Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

The critical role of extreme heat for maize production in the United States

Subjects

Abstract

Statistical studies of rainfed maize yields in the United States1 and elsewhere2 have indicated two clear features: a strong negative yield response to accumulation of temperatures above 30 °C (or extreme degree days (EDD)), and a relatively weak response to seasonal rainfall. Here we show that the process-based Agricultural Production Systems Simulator (APSIM) is able to reproduce both of these relationships in the Midwestern United States and provide insight into underlying mechanisms. The predominant effects of EDD in APSIM are associated with increased vapour pressure deficit, which contributes to water stress in two ways: by increasing demand for soil water to sustain a given rate of carbon assimilation, and by reducing future supply of soil water by raising transpiration rates. APSIM computes daily water stress as the ratio of water supply to demand, and during the critical month of July this ratio is three times more responsive to 2 °C warming than to a 20% precipitation reduction. The results suggest a relatively minor role for direct heat stress on reproductive organs at present temperatures in this region. Effects of elevated CO2 on transpiration efficiency should reduce yield sensitivity to EDD in the coming decades, but at most by 25%.

Access options

Rent or Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.

from$8.99

All prices are NET prices.

Figure 1: The association of extreme heat and precipitation with maize yields.
Figure 2: Determinants of daily growth.
Figure 3: Relative influence of temperature and precipitation on water stress.
Figure 4: Yield effects of temperature and precipitation changes.

References

  1. 1

    Schlenker, W. & Roberts, M. J. Nonlinear temperature effects indicate severe damages to U.S. crop yields under climate change. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 106, 15594–15598 (2009).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  2. 2

    Lobell, D. B., Banziger, M., Magorokosho, C. & Vivek, B. Nonlinear heat effects on African maize as evidenced by historical yield trials. Nature Clim. Change 1, 42–45 (2011).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. 3

    FAO Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), FAO Statistical Databases; available at http://faostat.fao.org (2012).

  4. 4

    Easterling, W. et al. in Climate Change 2007: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (eds Parry, M. L. et al.) 273–313 (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2007).

    Google Scholar 

  5. 5

    Lobell, D. & Asner, G. Climate and management contributions to recent trends in US agricultural yields. Science 299, 1032 (2003).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  6. 6

    Tao, F., Yokozawa, M., Liu, J. & Zhang, Z. Climate–crop yield relationships at provincial scales in China and the impacts of recent climate trends. Clim. Res. 38, 83–94 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. 7

    Sakurai, G., Iizumi, T. & Yokozawa, M. Varying temporal and spatial effects of climate on maize and soybean affect yield prediction. Clim. Res. 49, 143–154 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. 8

    Schlenker, W. & Lobell, D. B. Robust negative impacts of climate change on African agriculture. Environ. Res. Lett. 014010 (2010).

  9. 9

    Lobell, D. B. & Field, C. B. Global scale climate-crop yield relationships and the impacts of recent warming. Environ. Res. Lett. 2, 004000 (2007).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. 10

    De Boeck, H. J., Dreesen, F. E., Janssens, I. A. & Nijs, I. Climatic characteristics of heat waves and their simulation in plant experiments. Glob. Change Biol. 16, 1992–2000 (2010).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. 11

    Bolanos, J. & Edmeades, G. O. The importance of the anthesis-silking interval in breeding for drought tolerance in tropical maize. Field Crops Res. 48, 65–80 (1996).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. 12

    Crafts-Brandner, S. J. & Salvucci, M. E. Sensitivity of photosynthesis in a C4 plant, maize, to heat stress. Plant Physiol. 129, 1773–1780 (2002).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  13. 13

    Parent, B. & Tardieu, F. Temperature responses of developmental processes have not been affected by breeding in different ecological areas for 17 crop species. New Phytol. 194, 760–774 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. 14

    Sinclair, T. R., Tanner, C. & Bennett, J. Water-use efficiency in crop production. BioScience 34, 36–40 (1984).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. 15

    Hirasawa, T. & Hsiao, T. C. Some characteristics of reduced leaf photosynthesis at midday in maize growing in the field. Field Crops Res. 62, 53–62 (1999).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. 16

