Search for: All records

Precision Agriculture (PA) manages field heterogeneities and enables informed site-specific management. While PA helps improve farming efficiency and profitability, challenges prior to and following PA adoption can prevent many farmers from widely using it. This paper aims to understand producers’ challenge perceptions using 1119 survey responses from U.S. Midwest farmers. The majority (59%) of respondents have adopted at least one PA technology, while the minority (14%) had not adopted any PA technologies. Cost (equipment and service fee), brand compatibility, and data privacy concerns topped other concerns from the average producer’s point of view. Among all producers, 60% regarded PA equipment and service fee as too high, followed by 50% who viewed brand compatibility and data privacy as their major concerns. Producers at more advanced adoption stage indicated reduced concerns in most categories. Yet, there were similar concerns towards data privacy issue regardless of the adoption status. Furthermore, brand compatibility issue is more of a concern for adopters than for non-adopters. Estimation results from partial proportional odds (PPO) models show that factors that frequently affect producers’ perceived challenges include adoption status, cropland acres, age, education, information sources, farming goals, soil characteristics, and region variables. Findings from this study can aid PA stakeholders in identifying target groups, tailoring future development, research, and outreach efforts, and ultimately promoting efficient PA usage on a broader scale. 

Precision Agriculture (PA) technologies are well known to be useful in addressing field heterogeneities and enabling informed site-specific management decisions. While profitability is the foremost factor considered by farmers when making PA adoption decisions, information in this regard is lacking from the farmers' perspective. This paper analyzed 1119 farmer responses from a 2021 survey conducted in four states along the western margins of the U.S. Midwest. Our findings show that while most (around 60%) non-adopters indicate that they are unaware of PA profit change, adopters are likely to rate a major profit increase. About two thirds of adopters rated at least a 5% increase in profitability towards variable rate (VR) fertilizer application (72%), VR seed application (68%), and automatic section control (66%). We modeled farmers' profit change subsequent to PA adoptions. Our regression results demonstrate that the profits from PA usage increase over time and that use of conservation practices likely influences PA profitability in a positive way. As soil quality and weather factors also affect profit ratings, it would be beneficial to compare and demonstrate profitability potential of various PA technologies on a regional basis and tailor the promotion efforts to farmers most likely to benefit from them. 

The changing climate and the projected increase in the variability and frequency of extreme events make accurate predictions of crop yield critically important for addressing emerging challenges to food security. Accurate and timely crop yield predictions offer invaluable insights to agronomists, producers, and decision-makers. Even without considering climate change, several factors including the environment, management, genetics, and their complex interactions make such predictions formidably challenging. This study introduced a statistical-based multiple linear regression (MLR) model for the forecasting of rainfed maize yields in Kansas. The model’s performance is assessed by comparing its predictions with those generated using the Decision Support System for Agrotechnology Transfer (DSSAT), a process-based model. This evaluated the impact of synthetic climate change scenarios of 1 and 2 °C temperature rises on maize yield predictions. For analysis, 40 years of historic weather, soil, and crop management data were collected and converted to model-compatible formats to simulate and compare maize yield using both models. The MLR model’s predicted yields (r = 0.93) had a stronger association with observed yields than the DSSAT’s simulated yields (r = 0.70). A climate change impact analysis showed that the DSSAT predicted an 8.7% reduction in rainfed maize yield for a 1 °C temperature rise and an 18.3% reduction for a 2 °C rise. The MLR model predicted a nearly 6% reduction in both scenarios. Due to the extreme heat effect, the predicted impacts under uniform climate change scenarios were considerably more severe for the process-based model than for the statistical-based model. 

Data-driven technologies are employed in agriculture to optimize the use of limited resources. Crop evapotranspiration (ET) estimates the actual amount of water that crops require at different growth stages, thereby proving to be the essential information needed for precision irrigation. Crop ET is essential in areas like the US High Plains, where farmers rely on groundwater for irrigation. The sustainability of irrigated agriculture in the region is threatened by diminishing groundwater levels, and the increasing frequency of extreme events caused by climate change further exacerbates the situation. These conditions can significantly affect crop ET rates, leading to water stress, which adversely affects crop yields. In this study, we analyze historical climate data using a machine learning model to determine which of the climate extreme indices most influences crop ET. Crop ET is estimated using reference ET derived from the FAO Penman–Monteith equation, which is multiplied with the crop coefficient data estimated from the remotely sensed normalized difference vegetation index (NDVI). We found that the climate extreme indices of consecutive dry days and the mean weekly maximum temperatures most influenced crop ET. It was found that temperature-derived indices influenced crop ET more than precipitation-derived indices. Under the future climate scenarios, we predict that crop ET will increase by 0.4% and 1.7% in the near term, by 3.1% and 5.9% in the middle term, and by 3.8% and 9.6% at the end of the century under low greenhouse gas emission and high greenhouse gas emission scenarios, respectively. These predicted changes in seasonal crop ET can help agricultural producers to make well-informed decisions to optimize groundwater resources. 

