Anda di halaman 1dari 7

Agric. sci. dev., Vol(3), No (7), July, 2014. pp.

230-236

TI Journals

ISSN:

Agriculture Science Developments

2306-7527

www.tijournals.com

Copyright 2014. All rights reserved for TI Journals.

Potential benefits from adaptation to climate change in chickpea


Amir Hajarpoor *
Ph.D. student of crop ecology, Dept. of Agronomy, Gorgan University of Agricultural Sciences and Natural Resources, Iran.

Afshin Soltani
Prof., Agronomy Group, Gorgan University of Agricultural Sciences and Natural Resources, Iran.

Ebrahim Zeinali
Assistant Prof., Agronomy Group, Gorgan University of Agricultural Sciences and Natural Resources, Iran.

Faramarz Sayyedi
Academic member, Agricultural Research Center of Golestan province, Iran
*Corresponding author: amiragro65@gmail.com

Keywords

Abstract

Chickpea model
Genetic adaptation
Grain yield
Management adaptation
Water consumption
Water-limited condition

This study was aimed to assess management and genetic adaptation strategies in water-limited
condition of chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) in response to climate change using a crop simulation
model. Four major chickpea-producing dry areas of Iran, having different sowing dates (owing to
their climate), were selected. Chickpea yield would be increased by 37-89% under future climate
conditions and there were more opportunities for increasing yield. Different adaptation
management or varieties could be optimized to gather more potential benefits of climate change.
Results showed that further gain of yield (12-82%) and WUE (9-75%) could be achieved via crop
earliness and early sowing under the future climate of dry areas of investigated locations. This is
the consequence of a shift in growing season to a wetter part of the year and reduced the risk of
late season drought stress. So new varieties should be released with shorter growth periods than
current ones and sowing dates must be advanced whenever possible.

1.

Introduction

Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) is cultivated on large scale in arid and semiarid environment. Terminal drought and heat stress, among other
abiotic and biotic stresses, are the major constraints of yield in most regions of chickpea producing [1-6]. About 90% of the worlds chickpea
is grown under rainfed conditions where the crop grows and matures on a progressively depleting soil moisture profile and experiences
terminal drought, a condition in which grain yield of chickpea is low [7]. Major producing countries include India, Turkey, Pakistan and Iran
[8]. Average chickpea yield remains low in major producing countries due mainly to inadequate water supply [6]. In Iran, chickpea is the
most important legume crop which is sown on more than 50% of the total legume area with average yields of 500 kg ha-1 [8]. The crop is
predominately rainfed and according to official statistics, less than 5% of this crop is grown with irrigation [2]. Chickpea is a highly nutritious
grain legume crop. It is valued for the beneficial effect of increasing productivity of succeeding crops in rotation and, hence, rising the
sustainability and profitability of production systems [6].
There is evidence from observations gathered since 1950 of change in some extremes. Many weather and climate extremes are the
result of natural climate variability (including phenomena such as El Nino) but, there is evidence that some extremes have changed as a result
of anthropogenic influences, including increases in atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse gases [9]. More frequent and intense
precipitation events, elevated temperatures, drought, and other types of damaging weather are all expected to impact crop yield and quality
[10]. The study of the effects of climate change could help to develop adaptation strategies to promote and stabilize crop yield [11].
Recently, a parallel study of the same authors have been carrying out to understand the interactions between different aspects of climate
change on chickpea. This study indicated that increasing temperature and CO2 concentration, simultaneously, would have a positive effect on
grain yield and water use efficiency of the chickpea in water-limited conditions. Increase in yield of rainfed chickpea under climate change
has also been reported by Koocheki et al. [12] for the Tabriz area in Iran and for selected sites in Iran and Syria by Gholipoor and Soltani
[11]. But a missing element in these simulation study was that it did not include possible changes in crop management practices under future
conditions.
Without addressing adaptation, climate change risk assessment is incomplete. The ultimate purpose of climate change risk assessment
is to identify adaptation strategies for attaining sustainable development in a specic sector/region [13]. Such adaptation strategies include
improved varieties, shifts in recommended planting dates and rates, novel cropping sequences, change in the number of fallow years required
for soil-water recharge in rainfed systems, and introduction of alternative or new crops [14].
Sowing date is the most frequently varied option [14], which will surely be adjusted to increased temperature. Under warmer future
climates, earlier sowing is likely to require cultivars with different phenological development than currently used [6].
Ecophysiological models are widely used to simulate the potential impacts of environmental factors on agricultural productivity and to
examine options for adaptation [14]. Therefore, as a completion object of previous study of the same authors, the objective of this study was
to evaluate if different adaptation management or varieties could be optimized to gather more potential benefit of climate change.

