Climate Change: Impact on Crop Production and its Coping Strategies

W. Sultana, M. A. Aziz and F. Ahmed

Agronomy Division Bangladesh Agricultural Research Institute (BARI) Joydebpur, Gazipur, Bangladesh 27 August 2008

2

3

4

Bangladesh Issue Change in temperature and precipitation

According to IPCC ● Average temperature has registered an increasing trend of about

1 º C in May and 0.5 º C in November during the 14 year period from 1985 to 1998 ● The annual mean rainfall exhibits increasing trends in Bangladesh

● Salt water from the Bay of Bengal is reported to have penetrated 100 km or more inland along tributary channels during the dry season.

5

Climate Change Impact • Summer are becoming hotter • Monsoon irregular with untimely rainfall • Increased river flow and inundation during monsoon • Heavy rainfall over short period causing water logging •Increased frequency, intensity and recurrence of flood • Crop damage due to flash flood • Very little rainfall in dry period • Crop failure due to drought • Prolonged cold spell • Salinity intrusion along the coast region

6

7

MAPS SHOWING EXISTING DROUGHT, AND DROUGHT IN THE YEAR 2030 & 2075 DROUGHT CLASSES (KHARIF SEASON) Very Severe Drought Severe Drought Moderate Drought Less Moderate Drought Slight Drought

EXISTING DROUGHT

Very Slight to Nil Severe & Moderate Moderate & Less Moderate Sunderbans Forest

ADDITIONAL DROUGHT PRONE AREAS IN 2030

ADDITIONAL DROUGHT PRONE AREAS IN 2075 8

Climate Change: Impact on Crop Production Crop production in Bangladesh would be extremely vulnerable under climate change scenarios, as a result, food security of the country will be at risk. The increase in air temperature would shorten our winter season and the productivity of some rabi crop will be greatly affected.

9

Objectives • To study the climate change impact on field crop production • To determine coping strategies in future to address climate change

10

Methodology

• Various books, journals, workshop/symposium proceedings, reports, publications etc. related to topic have been reviewed • Research under control condition was done in laboratory through Hoagland solution culture and in vinyl house through pot culture • Field research was done at BARI Research Farm • In the coastal area field research was done in the farmer’s field through On Farm Research Division • Data has also been collected from secondary sources and in consultation with the respective resource personnel

11

150 125 100

Temperature stress

75 50 25 0

Nov (30) sown

Dec(15) sown

Dec(30) sown

Tas seling (DAS)

80

84

87

Harves ting (DAS)

149

146

136

yield (t/ha)

9.13

8.39

7.78

Fig.8. Eff ect of sow ing time on tasseling, harvesting and grain yield of hybrid maize

40 Maximum

Minimum

35 Temperature ( o C)

30 25 20 15 10 5 0 Nov Nov Dec Dec Jan Jan Feb Feb Mar Mar Apr Apr May May (15) (30) (15) (31) (15) (31) (15) (29) (15) (31) (15) (30) (15) (31) Months Fig.9.Fortnightly mean temperatures during maize grow ing period (2006-2007) (left three arrow s idicate sow ing time, middle three tasseling and right three harvesting time, similar type arrow s are used in different grow th stage for individual sow ing time)

12

Drought stress Yield of maize as affected by drought stress at different growth stages

Treatment.

Grain yield (g/plant)

Yield decreased over control (%)

2005-06

2006-07

2005-06

2006-07

No drought stress (control)

173.25 a

177.83 a

-

-

Drought stress at vegetative stage

156.31 b

164.67b

9.78

7.40

Drought stress at tasseling stage

142.31 c

133.37 c

17.86

25.00

Drought stress at grain filling stage

145.77 c

142.07 c

15.87

20.11

6.24

-

-

CV (%)

3.10 Source: Ahmed et. al., 2008

13

Drought stress avoidance

Performance of cowpea at different date of sowing in the saline area of Kuakata, Potuakhali in 2006-07 Sowing date

Plant population (m-2)

Plant height (cm)

