| Literature DB >> 27404110 |
Xiaoyun Li1, Nianjie Liu1, Liangzhi You1,2, Xinli Ke3, Haijun Liu4, Malan Huang1, Stephen R Waddington5.
Abstract
After a remarkable 86% increase in cereal production from 1980 to 2005, recent crop yield growth in China has been slow. County level crop production data between 1980 and 2010 from eastern and middle China were used to analyze spatial and temporal patterns of rice, wheat and maize yield in five major farming systems that include around 90% of China's cereal production. Site-specific yield trends were assessed in areas where those crops have experienced increasing yield or where yields have stagnated or declined. We find that rice yields have continued to increase on over 12.3 million hectares (m. ha) or 41.8% of the rice area in China between 1980 and 2010. However, yields stagnated on 50% of the rice area (around 14.7 m. ha) over this time period. Wheat yields increased on 13.8 m. ha (58.2% of the total harvest area), but stagnated on around 3.8 m. ha (15.8% of the harvest area). Yields increased on a smaller proportion of the maize area (17.7% of harvest area, 5.3 m. ha), while yields have stagnated on over 54% (16.3 m. ha). Many parts of the lowland rice and upland intensive sub-tropical farming systems were more prone to stagnation with rice, the upland intensive sub-tropical system with wheat, and maize in the temperate mixed system. Large areas where wheat yield continues to rise were found in the lowland rice and temperate mixed systems. Land and water constraints, climate variability, and other environmental limitations undermine increased crop yield and agricultural productivity in these systems and threaten future food security. Technology and policy innovations must be implemented to promote crop yields and the sustainable use of agricultural resources to maintain food security in China. In many production regions it is possible to better match the crop with input resources to raise crop yields and benefits. Investments may be especially useful to intensify production in areas where yields continue to improve. For example, increased support to maize production in southern China, where yields are still rising, seems justified.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27404110 PMCID: PMC4942084 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0159061
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Fig 1Rice, wheat, maize and other crop areas in five major cereal farming systems in eastern and southern China.
The distribution of types of yield trend across major cereals and farming systems in China, 1980–2010.
| Farming system | % of national harvest area | Yield trend | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CO | NI | SI | ST | ||
| Rice | |||||
| Lowland rice system | 59.7 | 0.2 | 4.7 | 22.3 | 32.5 |
| Temperate mixed system | 19.0 | 0.2 | 0.8 | 10.6 | 7.4 |
| Upland intensive-temperate | 2.2 | 0.0 | 0.1 | 1.2 | 0.9 |
| Upland intensive-sub tropical | 16.9 | 0.0 | 1.7 | 6.5 | 8.7 |
| Highland mixed | 1.6 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 1.2 | 0.4 |
| System total (%) | 99.6 | 0.4 | 7.4 | 41.8 | 50.0 |
| System total (Harvest area, M ha) | 29.3 | 0.1 | 2.2 | 12.3 | 14.7 |
| Wheat | |||||
| Lowland rice | 51.6 | 0.3 | 7.7 | 37.3 | 6.3 |
| Temperate mixed system | 23.3 | 0.6 | 1.6 | 14.4 | 6.7 |
| Upland intensive-temperate | 9.1 | 0.4 | 2.4 | 4.9 | 1.4 |
| Upland intensive-sub tropical | 3.9 | 0.4 | 1.3 | 1.4 | 0.8 |
| Highland mixed | 1.1 | 0.1 | 0.3 | 0.2 | 0.5 |
| System total (%) | 89.1 | 1.8 | 13.3 | 58.2 | 15.8 |
| System total (Harvest area, M ha) | 21.2 | 0.4 | 3.2 | 13.8 | 3.8 |
| Maize | |||||
| Lowland rice | 15.7 | 0.5 | 4.1 | 3.8 | 7.3 |
| Temperate mixed system | 62.9 | 0.7 | 13.7 | 7.2 | 41.3 |
| Upland intensive-temperate | 9.4 | 0.3 | 3.1 | 1.8 | 4.2 |
| Upland intensive-sub tropical | 4.8 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 3.4 | 0.9 |
| Highland mixed | 2.1 | 0.0 | 0.2 | 1.4 | 0.5 |
| System total (%) | 95.3 | 1.6 | 21.7 | 17.7 | 54.3 |
| System total (Harvest area, M ha) | 28.6 | 0.5 | 6.5 | 5.3 | 16.3 |
CO = yield collapsed, NI = yield not improved, SI = yield still increasing, ST = yield stagnated
Fig 2Examples of four types of cereal yield trends in China, 1980–2010. Y axis is grain yield in t/ha.