231

Potential Benefits from Adaptation to Climate Change in Chickpea


Agriculture Science Developments Vol(3), No (7), July, 2014.

2.

Methodology

2.1 Crop Modelling


To study the effect of climate change and simulation the adaptation strategies, the model of Soltani and Sinclair [15] was used. This model
simulates phenological development, leaf development and senescence, mass partitioning, plant nitrogen balance, yield formation and soil
water balance [15, 16]. Responses of crop processes to environmental factors of solar radiation, photoperiod, temperature, nitrogen and water
availability, and genotype differences were included in the model. The model uses a daily time step and readily available weather and soil
information.
The model also accounts for the termination of crop growth under severe drought. To understand how key processes are represented in
the model and its parameterization please refer to Soltani and Sinclair [15, 16]. The model (SSM-Chickpea) can be downloaded from
http://sites.google.com/site/CropModeling.
The robustness of the chickpea model has been tested extensively. Soltani et al [4] specifically tested the phenological component of
the model and Soltani and Sinclair [15] tested the whole model for robustness and concluded that model generality, i.e., constant parameters
for different genotypes across locations, and applicability to a wide range of environmental conditions factors made this model especially
useful. This result are in agreement with an independent work by Vadez et al. [17].
2.2 Locations
Four distinctive locations with reliable long-term daily data were chosen for this study: Maragheh (3724N, 4616E and 1477.7 m asl) in
the North West, Gonbad (3715N, 5510E and 37.2 m asl) in the North, Bojnurd (3728N, 5719E and 1091 m asl) in the North East and
Kermanshah (3421N, 4709E and 1318.6 m asl) in the West of Iran (Table 1). These four locations represent major chickpea producing
areas of Iran. Sowing dates depended mainly on winter temperature; Gonbad and Kermanshah have mild winters, so chickpea is sown in
autumn, but in Bojnurd and Maragheh with cold winters, the crop is sown in spring.
Table 1. List of synoptic stations of investigated locations with latitude, longitude and altitude

Station

Latitude (N)

Longitude (E)

Altitude (m)

Baseline period (yr)

Bojnurd

3728

5719

1091

1987-2007

Maragheh

3724

4616

1477.7

1984-2007

Kermanshah

3421

479

1318.9

1976-2005

Gonbad

3715

551

37.2

1989-2008

Average temperature during the growing season in Maragheh (March-July) is 16.5C, in Bojnurd (AprilAugust) is 21C, in Gonbad
(DecemberJune) is 14C and in Kermanshah (November-July) it is 12C (Figure 1). All locations are characterized by mid to late season
drought. Estimates of yield losses due to terminal drought range from 35 to 50% which depend on geographical region and length of crop
season [2]. Average rainfall during the chickpea growing period is 158 mm for Maragheh, 92 mm for Bojnurd, 353 mm for Gonbad and 362
mm for Kermanshah (Figure 1).
For each location, a baseline period of daily weather data was available (Table 1). Solar-radiation data were calculated from sunshine
hours using a simple program [16]. With the estimated solar-radiation data, a complete data set of daily precipitation, maximum and minimum
temperatures and solar radiation data was available for each location.
40
80

40

(a)

80

(b)
Chickpea growth period

30

30
Chickpea growth period

60

60
20

20

40

40
10

20

Temperature (C)

20

0-10

-10
10
40

11

12

0
10

11

12

8040

(c)

9
80

Chickpea growth period

(d)
30

30

60

Prepicitation (mm)

10

60

Chickpea growth period

20

20

40

40

10

10

20

20

0-10

-10
10

11

12

0
10

11

12

Month

Figure 1. Long-term monthly mean of maximum (filled circles) and minimum (open circles) temperature and monthly total rainfall (bars) in Gonbad (a),
Kermanshah (b), Bojnurd (c) and Maragheh (d). Note that x-axis starts with November (month 10).