Pods/plant

Seeds/pod

Seed yield (kg/ha)

11 December

21

59.9

9.0

14

1360

21 December

20

49.2

7.6

11

1210

31 December

-

-

-

-

-

Source: Aziz et. al., 2007

14

Drought stress avoidance

29 January sowing

11 December sowing

Mungbean at farmers field of Potuakhali non saline coastal area 15

Water logging stress ● The influence of excess rainfall stress on growth, dry matter production and yield of twenty-six mungbean varieties / genotypes was evaluated and found that BINA mug 5 was more tolerant under excess rainfall stress compared to other varieties/ genotypes in respect of total dry matter production, grain yield and green biomass production (Aziz et. al., 2008a).

16

Water logging stress ● Sesame cultivars under water logged condition at different growth stages indicated that all the cultivars damaged 100% when water logged at flowering ( 72 hrs) and pod development stages. About 3-75% plant mortality was found when the field was water logged at vegetative stage. BARI Til 3 was found water logged tolerant at vegetative stage (Saha et. al. 2008).

Control

Water logged at flowering stage

Water logged at vegetative stage

Water logged at pod dev. stage

17

Salinity Stress Identification of salt tolerant genotypes: Screening with 50 genotypes of each crops for their salt tolerance at germination and early vegetative stage under control condition found that: - 2 mungbean genotypes (BM 01 and BM 08) - 4 soybean genotypes - 7 mustard genotypes - 4 barley genotypes and - 5 maize cultivars were selected as salt tolerant genotypes Source: Aziz et al., 2007

18

Salt tolerance in mungbean at different growth stages:

Vegetative stage is being more sensitive than flowering and podfilling stages. The salt tolerance in mungbean was in order of vegetative stage > flowering stage > pod filling stage

Grain yield (g/plant) of BM 01 (tolerant) and BM 21(susceptible) as affected by NaCl salinity at the vegetative (V), flowering (F) and pod-filling (P) stages of growth (Aziz, 2003)

19

Salt Tolerance Mechanisms in Mungbean Re-absorption and Re-translocation

Concentration of Na+ ion in different plant-parts of BM 01 and BM 21 as affected by salinity at the vegetative (V), flowering (F) and pod-filling stages of growth. Error bars represent standard error (Aziz, 2003)

20

Succulence

Succulence of individual leaf of BM 01 and BM 21 as affected by NaCl salinity (Aziz, 2003) 21

Na+ : K+ ratio BM 01

BM 21

K+/Na+ ratio of mungbean genotypes of BM 01 and BM 21 as by NaCl salinity (Aziz, 2003)

22

Leaf to leaf compartmentation

Sodium and potassium content of mungbean genotypes of BM 01 and BM 21 as affected by NaCl salinity (Aziz, 2003)

23

Osmoregulation

BM 21

Proline content in leaves (A: absolute and B: relative) of mungbean genotypes BM 01 (salt- tolerant) and BM 21(salt-susceptible) as affected by NaCl salinity (Aziz, 2003)

24

Membrane stability

Percent injury index in leaves (A: absolute, B: relative and C: functional relationship) of mungbean genotypes BM 01 (salt- tolerant) and BM 21(salt-susceptible) as affected by NaCl salinity

Gas Exchange Characters 50 m M

-1 -2

30

20

10

0 0

50

100

200

500

1000

1500

2000

Stomatal condactance (mol m S )

10

0 0

50

100

200

500

1000

1500

2000

0

50

100

200

500

1000

1500

2000

1000

1500

2000

12

-2

-1

10

-2

-1

Stomatal condactance (mol m S )

20

-1 0

-1 0

8

6

4

2

0 0

50

100

200

500

1000

1500

10 8 6 4 2 0

2000

Intercellular CO2 concentration

400

350

(ppm)

Intercellulat CO2 concentration

30

300

250

200

400

350

(ppm)

-2

40

100 mM

Photosynthesis(mol CO2 m S )

0 mM

-1

Photosynthesis(mol CO2 m S )

