The shifting influence of drought and heat stress for crops in northeast Australia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Characterization of drought environment types (ETs) has proven useful for breeding crops for drought-prone regions. Here, we consider how changes in climate and atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2 ) concentrations will affect drought ET frequencies in sorghum and wheat systems of northeast Australia. We also modify APSIM (the Agricultural Production Systems Simulator) to incorporate extreme heat effects on grain number and weight, and then evaluate changes in the occurrence of heat-induced yield losses of more than 10%, as well as the co-occurrence of drought and heat. More than six million simulations spanning representative locations, soil types, management systems, and 33 climate projections led to three key findings. First, the projected frequency of drought decreased slightly for most climate projections for both sorghum and wheat, but for different reasons. In sorghum, warming exacerbated drought stresses by raising the atmospheric vapor pressure deficit and reducing transpiration efficiency (TE), but an increase in TE due to elevated CO2 more than offset these effects. In wheat, warming reduced drought stress during spring by hastening development through winter and reducing exposure to terminal drought. Elevated CO2 increased TE but also raised radiation-use efficiency and overall growth rates and water use, thereby offsetting much of the drought reduction from warming. Second, adding explicit effects of heat on grain number and grain size often switched projected yield impacts from positive to negative. Finally, although average yield losses associated with drought will remain generally higher than that for heat stress for the next half century, the relative importance of heat is steadily growing. This trend, as well as the likely high degree of genetic variability in heat tolerance, suggests that more emphasis on heat tolerance is warranted in breeding programs. At the same time, work on drought tolerance should continue with an emphasis on drought that co-occurs with extreme heat.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".