Amir Hajarpoor *, Afshin Soltani, Ebrahim Zeinali , Faramarz Sayyedi

232

Agriculture Science Developments Vol(3), No (7), July, 2014.

2.3 Simulation
To simulate climate change environments, the probable climate scenario for this region by 2100, projected in the parallel study of the same
authors, were used. To capture the effect of elevated atmospheric CO 2 concentration of future climates on crop growth and grain yield The
direct impact of the elevated CO2 environment was simulated by increasing only the values of radiation use efficiency (RUE) from 1.0 g MJ 1
solar radiation to 1.23 g MJ -1 [18] and transpiration efficiency coefficient (TEC) from 5.0 Pa [15] to 6.85 Pa [19, 20] in response to a CO2
concentration increase from 350 to 700 ppm. In accounting for the temperature increase, 4C was added to both the current daily minimum
and maximum temperature. Precipitation amounts were decreased in future climates by multiplying current rain amounts by 0.98 in autumn
sown crops and 0.90 for spring sown crops.
Based on the climate (section 2.2) and the prevailing cropping system, a certain sowing date and cultivar were selected for each site (i.e.
31 March at Maragheh, 21 April at Bojnurd, 22 November at Gonbad and 27 October at Kermanshah), all of them at a plant density of 33
plants m2. The cultivars were Beavanij for Kermanshah, Hashem for Gonbad and Jam for Maragheh and Bojnurd.
Soil properties were assumed the same at the four locations with a volumetric extractable soil water of 0.13 m3m3 and a depth of 120
cm. The soil moisture at sowing time was set at 50% in Kermanshah, 88% in Maraghe, 85% in Bojnurd and 70% in Gonbad. A simple soil
water balance model was used to estimate soil water content at sowing time [16].
The crop model was run for the different years of baseline period for current and future climate under typical management and cultivar
and also under three adaptation strategies in the future climate include Management adaptation (M), Genetic adaptation (G) and a combination
of both Management and Genetic adaptation (M&G) as described below (Table 2):

Management In various studies changing in planting dates as the simplest and least-cost adaptation strategy has been emphasized
[e.g. 13, 21, 22, 23 and etc.]; hence a shift in planting dates i.e. sowing 15 days in advance was explored in this study to reduce the
risk of the late season drought.

Genetics Changes in genotype have been suggested to be the most promising adaptation option in the world. Earlier maturity
cultivars may be needed to match future drier conditions [13]. Thus alternative genotype was a cultivar with 20% lesser of the
required biological day from emergence to flowering. A biological day is a day with optimal photoperiod, temperature and soil
water [15]. Decrease in the required biological day for development stages was the simplest way to mimic faster maturing cultivars
that could be obtained through genetic improvement. It is necessary to mention that we tried a later maturity cultivar, too. However,
the option resulted in yield penalty.

M&G The third adaptation practice was an attempt to combine both earliness and early sowing date (15 days).
A randomized complete-block design was used for data analysis in which climate condition with considered as treatment and years
considered as blocks. When it was necessary, mean comparison was done using a Least Significant Difference (LSD) procedure at 5% level.
Table 2. The climate condition and their description used in the context

3.

Number

Symbol

Description

Normal

Simulation of chickpea production in double CO2 concentration of atmosphere, decline rainfall and
temperature increase of 4C as the future condition

Simulation of chickpea production in the future condition with the impact of early sowing as a
management adaptation.

Simulation of chickpea production in the future condition with the impact of earlier maturity as a
genetic adaptation

M&G

Simulation of chickpea production in the future condition with a combination of both management
and genetic adaptation

Simulation of chickpea production using historic weather data as the current condition.

Result
3.1 Climate change

In the investigated region, the baseline mean yields were 1525, 608, 941 and 520 kg ha-1 at Gonbad, Kermanshah, Maragheh and Bojnurd,
respectively. Although the effect of decreased rainfall (10% for spring-sown crops and 2% for autumn-sown crops) on grain yield could be
negative but the ultimate effect of future climate was positive in all locations (Table 3). Gonbad with a 37% increased grain yield showed the
least response and Kermanshah with an 89% increase in grain yield showed the greatest response to the future climate (Figure 2).

233

Potential Benefits from Adaptation to Climate Change in Chickpea


Agriculture Science Developments Vol(3), No (7), July, 2014.

Table 3.Simulation of current conditions (N) and future climate (C) with the impact of early sowing as a management adaptation (M), earlier maturity as a
genetic adaptation (G) and a combination of both management and genetic adaptation (M&G) on mean grain yield (Y, kg ha-1) of rainfed chickpea in Gonbad
, Kermanshah , Maragheh and Bojnurd .

Stations
Conditions

Autumn sown

Spring sown

Gonbad

Kermanshah

Maragheh

Bojnurd

Normal (N)

1525c

608d

941d

520d

Climate change (C)


Percent of Change (C/N)

2081b
36.5

1151c
89.3

1320c
40.3

779c
49.8

Adaptation
Management(M)

2012b

1336c

1443c

970b

Percent of Change (M/N)

31.9

119.7

53.3

86.5

Percent of Change (M/C)

-3.3

16.1

9.3

24.5

2326a

1695b

1612b

957b

Percent of Change (G/N)

52.5

178.8

71.3

84.0

Percent of Change (G/C)

11.8

47.3

22.1

22.8

2334a

2091a

1855a

1222a

Percent of Change (M&G/N)

53.0

243.9

97.1

135.0

Percent of Change (M&G/C)

12.2

81.7

40.5

56.9

Genetics(G)

M&G

Bojnurd Kermanshah Gonbad

*The numbers with different letters indicate significant differences at 5% level of probability in each column.

Yield

Maragheh

ET

-10

WUE

10

30

50

70

90

Figure 2. Comparing mean grain yield, evapotranspiration (ET) and water use efficiency (WUE) of rainfed chickpea (in %) between current condition (N) and
future climate (C).

Water use efficiency (the ratio of crop yield to evapotranspiration) would be increase under the future climate of investigated locations (Figure
2). Gonbad with a 35% and Kermanshah with an 81% had the least and largest increased WUE, respectively, to future climate among
investigated locations (Figure 2)
3.2 Adaptation strategies
The possibilities for gathering more benefit of grain yield were tested by changing sowing date as a management adaptation and cultivar as
a genetic adaptation. Figure 3 shows the variation of grain yield as a cumulative probability in each various climate and adaptation strategies
that simulated for the baseline period.

Amir Hajarpoor *, Afshin Soltani, Ebrahim Zeinali , Faramarz Sayyedi

234

Agriculture Science Developments Vol(3), No (7), July, 2014.

100

(a)

Cumulative Probablity

Cumulative Probablity

100

75

50

25

N
C
M

50

G
M&G
25

0
0

1000

2000

3000

4000

kg ha-1

100

1000

2000

(C)
75

50

25

3000

4000

kg ha-1

100

Cumulative Probablity

Cumulative Probablity

(b)

75

(d)

75

N
C
M

50

G
M&G
25

0
0

1000

2000

3000

4000

1000

2000

3000

4000

kg ha-1

kg ha-1

Figure 3. Cumulative distribution function (CDF) of various simulation including current condition (N), future climate (C) with adaptation strategies: early
planting (Management), early maturity (Genetic) and a combination of earliness and early planting (M&G) in Gonbad (a), Kermanshah (b), Bojnurd (c) and
Maragheh (d).

Gonbad

The yield benefits provided with a 15-days earlier sowing were between 39 to 120 percent comparing with current condition (Table 3).
While earlier sowing under future climate led to 16, 25 and 9 percent increase in average grain yield in Kermanshah, Bojnurd and Maragheh,
respectively, a subtle reduction in average yield of Gonbad was observed (Table 3). In Gonbad and Maragheh, WUE was lower if crop sowing
in advance, but in Kermanshah and Bojnurd, WUE was improved because yield increase was larger than the increase of ET (Figure 4).

Manage
Yield

Genetic

ET

Bojnurd

Kermanshah

M&G

WUE

Manage
Genetic
M&G
Manage
Genetic

Maragheh

M&G
Manage
Genetic
M&G
-10

10

30

50

70

90

Figure 4. Comparing mean grain yield, evapotranspiration (ET) and water use efficiency (WUE) of rainfed chickpea (in %) under future climate (C)
with adaptation strategies: early planting (Management), early maturity (Genetic) and a combination of earliness and early planting (M&G).