By influencing soil organic carbon (SOC), cover crops play a key role in shaping soil health and hence the system's long‐term sustainability. However, the magnitude by which cover crops impacts SOC depends on multiple factors, including soil type, climate, crop rotation, tillage type, cover crop growth, and years under management. To elucidate how these multiple factors influence the relative impact of cover crops on SOC, we conducted a meta‐analysis on the impacts of cover crops within rotations that included corn (Zea maysL.) on SOC accumulation. Information on climatic conditions, soil characteristics, management, and cover crop performance was extracted, resulting in 198 paired comparisons from 61 peer‐reviewed studies. Over the course of each study, cover crops on average increased SOC by 7.3% (95% CI, 4.9%–9.6%). Furthermore, the impact of cover crop–induced increases in percent change SOC was evaluated across soil textures, cover crop types, crop rotations, biomass amounts, cover crop durations, tillage practices, and climatic zones. Our results suggest that current cover crop–based corn production systems are sequestering 5.5 million Mg of SOC per year in the United States and have the potential to sequester 175 million Mg SOC per year globally. These findings can be used to improve carbon footprint calculations and develop science‐based policy recommendations. Taken altogether, cover cropping is a promising strategy to sequester atmospheric C and hence make corn production systems more resilient to changing climates. 

As the climate changes, a growing demand exists to identify and manage spatial variation in crop yield to ensure global food security. This study assesses spatial soil variability and its impact on maize yield under a future climate in eastern Kansas’ top ten maize-producing counties. A cropping system model, CERES-Maize of Decision Support System for Agrotechnology Transfer (DSSAT) was calibrated using observed maize yield. To account for the spatial variability of soils, the gSSURGO soil database was used. The model was run for a baseline and future climate change scenarios under two Representative Concentration Pathways (RCP4.5 and RCP8.5) to assess the impact of future climate change on rainfed maize yield. The simulation results showed that maize yield was impacted by spatial soil variability, and that using spatially distributed soils produces a better simulation of yield as compared to using the most dominant soil in a county. The projected increased temperature and lower precipitation patterns during the maize growing season resulted in a higher yield loss. Climate change scenarios projected 28% and 45% higher yield loss under RCP4.5 and RCP8.5 at the end of the century, respectively. The results indicate the uncertainties of growing maize in our study region under the changing climate, emphasizing the need for developing strategies to sustain maize production in the region. 

Extreme weather events have cost lives and financial losses across the United States. Moreover, they are expected to increase in frequency, and this will exacerbate their impact on vulnerable sectors such as agriculture. But how farmers could adapt to extreme weather events by adopting different conservation practices has received slight attention in the literature. This study examines how farmers' perceptions of drought and flooding influence their decisions to implement conservation practices in their conventional crop fields. Out of the 350 farmer responses we received, fewer than half indicated a likelihood to adopt no-tillage/reduced tillage (43%), cover crops (40%), crop diversification (37%), and integrated crop-livestock grazing (29%). Using this data and a multivariate probit modeling framework, we show that farmers’ decisions can be partly explained by their perception of drought but not by their perception of flooding. Specifically, the perceived number of drought years significantly increases the likelihood of adopting no-tillage/reduced tillage and diversified cropping in the future. However, the number of drought years is not significantly associated with the use of cover crops and integrated crop-livestock grazing. These results suggest that the effects of extreme weather events on adoption of conservation practices as adaptive measures vary across different practices. Therefore, adaptation policies that make use of conservation practices must be tailored to farmers’ needs and priorities to be effective. 

While conservation practices promote soil health and reduce the negative environmental effects from agricultural production, their adoption rates are generally low. To facilitate farmer adoption, we carried out a survey to identify potential challenges faced by farmers regarding conservation tillage and cover crop adoption in the western margin of the US Corn Belt. We found farmers' top two concerns regarding conservation tillage were delayed planting, caused by slow soil warming in spring, and increased dependence on herbicide and fungicides. Narrow planting window and lack of time/labor were perceived by farmers as the two primary challenges for cover crop adoption. Some sense of place factors, including the commonly included dimensions of attachment, identity and dependence, played a role in farmers' perceived challenges. For example, respondents more economically dependent on farming perceived greater challenges. We found that farmers' challenge perceptions regarding reduced yield and lack of time/labor significantly decreased as years of usage increased, implying that time and experience could dilute some challenges faced by farmers. Our findings indicate that social network use, technical guidance and economic subsidies are likely to address the concerns of farmers and facilitate their adoption of conservation practices.