Download application of infocrop to simulate the growth and yield of cotton

Title: Simulating the impacts of climate change on cotton production in
India
Journal Name: Climate Change
K.B.Hebbar1*, M.V.Venugopalan1, A.H.Prakash1, P.K.Aggarwal2
1
Central Institute for Cotton Research, P.B.No.2, Shankar Nagar, Nagpur, 440 010,
Maharashtra, India
* Present address & Corresponding author: Central Plantation Crops Research Institute,
Kasaragod Kerala, India
Email: [email protected]
Telephone: 914994 232894; Fax: 914994 232322
M.V.Venugopalan: Email: [email protected]
A.H.Prakash: Email: [email protected]
2
Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi, 110 012, India.
Present address: CGIAR Research Program on Climate Change, Agriculture and Food
Security (CCAFS), International Water Management Institute, New Delhi Office; New
Delhi-110012, India
Email:[email protected]
1
2.1.1 Model description
The Infocrop model is written in FORTRAN SIMULATION TRANSLATOR (FST)
language (Van Kraalingen 1995). The time step of the model is one day. The general
structure and details of the Infocrop series of models are described by Aggarwal et al.
(2004; 2006). Cotton is also a part of a wider group of field crops simulated by this
generic model, and the reader is referred to (Hebbar et al. 2008) for a fuller description of
the approach. The Infocrop cotton module simulates crop development, growth, yield and
nitrogen accumulation in response to temperature, photoperiod, soil water and N supply.
The model was calibrated and validated to simulate the growth and production of cotton
using field experiment data collected during 2000-2005 from a network project ‘
Technology Mission on Cotton’ funded by Government of India (Hebbar et al. 2008;
Venugopalan et al.2007). Here we present some of the parameters and relationships
needed to build the functions in the infocrop cotton model.
2.1.2 Phenology
The Infocrop cotton simulates the complete life cycle of cotton in three developmental
phases viz. sowing to emergence, emergence to flowering and flowering to maturity. The
duration of these growth stages is found to be dependent on genotype and environment.
Broadly the varieties and hybrids are classified according to their duration for maturity as
short (125 to 145 days), medium (145 to 165) and long (170 to 190 days) (Kairon and
Singh 1996). The corresponding duration required for flowering is 55 to 60, 60 to 65 and
65 to 73 days respectively. Like in other crops, in cotton too, the development rate is
mainly driven by temperature (Oosterhuis, 1992). The amount of heat required for each
2
stage is measured in heat units using the daily average and a base temperature of 15oC
(Reddy et al. 1997). Emergence has an optimum temperature requirement of 28-30o C.
The vegetative stage, i.e., from emergence to anthesis has been divided into early
vegetative stage i.e. from emergence to the appearance of 1st square (35 to 50 days) and
juvenile phase i.e. from squaring to flowering (20 to 22 days). Most of the commercially
grown cotton cultivars are not photosensitive but highly thermo sensitive (Bhat 1996).
Cotton has an optimum temperature of 28oC for flowering. At low temperature flowering
is delayed and below 15oC there is complete cessation of flowering.
At this stage, the
development rate is linearly related to the daily mean temperature above base
temperature. Above optimum the rate decreases until the maximum temperature is
reached (Reddy et al. 1997). If temperature goes below the base or above the maximum
the rate of development becomes zero. Water stress in cotton increase leaf temperatures
as high as 3.4°C above ambient (Pallas et al. 1967). This accelerates flowering and hence,
depending upon the severity of stress the rate of development is controlled by increasing
canopy temperature (Turner et al. 1986).
The duration of last phase from flowering to maturity in cotton has been divided into 2
stages viz. flowering to cutout and cutout to maturity. Since, cotton is an indeterminate
crop there is continuous production of flowers. The number of bolls retained and
developed is solely a function of variety specific thermal time which is modified by water
and nitrogen stress. The developing bolls utilize all the carbohydrates, leading to
cessation of growth known as cutout (Guinn 1984; 1985). Cut out dictates the end of the
growing season (that is the end of production of new blooms and bolls that will
contribute to harvest) which is relatively early in Bt cotton hybrids compared to Non-Bt
3
hybrids due to faster utilization of assimilates as a result of more synchronized boll
development (Hebbar et al 2007b).
Bt cotton hybrids mature 10 to 20 days early
compared to non-Bt hybrids (Singh et al. 2006).
2.1.3 Leaf area growth
Leaf area development is described using functions for the appearance, expansion and
senescence of leaves. Leaf appearance can occur from emergence until maturity
depending upon the supply of assimilates available for growth. Leaf lamina area (LAI)
changes proportionally with leaf area growth rate; its value is obtained by multiplying the
increment in leaf weight by the specific leaf area (SLA). Under field condition SLA
ranges from 0.0020 to 0.0022 dm2 mg-1 (Hebbar et al. 2008). SLA is high at initial stages
and gradually decreases with the crop age. This is simulated by adjusting SLA as a
function of the development stage. In cotton, bracts and capsules contribute 15 to 20% of
green leaf area for photosynthetic area (Bhatt 1996; Wullschleger and Oosterhuis 1991).