Simulation results indicated that a 20% decrease in biological day from emergence to flowering to mimic faster maturing cultivars,
resulted in 53-179% increase in grain yield comparing with current condition and 12-47% with future climate depending on locations (Table
3). Water use efficiency would increase much more in all locations with earlier maturity cultivar, because yield increase was considerably
higher (Figure 4).

235

Potential Benefits from Adaptation to Climate Change in Chickpea


Agriculture Science Developments Vol(3), No (7), July, 2014.

A combination of both earliness and early sowing date showed 53-244% increase in grain yield compared to current condition and 1282% increase compared to future climate (Table 3). In addition, WUE would be higher through this combination strategies as yield growth
was greater than ETs, especially in Kermanshah with a 75% increase in WUE (Figure 4).

4.

Discussion

The ultimate result of the future climate was an increase in grain yield in all investigated locations (Table 3). Increase in temperature at these
sites could led to faster crop development. Increasing of yield is the consequence of fertilization effect of elevated CO 2 and reducing the risk
of late season drought according to shorter growth period of crops. In a study carried out by Gholipoor and Soltani [11], positive differential
grain yield of rainfed chickpea was discerned between the sites they examined. Soltani and Sinclair [6], indicated that higher yields of
chickpea were obtained with a 4C increase in temperature and they concluded that this was mainly due to accelerated development rate and
earlier maturity under higher temperature and resultant drought escape.
Comparing the ratio of yield/ET (Figure 2) showed that increased crop yield was the main reason for the escalation of water use
efficiency, yet in the meantime, ET has remained at a relatively stable level. Mo et al. [24] in a simulation study of double cropping system
of wheat and maize expressed that the relative change of ET is less than that of grain yield; thus WUE was greatly improved.
The adaptation strategies were useful to some extent to reach higher yield and WUE, rather than keeping traditional sowing dates and
varieties. Current hazards, as risk of frosts during and after anthesis as a result of earlier sowing of autumn sown crops [22] and limitations
of early cultivation as a result of rainfall and freezing soil surface in spring sown crops, strongly decrease when average temperatures increase.
It seems that early sowing is an effective adaptation strategy for increasing yield under future climates [13]. This positive effect was due to a
shift of the growing season to a wetter part of the year. Due to lack of rainfall during flowering, podding and seed filling, terminal drought
stress is a major abiotic stress that reduces chickpea productivity in drylands [2]. It seems that the main reason for the increased grain yield
might be attributed to reduced risk of late season drought stress.
While it has been pointed out that changing sowing dates could be an option for increasing yield under future climates [25], in Gonbad
with Hashem cultivar, subtle reduction was observed in average yield (Table 3 and Figure 4); this might be associated with the fact that
chickpea responds to photoperiod as a qualitative long-day plant [26] , i.e. remaining unresponsive until photoperiod increased above the
critical value; the consequence of prolongation of vegetative phase was a decreased harvest index [1] and decreased grain yield. In addition
to this inherent limitation, as chickpea is planted in double-cropping system in Gonbad, the possibility of changing the sowing date is so
limited unless changes in the cropping system were also adopted. Gholipoor and Soltani [11] suggested using less photoperiod sensitive
chickpea varieties as an alternative strategy.
Longer-season varieties may perform better under changing climate conditions with increased temperatures as higher temperatures
accelerate crop development [22, 23]; but in chickpea growing areas where plants are usually subjected to terminal drought, the possibility
to have a higher grain yield in varieties with early maturity is greater [6]. This reduced period happens in a significantly wetter part of the
year, sufficient to outweigh the lower radiation levels before and during grain filling [22]. Furthermore, breeding for earliness by reducing
the vegetative period would save more water to be used for grain filling.
Between the investigated locations, Kermanshah has the best performance with the adaptation strategies (Figure 4). This might have
due to lack of precipitation in the end of the growth season in Kermanshah (Figure 1b); so earliness and early sowing enabled crop to escape
from this severe drought condition.
Drought is by far the most important environmental stress in agriculture and many efforts have been made to improve crop productivity
under water-limiting conditions [27]. According to our and other studies [1-6], terminal drought is a major constraint of yield in most chickpea
production regions. Thus, growing season could be shifted to a wetter part of the year by earliness and early sowing. This will also leads to a
better distribution of limited water between vegetative growth and grain filling resulting in an increase of grain yield. This higher grain yield
could redound to higher WUE when ET has remained at a relatively stable level. Over the next decades, water resources may become scarcer
and new constraints will be placed on water supplies available for irrigation as well as for rainfed agriculture [28]; therefore, it is important
that crops WUE improve in the future, so that plant production can take maximum advantage of the available water resources.
Other management options such as soil water conservation measures (i.e. stubble retention, zero or minimal tillage etc.) were not
considered in this study. Their effectiveness in counteracting negative climate change impacts needs to be quantified in the future. Therefore,
the multidimensional adaptation countermeasures are needed, among which increasing water productivity is the main factor in the climate
change adaptation in daylands.

