...
首页> 外文期刊>Hydrology and Earth System Sciences Discussions >Benchmark levels for the consumptive water footprint of crop production for different environmental conditions: a case study for winter wheat in China
【24h】

Benchmark levels for the consumptive water footprint of crop production for different environmental conditions: a case study for winter wheat in China

机译:不同环境条件的作物生产消耗水脚印的基准水平 - 以中国冬小麦为例

获取原文

摘要

Meeting growing food demands while simultaneously shrinking the water footprint (WF) of agricultural production is one of the greatest societal challenges. Benchmarks for the WF of crop production can serve as a reference and be helpful in setting WF reduction targets. The consumptive WF of crops, the consumption of rainwater stored in the soil (green WF), and the consumption of irrigation water (blue WF) over the crop growing period varies spatially and temporally depending on environmental factors like climate and soil. The study explores which environmental factors should be distinguished when determining benchmark levels for the consumptive WF of crops. Hereto we determine benchmark levels for the consumptive WF of winter wheat production in China for all separate years in the period 1961–2008, for rain-fed vs. irrigated croplands, for wet vs. dry years, for warm vs. cold years, for four different soil classes, and for two different climate zones. We simulate consumptive WFs of winter wheat production with the crop water productivity model AquaCrop at a 5 by 5?arcmin resolution, accounting for water stress only. The results show that (i)?benchmark levels determined for individual years for the country as a whole remain within a range of ±20?% around long-term mean levels over 1961–2008, (ii)?the WF benchmarks for irrigated winter wheat are 8–10?% larger than those for rain-fed winter wheat, (iii)?WF benchmarks for wet years are 1–3?% smaller than for dry years, (iv)?WF benchmarks for warm years are 7–8?% smaller than for cold years, (v)?WF benchmarks differ by about 10–12?% across different soil texture classes, and (vi)?WF benchmarks for the humid zone are 26–31?% smaller than for the arid zone, which has relatively higher reference evapotranspiration in general and lower yields in rain-fed fields. We conclude that when determining benchmark levels for the consumptive WF of a crop, it is useful to primarily distinguish between different climate zones. If actual consumptive WFs of winter wheat throughout China were reduced to the benchmark levels set by the best 25?% of Chinese winter wheat production (1224?m3?t?1 for arid areas and 841?m3?t?1 for humid areas), the water saving in an average year would be 53?% of the current water consumption at winter wheat fields in China. The majority of the yield increase and associated improvement in water productivity can be achieved in southern China.
机译:满足粮食需求的同时缩小农业生产的水占地面积(WF)是最大的社会挑战之一。作物生产WF的基准可以作为参考,并有助于设置WF减少目标。作物的消耗性WF,储存在土壤(绿色WF)中的雨水消耗,以及在作物生长期间的灌溉水(蓝色WF)的消耗在空间上和时间内变化,具体取决于气候和土壤等环境因素。该研究探讨了在确定作物消耗性WF的基准水平时应区分环境因素。 HERETO我们在1961 - 2008年的冬小麦产量为冬小麦生产的消费WF的基准级别,为雨喂养与灌溉农作物,潮湿的农作物,为寒冷多年,为寒冷多年四种不同的土壤类别,以及两种不同的气候区。我们用5乘5乘5乘5乘5乘5乘5乘5乘5乘5乘5乘5次冬小麦生产消费WFS。arcmin分辨率,仅占水分胁迫。结果表明,(i)?整个国家为全国各个年份确定的基准水平仍然在1961 - 2008年的长期平均水平周围的范围内,(ii)?灌溉冬季的WF基准小麦比雨喂养冬小麦大8-10?%(iii)?潮湿年的WF基准比干燥年小为1-3?%,(iv)?温暖年的WF基准是7- 8?%小于寒冷的年份,(v)?WF基准在不同的土壤纹理类别上的差异约为10-12?%(vi)?潮湿区的WF基准比为26-31?%干旱区,其参考蒸散量相对较高,雨送领域的产量下降。我们得出结论,当确定作物消费WF的基准水平时,主要区分不同气候区是有用的。如果在整个中国的冬小麦的实际消费WFS被最佳25?%的中国冬小麦生产(1224?M3?T?1用于干旱地区的基准水平,而841?M3?1用于潮湿区域) ,平均年的节水将是中国冬小麦田中当前耗水量的53倍。中国南方的水生产率大部分产量增加和相关的提高。

著录项

获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号