In the model, non- lamina area is calculated as a crop specific function of the maximum
leaf lamina area index and it is assumed that the photosynthetic character of their nonlamina green area are same as those of leaves.
Simulation of senescence is based on several empirical constants relating to shading,
ageing, nitrogen mobilization, temperature, water stress and death due to pests and
diseases. Shading in dense stands (LAI > 4.0) accelerates senescence linearly to a
maximum of 3% per day of leaf area index. Higher (>36 oC) or lower (< 15oC)
temperatures and water stress accelerate rate of senescence depending upon its severity.
Net effective leaf area for photosynthesis and transpiration (EFFLAI) is thus the sum of
leaf area and non-lamina area after subtracting all losses due to senescence.
4
2.1.4 Dry matter production
In cotton at emergence nearly 35 to 40 % of seed weight is partitioned to leaf and rest to
roots. For simulating further increase in dry matter, the crop is treated as an intact unit.
The dry matter production in Infocrop-cotton is calculated by the approach of the
radiation use efficiency (RUE). Pre-determined values of the RUE are input in the model
as a function of crop/cultivar (RUEMAX). RUE in cotton ranges between 1.5 to 1.7 g
MJ-1 under favorable condition and 1.2 to 1.4 g MJ-1 under unfavorable condition (Sadras
1996). It is further modified by the development stage (RCFDS), abiotic (RUEABI) and
biotic (RUEBIO) factors. RUE peaks at early boll development and subsequently it
declines (Milroy and Bange 2003). Radiation interception by the crop is calculated as a
function of total LAI, incident solar radiation, radiation captured by the pests and weeds
and a crop / cultivar specific extinction coefficient (KDF). Under favorable growing
condition KDF has values from 0.8 to 1.14 while, under unfavorable condition it ranges
from 0.6 to 0.9 (Sadras 1996). The growth rate of the crop (GCROP) is then calculated as
a function of RUE and radiation intercepted by the crop.
RUE = RUEMAX*AFGEN(RCFDS,DS)*RUEABI*RUEBIO
RUEABI = AFGEN(RCFTP,TPAD)*AFGEN(RCFLN,NSTRES)*...
AFGEN(RCFCO2,CO2)*LIMIT(0.,1.,WSTRES)
RUEBIO=AMAX1(0.,1.-AMAX1(BLIGHT,RUST,…
AFGEN(SEVRPT,MILDEW), AFGEN(EARCUT,DAS)*.3/100.))
GTOTAL = RUE*PARINT*10.
Photosynthesis of cotton hybrids ranges from 28 to 34 umole m-2s-1 under field condition
(Hebbar et al 2007a). Bt cotton hybrids showed higher photosynthesis compared to non-
5
Bt hybrids at boll development stage (Hebbar et al. 2007a). The preferred temperature for
optimum photosynthesis is 25oC (Downtown and Slatyer 1972). The effect of
temperature mimics a crop specific decrease in photosynthesis RCFTP due to adverse
mean daytime temperature (TPAD). Function RCFLN, dependent on N levels has an
exponential relation with a maximum of 32 umol CO2 m-2 s-1 (Milroy and Bange 2003),
further reduces RUE. Since, cotton is a C3 plant, more C is fixed in high [CO2] grown
plants at all levels of water and nutrient deficient conditions and across a wide range of
temperatures (Reddy et al. 1997). This is simulated by a crop specific input (RCFCO2)
that increases RUE as a function of ambient [CO2].
2.1.5 Dry mass partitioning among plant organs
The net dry matter available each day for crop growth is partitioned into roots, leaves,
stems and seed cotton as a function of development stage is simulated in the model
through empirical interpolation functions developed from field experiments (Hebbar
unpublished data). Allocation is first made to roots (0.35), which are increased in case the
crop experiences water, or nitrogen stress. The remaining dry matter is allocated to the
above ground shoot from which a fraction is allocated to leaves and stems.
Approximately 70% biomass is accumulated in leaves at early seedling stage and later it
gradually decreased. At squaring, almost equal amount of biomass was partitioned
between leaves and stem. After flowering biomass allocation increases towards bolls and
nearing cutout negligible amount was partitioned to leaves and stem.