5.

Conclusion

This study followed the previous study of the same authors and indicated more opportunities for increasing yield in chickpea growing areas.
Results showed that in the future, the yield of rainfed chickpea would be raised between 37-89% in rainfed condition of the investigated
regions. The possibilities for gathering more benefit of grain yield were tested by changing traditional management and genetics of the
locations in the future climate. It was found that new crop varieties and crop management strategies were helpful for adaptation to the new
climate conditions. Crop earliness and early sowing were effective adaptation strategies resulting in a further gain of yield (12-82%) and
WUE (9-75%) of the future climate in dry areas of investigated locations. Higher WUE of crops is important in the future climate because
water availability will be lower. So new varieties should be released with shorter growth periods than current ones and their sowing dates
must be advanced where possible. Results of this study can also be extended to water-limited regions of chickpea producing with similar
climatic and edaphic conditions.

Acknowledgements
We feel indebted to Mrs. F. Aminfar and Mr. M. Jafari for their contribution to the paper.

Amir Hajarpoor *, Afshin Soltani, Ebrahim Zeinali , Faramarz Sayyedi

236

Agriculture Science Developments Vol(3), No (7), July, 2014.

References
[1]
[2]
[3]
[4]
[5]
[6]
[7]
[8]
[9]

[10]
[11]
[12]
[13]
[14]
[15]
[16]
[17]
[18]
[19]
[20]
[21]
[22]
[23]
[24]
[25]
[26]
[27]
[28]

