JUN JUL AUG SEPOCT NOVDEC Month Figure S1: Deviation of monthly precipitation from the observations for 1991 to 28 for Tifton, Georgia for each of the 21 GCMs. The projections of the 21 GCMs were based on the A1B scenario and were generated with SimCLIM. 3

4 1..8 BCCR-BCM2. CGCM3.1(T47) CCSM CNRM-CM3 CSIRO-Mk3. CSIRO-Mk ECHO--G FGOALS-g1. GFDL-CM GFDL-CM2.1 GISS-EH GISS-ER INM-CM-3. IPSL-CM4 MIROC3.2(hires) MIRO3.2(medres) ECHAM5/MPI-OM MRI-CGCM PCM UKMO-HadCM3 UKMO-HadGEM JAN FEB MAR APRMAY JUN JUL AUGSEPOCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APRMAY JUN JUL AUG SEPOCT NOVDEC JAN FEB MAR APRMAY JUN JUL AUG SEPOCT NOVDEC Month Figure S2: Deviation of monthly mean temperature from the observations for 1991 to 28 for Tifton, Georgia for each of the 21 GCMs. The projections of the 21 GCMs were based on the A1B scenario and were generated with SimCLIM. 4

5 5 BCCR-BCM2. CGCM3.1(T47) CCSM CNRM-CM3 CSIRO-Mk3. CSIRO-Mk ECHO--G FGOALS-g1. GFDL-CM GFDL-CM2.1 GISS-EH GISS-ER INM-CM-3. IPSL-CM4 MIROC3.2(hires) MIRO3.2(medres) ECHAM5/MPI-OM MRI-CGCM PCM UKMO-HadCM3 UKMO-HadGEM JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC Month Figure S3: Deviation of monthly precipitation for each of the 21 GCMs from the average monthly precipitation of 21 GCMs for 1991 to 28 for Tifton, Georgia. The projections of 21 GCMs were based on the A1B scenario and were generated with SimCLIM. 5

6 .4 BCCR-BCM2. CGCM3.1(T47) CCSM CNRM-CM3 CSIRO-Mk3. CSIRO-Mk ECHO--G FGOALS-g1. GFDL-CM GFDL-CM2.1 GISS-EH GISS-ER INM-CM-3. IPSL-CM4 MIROC3.2(hires) MIRO3.2(medres) ECHAM5/MPI-OM MRI-CGCM PCM UKMO-HadCM3 UKMO-HadGEM JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC Month Figure S4: Deviation of monthly mean temperature for each of the 21 GCMs from the average monthly mean temperature of 21 GCMs for 1991 to 28 for Tifton, Georgia. The projections of 21 GCMs which were based on the A1B scenario were generated with SimCLIM. The difference between observed and projected mean temperature under UKHADGEM for January reached 2.2 o C which was treated as an error of the model. 6

7 .5 DP5634RR-225 DP5915RR-225 AG AGS758RR-225 DP722RR-225 S8-P DP5634RR-25 DP5915RR-25 AG AGS758RR-25 DP722RR-25 S8-P Change in Number of Days to Matur Planting Date Figure S5: The change in the number of days to maturity for the GISS-EH projections for 225 and 25 for six scenarios compared to the reference period ( ) for rainfed soybean for six cultivars and four planting dates. 7

8 .5 DP5634RR-225 DP5915RR-225 AG AGS758RR-225 DP722RR-225 S8-P DP5634RR-25 DP5915RR-25 AG AGS758RR-25 DP722RR-25 S8-P Change in Number of Days to Maturi Planting Date Figure S6: The change in the number of days to maturity for the MRI-CGCM2.3.2 projections for 225 and 25 for six scenarios compared to the reference period ( ) for rainfed soybean for six cultivars and four planting dates. 8

9 4 DP5634RR-225 DP5915RR-225 AG AGS758RR-225 DP722RR-225 S8-P DP5634RR-25 DP5915RR-25 AG AGS758RR-25 DP722RR-25 S8-P Change in Grain Yield (%) 2 1 Planting Date Figure S7: The change in the grain yield for the GISS-EH projections for 225 and 25 for six scenarios compared to the reference period ( ) for rainfed soybean for six cultivars and four planting dates. 9

10 4 DP5634RR-225 DP5915RR-225 AG AGS758RR-225 DP722RR-225 S8-P DP5634RR-25 DP5915RR-25 AG AGS758RR-25 DP722RR-25 S8-P Change in Grain Yield (%) 2 1 Planting Date Figure S8: The change in the grain yield for the MRI-CGCM2.3.2 projections for 225 and 25 for six scenarios compared to the reference period ( ) for rainfed soybean for six cultivars and four planting dates. 1

11 .5 DP5634RR-225 DP5915RR-225 AG AGS758RR-225 DP722RR-225 S8-P DP5634RR-25 DP5915RR-25 AG AGS758RR-25 DP722RR-25 S8-P Change in Number of Days to Maturity Planting Date Figure S9: The change in the number of days to maturity for the GISS-EH projections for 225 and 25 for six scenarios compared to the reference period ( ) for irrigated soybean for six cultivars and four planting dates. 11

12 .5 DP5634RR-225 DP5915RR-225 AG AGS758RR-225 DP722RR-225 S8-P DP5634RR-25 DP5915RR-25 AG AGS758RR-25 DP722RR-25 S8-P Change in Number of Days to Matur Planting Date Figure S1: The change in the number of days to maturity for the MRI-CGCM2.3.2 projections for 225 and 25 for six scenarios compared to the reference period ( ) for irrigated soybean for six cultivars and four planting dates. 12

13 4 DP5634RR-225 DP5915RR-225 AG AGS758RR-225 DP722RR-225 S8-P DP5634RR-25 DP5915RR-25 AG AGS758RR-25 DP722RR-25 S8-P Change in Grain Yield (%) 2 1 Planting Date Figure S11: The change in the grain yield for the GISS-EH projections for 225 and 25 for six scenarios compared to the reference period ( ) for irrigated soybean for six cultivars and four planting dates. 13

14 4 DP5634RR-225 DP5915RR-225 AG AGS758RR-225 DP722RR-225 S8-P DP5634RR-25 DP5915RR-25 AG AGS758RR-25 DP722RR-25 S8-P Change in Grain Yield (%) 2 1 Planting Date Figure S12: The change in the grain yield for the MRI-CGCM2.3.2 projections for 225 and 25 for six scenarios compared to the reference period ( ) for irrigated soybean for six cultivars and four planting dates. 14