    Ray, J. D., Gesch, R. W., Sinclair, T. R. & Hartwell Allen, L. The effect of vapor pressure deficit on maize transpiration response to a drying soil. Plant Soil 239, 113–121 (2002).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  17. 17

    Leakey, A. D. B. Rising atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration and the future of C4 crops for food and fuel. Proc. R. Soc. B 1666, 2333–2343 (2009).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. 18

    Roberts, M. J., Schlenker, W. & Eyer, J. Agronomic weather measures in econometric models of crop yield with implications for climate change. Am. J. Agricult. Econom. 95, 236–243 (2013).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. 19

    White, J. W., Hoogenboom, G., Kimball, B. A. & Wall, G. W. Methodologies for simulating impacts of climate change on crop production. Field Crops Res. 124, 357–368 (2011).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. 20

    Yang, H. S. et al. Hybrid-maize—a maize simulation model that combines two crop modeling approaches. Field Crops Res. 87, 131–154 (2004).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. 21

    Jones, C. & Kiniry, J. CERES-Maize: A Simulation Model of Maize Growth and Development (Texas A&M Univ. Press, 1986).

    Google Scholar 

  22. 22

    Hammer, G. L. et al. Adapting APSIM to model the physiology and genetics of complex adaptive traits in field crops. J. Exp. Bot. 61, 2185–2202 (2010).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  23. 23

    Long, S. Modification of the response of photosynthetic productivity to rising temperature by atmospheric CO2 concentrations: Has its importance been underestimated? Plant Cell Environ. 14, 729–739 (1991).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  24. 24

    Muchow, R. & Sinclair, T. Water deficit effects on maize yields modeled under current and greenhouse climates. Agron. J. 83, 1052–1059 (1991).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. 25

    Leakey, A. D. B. et al. Photosynthesis in a CO2-rich atmosphere. Photosynthesis 34, 733–768 (2012).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  26. 26

    McGrath, J. & Lobell, D. B. An independent method of deriving the carbon dioxide fertilization effect in dry conditions using historical yield data from wet and dry years. Glob. Change Biol. 17, 2689–2696 (2011).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. 27

    Lobell, D. B., Schlenker, W. S. & Costa-Roberts, J. Climate trends and global crop production since 1980. Science 333, 616–620 (2011).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  28. 28

    Lyon, D. J., Hammer, G. L., McLean, G. B. & Blumenthal, J. M. Simulation supplements field studies to determine no-till dryland corn population recommendations for semiarid western Nebraska. Agron. J. 95, 884–891 (2003).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. 29

    Hammer, G. et al. Can changes in canopy and/or root system architecture explain historical maize yield trends in the US corn belt? Crop Sci. 49, 299–312 (2009).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. 30

    Robertson, M., Fukai, S., Ludlow, M. & Hammer, G. Water extraction by grain sorghum in a sub-humid environment. I. Analysis of the water extraction pattern. Field Crops Res. 33, 81–97 (1993).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. 31

    Tanner, C. & Sinclair, T. in Limitations to Efficient Water Use in Crop Production (eds Taylor, H.M. et al.) 1–27 (ASA, CSSA and SSSA, 1983).

    Google Scholar 

  32. 32

    Chapman, S. C., Hammer, G. L. & Meinke, H. A sunflower simulation model: I. Model development. Agron. J. 85, 725–735 (1993).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. 33

    Willett, K. M., Gillett, N. P., Jones, P. D. & Thorne, P. W. Attribution of observed surface humidity changes to human influence. Nature 449, 710–712 (2007).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank J. Jones and M. Burke for helpful comments. D.B.L., M.J.R. and W.S. were supported by NSF grant SES-0962625, and D.B.L. also by NOAA grant NA11OAR4310095. G.L.H. and G.M. were supported by grant LP100100495 from the Australian Research Council.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

D.B.L. and G.L.H. conceived the study, and all authors contributed to analysis and writing the paper.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to David B. Lobell.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing financial interests.

Supplementary information

Supplementary Information

Supplementary Information (PDF 1234 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Lobell, D., Hammer, G., McLean, G. et al. The critical role of extreme heat for maize production in the United States. Nature Clim Change 3, 497–501 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate1832

Download citation

Further reading

Search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing