sustainable agriculture under climate change in the aral sea basin. maryse bourgault
DESCRIPTION
Presentation from the WCCA 2011 event held in Brisbane, Australia.TRANSCRIPT
Sustainable agriculture under climate change in the
Aral Sea Basin
Maryse Bourgault1*, C.A. Madramootoo1, H.A. Webber1, G. Stulina2, M. Horst2, D.L. Smith1
1. Faculty of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences, McGill University
* Current address: CSIRO, Plant Industry, Climate Adaptation Flagship, St. Lucia, Australia
2. Central Asia Scientific Research Institute of Irrigation (SANIIRI)
Outline• The Aral Sea ecological disaster and
humanitarian crisis• Socio-politico-economic context of
agriculture in Uzbekistan• Possible solutions:
– Institutions for water management and other social changes (not covered here)
– Surface irrigation technologies– Crop rotations, choices and diversification
of agricultural production
ARAL SEA DISAPPEARANCE
2008NASA
1964
1997
1987
Humanitarian crisis
• Water and food contamination from water pollution and dust storms
• Incidence of diseases increased in terms of folds rather than percentages
• Lack of modern facilities• Depression and mental
health issues
CLIMATE CHANGE
Climate Change• Expected temperature increases in the basin: likely
to lead to heat stress• Conflicting evidence for precipitation changes
Climate Change• Expected temperature increases in the basin: likely
to lead to heat stress• Conflicting evidence for precipitation changes• Melting of glaciers: earlier and greater runoff in the
spring• Very likely increases in the frequency of heavy
precipitation events: flash floods and landslides
Savoskul et al. 2003
SOCIO-POLITICO-ECONOMIC CONTEXT OF AGRICULTURE
Uzbek agriculture
• Low governmental investment in agriculture
• State farms and agricultural assets
• Quotas for cotton and wheat
• Large uneducated rural population
POSSIBLE SOLUTIONS:SURFACE IRRIGATION TECHNOLOGIES
Regulated Deficit Irrigation•When to irrigate? Depletion factor
Field Capacity
Recommended Moderate Stress
Large Stress
Wilting Point
0% 100%threshold
Slide by Heidi Webber
Alternate Furrow Irrigation
Alternate Furrow Irrigation versus Conventional Every Furrow Irrigation
2003 2004
Parameter of interest Alternate furrow
Every furrow
P value Alternate furrow
Every Furrow
P value
Yield (kg ha-1) 656 692 0.3113 832 826 0.8276
Number of seeds per pod
6.9 7.1 0.1023 6.6 6.8 0.0441
100 seed weight (g) 24.3 24.1 0.5972 19.1 20.0 0.0367
Pods per plant 25.2 28.3 0.1379 9.7 10.2 0.2198
Harvest index (%) 0.302 0.346 0.1339 0.306 0.284 0.2486
Stem Water Potential (bars)
Before irrigation events
-10.2 -10.0 0.5025 -8.1 -8.0 0.0554
After irrigation events
-8.9 -8.2 0.0027 -7.7 -7.5 0.0346
Stomatal conductance (mmol m-2 sec-1)
Before irrigation events
221.0 233.5 0.1409 357.5 330.3 0.0947
After irrigation events
316.9 364.4 <0.0001 449.0 461.7 0.1410
Surge-flow Irrigation
POSSIBLE SOLUTIONS: CROP CHOICES
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec
Inoculated
Control
Conclusions
• Physical environment is already under stress and vulnerable
• The socio-economic context of agriculture in the region is specific and has implications for the introduction of new technologies
• In the short term, introduction of legumes in crop rotations
• Crop diversification to decrease vulnerability to lower irrigation water availability
AcknowledgmentsProf. Don SmithProf. Philippe SeguinProf. Chandra A. Madramootoo
Dr. Heidi WebberCatherine SenecalNicholas StampfliRobert Baker
Misha HorstGalina StulinaDr. Victor Dukhovnyall the field staff in Uzbekistan
Brace Center for Water Resources ManagementFonds Quebecois de Recherche en Nature et Technologies