40

300

250

200 0

50

100

200

500

1000

1500

2000

0

50

B M 01

100

200

500

B M 21 P h o t o n f lu x d e n s itie s (m o l m -2 s - 1 )

26

Table I. Yield and yield attributes of mungbean varieties at FSRD site of Noakhali and Benarpota during 2007-08 Varieties/ lines

Pod/plant

1000 seed wt. (g)

Grain yield (t/ha)

Noakhali

Benarpota

Noakhali

Benarpota

Noakhali

Benarpota

BM 01

14.36

17.33

25.46

21.66

1.06

0.71

BM 08

16.43

16.66

30.10

24.00

1.44

0.77

BARI mug 5

12.53

7.00

35.52

37.66

0.98

0.62

BARI mug 6

10.13

6.66

38.59

39.66

0.96

0.65

BU 02

10.10

8.00

29.87

48.33

0.52

0.59

BU 04

11.23

6.33

30.03

39.00

0.49

0.67

LSD (0.05)

2.531

1.69

6.822

1.135

0.467

5.38

CV(%)

15.94

13.30

11.87

1.56

16.67

12.95

Source: Aziz et al., 2008d

Soil salinity level : 4.45 to 6.97 dS/m

27

we& Gg 08

28

Fodder yield of maize grown in saline areas of Noakhali

Varieties/lies Hybrid

Fodder yield (t/ha) 60 DAE

80 DAE

Total

BHM-3

2.46 b

3.33 b

5.79

BHM-4

7.67 a

10.73 a

18.40

Pacific-11

2.60 b

2.95 b

5.55

Pacific-60

1.04 b

1.37 b

2.41

8.58 a

11.50 a

20.08

Barnali

3.42 b

3.40 b

6.82

BARI sweet corn

1.79 b

1.94 b

3.73

BM-6

2.69 b

3.02 b

5.71

**

**

Composite Khoibhutta

Level of significance Source: Farida et. al., 2007

Salinity level: 3.5 to 7.97 29

Yield and yield attributing characters of salt tolerant Barley varieties during rabi season, 2007-2008 Variety

Grains/spike (no)

1000 grain weight (g)

Grain yield (t/ha)

Noa.

Sat.

Pot.

Noa.

Sat.

Pot.

Noa.

Sat.

Pot.

BHL- 19

38.1

42.3

42.0

38.3

31.0

27.7

2.14

1.99

1.34

BHL- 18

36.5

45.6

39.2

37.7

32.3

27.3

1.99

2.00

1.17

BHL- 15

38.7

-

44.1

39.6

-

29.8

2.33

-

1.55

BHL- 13

32.8

39.0

-

37.3

28.3

-

1.74

1.24

-

BB-4

27.5

43.7

-

35.0

33.6

-

1.41

2.15

-

CV(%)

16.29 8.83

9.62

5.27

7.12

9.62

13

5.18

9.62

Noa. = Noakhali, Sat. = Satkhira, Pot. = Potuakhali Source: Farida et. al., 2008

30

Yield and yield attributing characters of mustard relaying with T.aman at Satkhira MLT site during rabi season of 2007-08 Variety

Plant Days to maturity popu./m2

Plant height (cm)

Siliqua/ plant (no.)

Seed/ siliqua (no.)

1000 seed wt. (g)

Seed yield (t/ha)

BINA sarisha-5

94

98.67

74.60

37.50

22.87

4.70

0.75

Tor-7

85

114.7

78.30

38.70

25.20

3.70

1.00

BARI sarisha-9

85

113.7

86.07

48.93

17.80

3.87

1.20

BARI sarisha-11

100

93.33

124.1

71.60

17.80

4.07

1.57

BARI sarisha-15

92

128.3

87.83

41.97

19.90

3.10

1.06

LSD(.05)

-

20.89

6.26

9.65

3.67

6.24

0.13

CV(%)

-

10.11

3.69

10.96

8.69

3.25

6.17

Source; Aziz et al., 2008b

31

Yield and yield attributing characters of maize at Banerpota and Kuakata 2007-08 Variety/line

Grain/cob (no.)