Fig 3Maps of cereal crop yield trends (1980–2010) across major farming systems in China.
Fig 4Crop yield trend status for top 10 producers in China.
The top 10 producers were derived from average crop production of 2006–2010 report by NSB, arranged in the horizontal coordinate by order of production size. Overall area was based on the harvest area from the five focus farming systems. Harvest area based on average 2006–2010.
Summary results of multiple linear regressions based on rice first difference time series data (1980–2010) for two dominant rice production areas in China.
| Region | Coefficients | S.E | t Stat | P-value | Lower 95% | Upper 95% |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Intercept | 0.1433 | 0.0636 | 2.2537 | 0.0245 | 0.0185 | 0.2682 |
| ΔTmax | -0.0077 | 0.0106 | -0.7284 | 0.4666 | -0.0285 | 0.0131 |
| ΔTmin | 0.0247 | 0.0118 | 2.0891 | 0.0371 | 0.0015 | 0.0479 |
| ΔRf | -0.0009 | 0.0003 | -3.1064 | 0.0020 | -0.0014 | -0.0003 |
| R Square | 0.0176 | Sign F | 0.0064 | |||
| Intercept | 0.1062 | 0.0588 | 1.8048 | 0.0717 | -0.0094 | 0.2217 |
| ΔTmax | 0.0017 | 0.0090 | 0.1877 | 0.8512 | -0.0159 | 0.0193 |
| ΔTmin | -0.0141 | 0.0119 | -1.1859 | 0.2362 | -0.0375 | 0.0093 |
| ΔRf | 0.0000 | 0.0001 | -0.0380 | 0.9697 | -0.0002 | 0.0002 |
| R Square | 0.0037 | Sign F | 0.5871 |
** significant at 0.05 level
*** significant at 0.01 level
Summary results of multiple linear regressions based on maize first difference time series data (1980–2010) for three dominant maize production areas in China.
| Region | Coefficients | S E | t Stat | P-value | Lower 95% | Upper 95% |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Intercept | 0.0732 | 0.3632 | 0.2017 | 0.8402 | -0.6398 | 0.7863 |
| -0.2406 | 0.0613 | -3.9276 | 0.0001 | -0.3609 | -0.1203 | |
| 0.2162 | 0.0712 | 3.0376 | 0.0025 | 0.0765 | 0.3560 | |
| -0.0039 | 0.0018 | -2.2318 | 0.0259 | -0.0074 | -0.0005 | |
| R Square | 0.0207 | Sign F | 0.0015 | |||
| Intercept | 0.0576 | 0.0727 | 0.7926 | 0.4288 | -0.0856 | 0.2008 |
| ΔTmax | -0.0251 | 0.0114 | -2.1993 | 0.0288 | -0.0475 | -0.0026 |
| ΔT | 0.0226 | 0.0151 | 1.5003 | 0.1349 | -0.0071 | 0.0523 |
| ΔRf | -0.0005 | 0.0004 | -1.4408 | 0.1510 | -0.0012 | 0.0002 |
| R Square | 0.0209 | Sign F | 0.1716 | |||
| Intercept | 0.1004 | 0.1135 | 0.8838 | 0.3772 | -0.1228 | 0.3235 |
| ΔTmax | -0.0490 | 0.0155 | -3.1650 | 0.0017 | -0.0795 | -0.0186 |
| ΔT | 0.0364 | 0.0205 | 1.7733 | 0.0768 | -0.0039 | 0.0768 |
| ΔRf | -0.0003 | 0.0002 | -1.9982 | 0.0463 | -0.0006 | 0.0000 |
| R Square | 0.0223 | Sign F | 0.0139 | |||
| Intercept | 0.0894 | 0.0532 | 1.6790 | 0.0939 | -0.0153 | 0.1940 |
| ΔTmax | 0.0089 | 0.0112 | 0.7935 | 0.4279 | -0.0132 | 0.0310 |
| ΔT | 0.0035 | 0.0124 | 0.2814 | 0.7786 | -0.0209 | 0.0278 |
| ΔRf | -0.0001 | 0.0002 | -0.3342 | 0.7384 | -0.0004 | 0.0003 |
| R Square | 0.0089 | Sign F | 0.2847 |
** significant at 0.05 level
*** significant at 0.01 level