2.1.6 Source-sink balance
The net growth during boll development period and a crop specific factor relating bolls
per growth are utilized to calculate increase in the number of bolls every day. In India,
6
under well managed condition cotton could yield as high as 5 ton ha-1 with a maximum
boll load of 1 to 1.1 million bolls having a potential boll weight of 5 g (Data from All
India Cotton Improvement Projects). Cotton crops produce many more floral buds than
mature bolls (Heitholt 1995); abscission of fruiting forms (squares and bolls) is a major
determinant of the number of bolls harvested. Apart from the entomological factors the
environmental conditions, which influence the fruiting in cotton are temperature, light,
water and nutrients (Ehlig and LeMert 1973; Patterson et al. 1978). Temperature has a
curvilinear response to potential growth of developing squares. Growth rate increased to
220 C but did not grow more rapidly at higher temperatures. Boll growth is much more
rapid, had a distinct optimum temperature at about 280C and declined rapidly at higher
temperature (Reddy et al. 1997). In the model, a predetermined maximum boll number
limits the final boll number.
Bolls retained in the plant are filled up with a rate depending upon temperature dependent
potential filling rate and the level of dry matter available for growth. The boll growth is
terminated when their weight reaches potential weight, no dry matter is available or when
the thermal time dependent stage has reached. In Bt hybrids, the boll growth is terminated
early due to greater competition for assimilates as a result of more synchronized boll
development (Hebbar et al. 2007b).
2.1.7 Abiotic stresses
Water stress is determined as the ratio of actual water uptake (ATRANS) and potential
transpiration. Though, cottons are xerophytes, water stress at flowering and boll
development significantly reduced the yield (Potkile et al. 1988). Similarly, drastic
reduction in leaf area expansion and growth was observed when field grown cotton was
7
stressed at 75, 95 and 115 days after emergence (Kumar et al. 1987). Photosynthetic rates
of cotton plants were reduced about 50% as the midday leaf water potential reduced
from -1.4 MPa to -3.5 MPa (Reddy et al. 1998). Similarly, Lower productivity under N
deficit was caused by reduced photosynthesis, leaf area and radiation use efficiency
(Milroy and Bange 2003). Leaf growth declined to nearly zero when the leaf N was 1.5 g
m-2, the minimum N concentration in cotton leaves.
Soil is considered waterlogged on a day in case available water fraction in the surface
layer exceeds 20% of the field capacity or if there is free-standing water on soil surface.
Cotton response to waterlogging depends on the cultivar, growth stages and the
prevailing weather conditions. It suddenly wilts if waterlogged under bright sunlight at
flowering and boll development stages (Hebbar 2004; 2010), whereas under cloudy
weather leaves starts senescing and thus leaf area and photosynthesis declines (Hebbar
2003a). Photosynthesis decreased by 30% in waterlogged plants relative to nonwaterlogged plants (Tongbai et al, 2001).
2.1.8 Soil water and nitrogen balance
The Infocrop cotton model simulates water and nitrogen balance in three layers. If
rainfall exceeds the infiltration rate and storage capacity of soil, runoff occurs. Above
field capacity, any additional water entering the soil surface percolates beyond the lower
boundary of the rooting zone. Waterlogging may occur if the rate of precipitation or
irrigation exceeds the hydraulic conductivity of any soil layer.
2.1.9 Model input requirements
Environmental inputs to run Infocrop are daily solar radiation, maximum and minimum
air temperature, rainfall, vapor pressure and wind speed. Additional necessary inputs are
8
sowing dates, seed rate, and latitude of the site, N fertility and the physical and hydraulic
properties of the soil. Crop development and growth processes required are phenology,
dry matter development and its partitioning, leaf area growth, source-sink balance,
nitrogen uptake and distribution, transpiration, abiotic stresses, biotic stresses etc.
Reference
Aggarwal PK, Joshi PK, Ingram JSI, Gupta RK (2004) Adopting food systems of the
Indo-Gangetic plains to global environmental change: Key information needs to
improve policy formulation. Environmental Sci and policy 7: 487-498.
Aggarwal PK, Kalra N, Chander S, Pathak H (2006) Infocrop: A dynamic simulation
model for the assessment of crop yields, losses due to pests, and environmental
impact of agro-ecosystems in tropical environments. I. Model description,
Agric Systems 89: 1-25.
Bhatt JG (1996) Growth of cotton under rain fed conditions. Cotton Physiology.In
Sundaram DV, Rao SBP (eds.), Cotton Monograph series, Indian Soc. for
Cotton Improvement, Mumbai, pp 26-37.
Downton Joy, Slatyer RO (1972) Temperature Dependence of Photosynthesis in Cotton.
Plant Physiol. 50: 518-522
Ehlig CF, LeMert RD (1973) Effect of fruit load, temperature and relative humidity on
boll retention of cotton, Crop Science 13: 168-171.
Guinn G (1985) Fruiting of cotton.III. Nutitional stress and cutout, Crop Sci. 25: 982985.