1000 grain wt. (g)

Grain yield (t/ha)

Banerpota

Kuakata

Banerpota

Kuakata

Banerpota

Kuakata

BARI hybrid maize 2

451.66

585

296.66

27.2

6.67

8.12

BARI hybrid maize 3

484.33

612

255.00

28.6

6.89

9.08

BARI hybrid maize 5

491.66

583

215.00

27.3

4.61

8.26

Pacific 11

425.66

602

276.66

27.6

7.91

7.69

Pacific 60

491.33

579

270.00b

27.0

6.63

7.62

Pacific 983

492.00

578

250.00

26.9

5.64

7.59

Pacific 984

489.33

580

253.33

27.0

6.77

7.64

LSD(.05)

45.90

NS

17.36

NS

0.82

0.56

CV(%)

5.61

6.32

3.93

3.12

7.60

9.68

Source; Aziz et al., 2008c

32

Hybrid maize in coastal area after Sidr

33

Source; Aziz et al., 2008c

Performance of mungbean varieties at different date of sowing in the saline area of Kuakata, Potuakhali in 2006-07 Sowing date

Plant population (m-2)

Plant height (cm)

11 December

38.33 a

31.22 a

16.44 a

10.00 a

1161 a

21 December

36.89 a

26.44 b

20.1 a

9.67 a

1106 a

31 December

15.33 b

20.70 c

10.67 b

7.67 b

432 b

12.13

8.09

15.21

9.24

11.13

CV (%)

pods/plant Seeds/pod

Yield (kg/ha)

Source: Aziz et. al., 2007

34

Yield and yield attributes of cowpea for dates of sowing as affected by salinity stress Date of sowing

Plant height (cm)

Pod/ plant

Seed/ pod

1000seed weight (g)

Grain yield (kg/ha)

1 January

53.37

5.59

14.30

89.00

1037

15 January

53.19

5.91

13.83

92.33

1177

1 February

50.80

5.60

12.91

91.00

983

15 February

50.14

4.93

10.53

80.00

833

1 March

49.05

-

-

-

-

LSD (.05%)

1.81

0.22

2.52

2.83

235

CV(%)

1.75

2.02

9.77

1.64

11.42

Source: Aziz et al., 2006 35

Salinity management

Salt

Without mulching

With mulching (Melon)

Mulching bitter gourd

36

Salinity management

Relay mustard

Visitor in tomato fields in Noakhali

Tomato in raised bed with mulch

37

Okra in raised bed with mulch

Salinity management

Water harvest technology

38

Coping Strategies • Identification of heat/waterlogg/salinity/drought tolerant genotypes of different crops • Introduction of saline tolerant varieties of mungbean, soybean, mustard, barley and maize in the coastal area • Study the heat/waterlogg/salinity/drought tolerance mechanisms of crops and development of tolerant varieties • Cultivation of vegetables and fruits on homestead plots in the coastal area • Planting saline tolerant of fruit and timber trees for long term income generation • Establishment of community nurseries and distribution of indigenous varieties of tree samplings • Switch location (regional or within farm) to new climates or soils • Adaptation to change growing season or to shift timing of heat stress • Plant deeper in drier conditions; thin crop in dry years to lower plant density and reduce competition for moisture

39

Coping strategies in problem areas to address climate change

40

Hilly Areas

Hybrid maize

Jhum cultivation

41

Mungbean

Mustard

Charlands

42

Haor Area

43

Conclusion

• The development and introduction of environmental stress tolerant varieties/technologies and corresponding dissemination measures are important and need to be facilitated by national research through development of Environmental Stress Research Centre. • New crops and agricultural practices has to build up and shared on the farm level. • Conservation of the environment and sustainable development strategies will definitely protect the earth and its environment and will particularly save countries like Bangladesh from the catastrophe which can be induced by global warming. 44

Bangladesh Agricultural Research Institute

Thank You All 45