Soltani, A., B. Torabi and H. Zarei, 2005. Modeling crop yield using a modified harvest index-based approach: application in chickpea. Field Crops
Research, 91(23): p. 273-285.
Sabaghpour, S.H., A.A. Mahmodi, A. Saeed, M. Kamel and R. Malhotra, 2006. Study on chickpea drought tolerance lines under dryland condition
of Iran. Indian J. Crop Sci, 1: p. 70-73.
Leport, L., N.C. Turner, S.L. Davies and K.H.M. Siddique, 2006. Variation in pod production and abortion among chickpea cultivars under
terminal drought. European Journal of Agronomy, 24(3): p. 236-246.
Soltani, A., G.L. Hammer, B. Torabi, M.J. Robertson and E. Zeinali, 2006. Modeling chickpea growth and development: Phenological development.
Field Crops Research, 99(1): p. 1-13.
Singh, P., S. Nedumaran, K.J. Boote, P.M. Gaur, K. Srinivas and M.C.S. Bantilan, 2014. Climate change impacts and potential benefits of drought
and heat tolerance in chickpea in South Asia and East Africa. European Journal of Agronomy, 52, Part B(0): p. 123-137.
Soltani, A. and T.R. Sinclair, 2012. Optimizing chickpea phenology to available water under current and future climates. European Journal of
Agronomy, 38(0): p. 22-31.
Kumar, J. and S. Abbo, 2001. Genetics of flowering time in chickpea and its bearing on productivity in semiarid environments. Advances in
Agronomy, 72: p. 107-138.
FAOSTST, 2011. Available in http://faostat.fao.org/site/339/default.aspx [15 June 2012].
Seneviratne, S., N. Nicholls, D. Easterling, C. Goodess, S. Kanae, J. Kossin, Y. Luo, J. Marengo, K. McInnes and M. Rahimi. Changes in climate
extremes and their impacts on the natural physical environment: An overview of the IPCC SREX report. in EGU General Assembly Conference
Abstracts. 2012.
Hatfield, J.L., K.J. Boote, B.A. Kimball, L.H. Ziska, R.C. Izaurralde, D. Ort, A.M. Thomson and D. Wolfe, 2011. Climate Impacts on Agriculture:
Implications for Crop Production. Agronomy journal, 103(2): p. 351-370.
Gholipoor, M. and A. Soltani, 2009. Future climate impacts on chickpea in Iran and ICARDA. Research Journal of Environmental Sciences, 3(1):
p. 16-28.
Koocheki, A., M. Nassiri, A. Soltani, H. Sharifi and R. Ghorbani, 2006. Effects of climate change on growth criteria and yield of sunflower and
chickpea crops in Iran. Climate Research, 30(3): p. 247.
Luo, Q., W. Bellotti, M. Williams and E. Wang, 2009. Adaptation to climate change of wheat growing in South Australia: Analysis of management
and breeding strategies. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 129(13): p. 261-267.
White, J.W., G. Hoogenboom, B.A. Kimball and G.W. Wall, 2011. Methodologies for simulating impacts of climate change on crop production.
Field Crops Research, 124(3): p. 357-368.
Soltani, A. and T.R. Sinclair, 2011. A simple model for chickpea development, growth and yield. Field Crops Research, 124(2): p. 252-260.
Soltani, A. and T.R. Sinclair, 2012. Modeling physiology of crop development, growth and yield. CABI.
Vadez, V., A. Soltani and T.R. Sinclair, 2012. Modelling possible benefits of root related traits to enhance terminal drought adaptation of chickpea.
Field Crops Research, 137(0): p. 108-115.
Soltani, A., M. Gholipoor and K. Ghassemi-Golezani, 2007. Analysis of temperature and atmospheric CO2 effects on radiation use efficiency in
chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.). Journal of Plant Sciences, 2(1): p. 89-95.
Gifford, R.M. and J.I. Morison, 1993. Crop responses to the global increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration. International Crop
Science I, (internationalcr): p. 325-331.
Asseng, S., P.D. Jamieson, B. Kimball, P. Pinter, K. Sayre, J.W. Bowden and S.M. Howden, 2004. Simulated wheat growth affected by rising
temperature, increased water deficit and elevated atmospheric CO2. Field Crops Research, 85(2-3): p. 85-102.
Abraha, M.G. and M.J. Savage, 2006. Potential impacts of climate change on the grain yield of maize for the midlands of KwaZulu-Natal, South
Africa. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 115: p. 150-160.
Van Ittersum, M.k., S.M. Howden and S. Asseng, 2003. Sensitivity of productivity and deep drainage of wheat cropping systems in a Mediterranean
environment to changes in CO2, temperature and precipitation. Agriculture Ecosystems & Environment, 97: p. 255-73.
Torriani, D.S., P. Calanca, S. Schmid, M. Beniston and J. Fuhrer, 2007. Potential effects of changes in mean climate and climate variability on the
yield of winter and spring crops in Switzerland. Climate Research, 34(1): p. 59-69.
Mo, X., S. Liu, Z. Lin and R. Guo, 2009. Regional crop yield, water consumption and water use efficiency and their responses to climate change
in the North China Plain. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 134(12): p. 67-78.
Ludwig, F. and S. Asseng, 2006. Climate change impacts on wheat production in a Mediterranean environment in Western Australia. Agricultural
Systems, 90(1-3): p. 159-179.
Soltani, A., B. Torabi, E. Zeinali and R. Sarparast, 2004. Response of chickpea to photoperiod as a qualitative long-day plant. Asian Journal of
Plant Sciences, 3.
Cattivelli, L., F. Rizza, F.-W. Badeck, E. Mazzucotelli, A.M. Mastrangelo, E. Francia, C. Mar, A. Tondelli and A.M. Stanca, 2008. Drought
tolerance improvement in crop plants: An integrated view from breeding to genomics. Field Crops Research, 105(1-2): p. 1-14.
Rosegrant, M.W., C. Ringler and T. Zhu, 2009. Water for Agriculture: Maintaining Food Security Under Growing Scarcity. SSRN eLibrary.

Anda mungkin juga menyukai