Bruno  Basso

Dr. Bruno Basso

Department of Earth and Environmental Sciences, College of Natural Science, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI 48823, USA
orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

29Years (1998-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
22 December 2014 in Nature Climate Change
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
SASenthold Asseng
Senthold Asseng
FEF. Ewert
F. Ewert
PMP. Martre
P. Martre
RRReimund Paul Rötter
Reimund Paul Rötter
DLDavid Lobell
David Lobell
YZY. Zhu
Y. Zhu
This study—based on systematic testing of 30 different wheat crop models against field experiments—shows that many wheat models simulate yields well, but with reduced accuracy at higher temperatures. Extrapolation of the model ensemble response indicates that global wheat production will fall by 6% for each 1 °C increase in temperature. Crop models are essential tools for assessing the threat of climate change to local and global food production1. Present models used to predict wheat grain yield are highly uncertain when simulating how crops respond to temperature2. Here we systematically tested 30 different wheat crop models of the Agricultural Model Intercomparison and Improvement Project against field experiments in which growing season mean temperatures ranged from 15 °C to 32 °C, including experiments with artificial heating. Many models simulated yields well, but were less accurate at higher temperatures. The model ensemble median was consistently more accurate in simulating the crop temperature response than any single model, regardless of the input information used. Extrapolating the model ensemble temperature response indicates that warming is already slowing yield gains at a majority of wheat-growing locations. Global wheat production is estimated to fall by 6% for each °C of further temperature increase and become more variable over space and time.

9 June 2013 in Nature Climate Change
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
SASenthold Asseng
Senthold Asseng
FEF. Ewert
F. Ewert
CRC. Rosenzweig
C. Rosenzweig
JJJ. W. Jones
J. W. Jones
JHJ. L. Hatfield
J. L. Hatfield
JWJonas Michel Wolf
Jonas Michel Wolf

1 March 2013 in Agricultural and Forest Meteorology
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
CRCynthia Rosenzweig
Cynthia Rosenzweig
JJJ.W. Jones
J.W. Jones
JHJ.L. Hatfield
J.L. Hatfield
ARA.C. Ruane
A.C. Ruane
KBKenneth J. Boote
Kenneth J. Boote
JWJ.M. Winter
J.M. Winter

7 January 2014 in Global Change Biology
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
SBSimona Bassu
Simona Bassu
NBNadine Brisson
Nadine Brisson
JDJean‐Louis Durand
Jean‐Louis Durand
KBKenneth J. Boote
Kenneth J. Boote
JLJon Lizaso
Jon Lizaso
KWKatharina Waha
Katharina Waha
Potential consequences of climate change on crop production can be studied using mechanistic crop simulation models. While a broad variety of maize simulation models exist, it is not known whether different models diverge on grain yield responses to changes in climatic factors, or whether they agree in their general trends related to phenology, growth, and yield. With the goal of analyzing the sensitivity of simulated yields to changes in temperature and atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations [CO2], we present the largest maize crop model intercomparison to date, including 23 different models. These models were evaluated for four locations representing a wide range of maize production conditions in the world: Lusignan (France), Ames (USA), Rio Verde (Brazil) and Morogoro (Tanzania). While individual models differed considerably in absolute yield simulation at the four sites, an ensemble of a minimum number of models was able to simulate absolute yields accurately at the four sites even with low data for calibration, thus suggesting that using an ensemble of models has merit. Temperature increase had strong negative influence on modeled yield response of roughly −0.5 Mg ha−1 per °C. Doubling [CO2] from 360 to 720 μmol mol−1 increased grain yield by 7.5% on average across models and the sites. That would therefore make temperature the main factor altering maize yields at the end of this century. Furthermore, there was a large uncertainty in the yield response to [CO2] among models. Model responses to temperature and [CO2] did not differ whether models were simulated with low calibration information or, simulated with high level of calibration information.

1 July 2017 in Agricultural Systems
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
JJJames W. Jones
James W. Jones
JAJohn M. Antle
John M. Antle
BBBruno Basso
Bruno Basso
KBKenneth J. Boote
Kenneth J. Boote
RCRichard T. Conant
Richard T. Conant
TWTim R. Wheeler
Tim R. Wheeler
Agricultural systems science generates knowledge that allows researchers to consider complex problems or take informed agricultural decisions. The rich history of this science exemplifies the diversity of systems and scales over which they operate and have been studied. Modeling, an essential tool in agricultural systems science, has been accomplished by scientists from a wide range of disciplines, who have contributed concepts and tools over more than six decades. As agricultural scientists now consider the “next generation” models, data, and knowledge products needed to meet the increasingly complex systems problems faced by society, it is important to take stock of this history and its lessons to ensure that we avoid re-invention and strive to consider all dimensions of associated challenges. To this end, we summarize here the history of agricultural systems modeling and identify lessons learned that can help guide the design and development of next generation of agricultural system tools and methods. A number of past events combined with overall technological progress in other fields have strongly contributed to the evolution of agricultural system modeling, including development of process-based bio-physical models of crops and livestock, statistical models based on historical observations, and economic optimization and simulation models at household and regional to global scales. Characteristics of agricultural systems models have varied widely depending on the systems involved, their scales, and the wide range of purposes that motivated their development and use by researchers in different disciplines. Recent trends in broader collaboration across institutions, across disciplines, and between the public and private sectors suggest that the stage is set for the major advances in agricultural systems science that are needed for the next generation of models, databases, knowledge products and decision support systems. The lessons from history should be considered to help avoid roadblocks and pitfalls as the community develops this next generation of agricultural systems models.

16 April 2020 in Nature Sustainability
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
BBBruno Basso
Bruno Basso
JAJohn Antle
John Antle