Guinn G (1984) What causes cutout. In Brown J,ed.). Proc. Beltwide cotton conference.,
National Cotton Council of Am., Memphis,TN, pp 58.
9
Hebbar KB, Mayee CD (2004) Parawilt of cotton: Is Inhibition of Root Respiration a
Causal Factor? Indian J. Agril. Sci. 74: 48-51.
Hebbar KB, Mayee CD (2010) Parawilt/sudden wilt of cotton-a perspective on the cause
and its management under field condition, Current Sci. 100: 1654-1662.
Hebbar KB, Perumal NK, Khadi BM (2007a) Photosynthesis and Plant Growth Response
of Transgenic Bt Cotton (Gossypium
hirsutum L.) Hybrids Under Field
Condition, Photosynthetica 45: 254-258.
Hebbar KB, Rao MRK, Khadi BM (2007b) Synchronised boll development of Bt cotton
Hybrids and their physiological consequences, Current Sci. 93:693-695.
Hebbar KB, Venugopalan MV, Seshasai MVR, Rao KV, Patil BC, Prakash AH, Kumar
V, Hebbar KR, Jeyakumar P, Bandhopadhyay KK, Rao MRK, Khadi BM,
Aggarwal PK (2008)
Predicting Cotton Production using Infocrop-cotton
simulation model, remote sensing and spatial agro-climatic data. Current
Science 95: 1570-80.
Heitholt JJ (1995) Cotton flowering and boll retention in different planting configurations
and leaf shapes, Agronomy J. 87; 994-998.
Kairon MS, Singh VV (1996) Genetic diversity of short duration cottons. The Plenary
meeting of the ICAC, Tashkent, Uzbekistan pp.5-9.
Kumar, V., Mehta, N.P., Gohil, M.D., 1987. Investigations into some physiological
parameters of cotton under water stress. Ann. Arid Zone 26, 267-271.
Milroy SP, Bange MP (2003) Nitrogen and light responses of cotton photosynthesis and
implications for crop growth, Crop Sci. 43: 904- 913.
Oosterhuis DM (1992) Growth and development of a cotton plant, Arkansas cooperative
10
Extension Service, MP 332-4M-9-92 R
Pallas JE Jr, Michel BE, Harris DG (1967) Photosynthesis, Transpiration, Leaf
Temperature, and Stomatal Activity of Cotton Plants under Varying Water
Potentials. Plant Physiol. 42: 76–88.
Patterson LL, Buxton DR, Briggs RE (1978) Fruiting in cotton as affected by controlled
boll set, Agron. J. 70: 118-22.
Potkile NN, Dhopte AM, Shastri NR (1988) Pattern of root growth and analysis in
hirsutum and arboreum cottons in response to short term water stress imposed
during reproduction, Ann. Plant Physiol. 2: 166-175
Reddy KR, Hodges HF, McKinion JM (1997) A comparison of scenarios for the effect
of global climate change on cotton growth and yield. Aust J Plant Physiol 24:
707-713.
Reddy AR., Reddy KR, Hodges HF (1998) Interactive effects of elevated carbon dioxide
and growth temperature on photosynthesis in cotton leaves. Plant Growth Regul
22: 1-8.
Sadras VO (1996) Cotton responses to simulated insect damage: radiation use efficiency,
canopy architecture and leaf nitrogen content as affected by loss of reproductive
organs, Field crops Res. 48:199-208.
Singh Jagvir, Rao MRK, Mohan P, Mayee CD (2006) Impact of soil depths on yield of Bt
cotton hybrids under rainfed conditions, Journal of Cotton Research and
Development 20:80–82.
Tongbai P, Milray S, Bange M, Rapp G, Smith T (2001) Agronomic responses of cotton
to low oxygen during waterlogging. Proceeding of the 10th Australian
11
Agronomy conference, Hobart, 2001.
Turner NC, JO’Toole JC, Cruz RT, Yambao EB, Ahmad S, Namuco OS, Dingkuhn M
(1986) Responses of seven diverse ricecultivars to water deficit. II. Osmotic
adjustment, leaf elasticity, leaf extension, leaf death, stomatal conductance and
photosynthesis, Field Crop Res. 13:273–286.
van Kraalingen. DWG (1995) The FSE system for crop simulation , version 2.1.
Quantitative Approaches in Systems Analysis Report no. 1. AB/DLO, PE,
Wageningen.
Venugopalan MV, Tiwary P, Hebbar KB, Ramamurthy V, Chatterji S, Rao KV, Sen TK,
Deshmukh HV, Wahane MR. (2007) Evaluation of Infocrop -cotton model in
some shrink- swell soils under rainfed conditions, Agropedology 17:34-40.
Wullschleger SD, Oosterhuis DM (1991) Photosynthetic and respiratory activities of
fruiting forms within the cotton canopy. Plant Physiol 94:463–469
12