Understanding the historical probability of drought

While there is wailing and gnashing of teeth over the current midwest drought,

drmon[1]

We have this interesting piece from the American Society of Agronomy :

Droughts can severely limit crop growth, causing yearly losses of around $8 billion in the United States. But it may be possible to minimize those losses if farmers can synchronize the growth of crops with periods of time when drought is less likely to occur. Researchers from Oklahoma State University are working to create a reliable “calendar” of seasonal drought patterns that could help farmers optimize crop production by avoiding days prone to drought.

Historical probabilities of drought, which can point to days on which crop water stress is likely, are often calculated using atmospheric data such as rainfall and temperatures. However, those measurements do not consider the soil properties of individual fields or sites. 

“Atmospheric variables do not take into account soil moisture,” explains Tyson Ochsner, lead author of the study. “And soil moisture can provide an important buffer against short-term precipitation deficits.”

In an attempt to more accurately assess drought probabilities, Ochsner and co-authors, Guilherme Torres and Romulo Lollato, used 15 years of soil moisture measurements from eight locations across Oklahoma to calculate soil water deficits and determine the days on which dry conditions would be likely. Results of the study, which began as a student-led class research project, were published online Jan. 29 in Agronomy Journal. The researchers found that soil water deficits more successfully identified periods during which plants were likely to be water stressed than did traditional atmospheric measurements when used as proposed by previous research.

Soil water deficit is defined in the study as the difference between the capacity of the soil to hold water and the actual water content calculated from long-term soil moisture measurements. Researchers then compared that soil water deficit to a threshold at which plants would experience water stress and, therefore, drought conditions. The threshold was determined for each study site since available water, a factor used to calculate threshold, is affected by specific soil characteristics.

“The soil water contents differ across sites and depths depending on the sand, silt, and clay contents,” says Ochsner. “Readily available water is a site- and depth-specific parameter.”

Upon calculating soil water deficits and stress thresholds for the study sites, the research team compared their assessment of drought probability to assessments made using atmospheric data. They found that a previously developed method using atmospheric data often underestimated drought conditions, while soil water deficits measurements more accurately and consistently assessed drought probabilities. Therefore, the researchers suggest that soil water data be used whenever it is available to create a picture of the days on which drought conditions are likely.

If soil measurements are not available, however, the researchers recommend that the calculations used for atmospheric assessments be reconfigured to be more accurate. The authors made two such changes in their study. First, they decreased the threshold at which plants were deemed stressed, thus allowing a smaller deficit to be considered a drought condition. They also increased the number of days over which atmospheric deficits were summed. Those two changes provided estimates that better agreed with soil water deficit probabilities.

Further research is needed, says Ochsner, to optimize atmospheric calculations and provide accurate estimations for those without soil water data. “We are in a time of rapid increase in the availability of soil moisture data, but many users will still have to rely on the atmospheric water deficit method for locations where soil moisture data are insufficient.”

Regardless of the method used, Ochsner and his team hope that their research will help farmers better plan the cultivation of their crops and avoid costly losses to drought conditions.

###

The full article is available for no charge for 30 days following the date of this summary. View the abstract at https://dl.sciencesocieties.org/publications/aj/abstracts/0/0/agronj2012.0295.

A peer-reviewed international journal of agriculture and natural resource sciences, Agronomy Journal is published six times a year by the American Society of Agronomy, with articles relating to original research in soil science, crop science, agroclimatology and agronomic modeling, production agriculture, and software. For more information visit: www.agronomy.org/publications/aj

The American Society of Agronomy (ASA) www.agronomy.org, is a scientific society helping its 8,000+ members advance the disciplines and practices of agronomy by supporting professional growth and science policy initiatives, and by providing quality, research-based publications and a variety of member services.

The climate data they don't want you to find — free, to your inbox.
Join readers who get 5–8 new articles daily — no algorithms, no shadow bans.
0 0 votes
Article Rating
39 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
James at 48
January 30, 2013 8:44 pm

I hate Negative Phase PDO.

January 30, 2013 9:07 pm

My Dad lived through the Dust Bowl, though in north Iowa. And it was as dry this summer as he has ever seen. This summer was one of the hottest in this part of Minnesota yet recorded. So while it is hopefully a cycle, it is very severe, and I watch for ENSO to switch over, anxiously.

Steve Garcia
January 30, 2013 9:32 pm

Anthony – not a correct headline or label. According tot the map, the drought is in the Great Plains, not the Midwest.
And Caleb is correct – it WAS called the Great American Desert. Gee, d’ya think that it might be dry sometimes in The Great American Desert?
Steve Garcia

Rhys Jaggar
January 30, 2013 11:33 pm

It’s well known that you can mitigate the effects of drought through application of biological compost where crops grow. Well known.
Perhaps if a new billion ton industry mixing cow shit, horse shit and organic waste emerged, the US farmers could mitigate potential drought through environmentally friendly means??

Crispin in Waterloo
January 31, 2013 12:03 am

Didn’t Theodor L predict a major drought in the US in 2018 and again for 2025? If we are repeating a 60 year cycle then it should be about like the ’50s again, not so? Let’s keep an eye on this as we explore other issues.

January 31, 2013 2:51 am

Might be a good study IF they can keep away from climate alarmism and stick to the facts. I am sure that the US rainfall patterns are cyclic and follow the ENSO/PDO

Editor
January 31, 2013 3:00 am

The real scientists at NOAA tell us that there is less rain over most of the US during the warm phase of the AMO, that exists now. (And also more rain in NW Europe).
http://www.aoml.noaa.gov/phod/faq/faq_fig1.php

Latitude
January 31, 2013 4:30 am

D.J. Hawkins says:
January 30, 2013 at 6:20 pm
People on this site need to stop this knee-jerk condemnation of every study that even hints of a model and LOOK AT THE WORK.
==================
I did……….and it’s a bunch of hooey

Peter in MD
January 31, 2013 4:48 am

John Marshall January 31, 2013 at 2:51am:
If they leave out the alarmism, they don’t get the money!
So we’ll call it “gratuitous alarmism”.

Mark C
January 31, 2013 8:17 am

“Researchers from Oklahoma State University are working to create a reliable ‘calendar’ of seasonal drought patterns that could help farmers optimize crop production by avoiding days prone to drought.”
I hope the research is better (and more important) than the press release makes it sound. “Avoiding days prone to drought”? Drought is not a daily or weekly phenomenon. How does a farmer avoid drought “days”? He needs to know if it’s going to be a monthly (irrigation) to seasonal (crop selection) event, and he needs it as a forecast if he’s going to make decisions.
For example, in the Midwest and Plains crop selection will have to be made very soon. Knowing there is a soil moisture deficit now may make a farmer assume he should plant drought-tolerant crops. However, if he does so, and he has near to above-normal rainfall this year, he has lost an opportunity to plant regular hybrids that have a higher yield potential if there is no water stress.
I agree that more detailed measurements of soil moisture, combined with soil characterization, should yield better estimates of the water deficit and resulting crop stress. The trouble is planning on a monthly or seasonal basis how to react to water deficits. This also requires good monthly to seasonal forecasts of precipitation amounts in addition to a fuller assessment of current conditions. I don’t think CPC offers actionable forecast capability here.

mib8
January 31, 2013 11:00 am

Looks like reasonable work, to me. They look at rain-fall, relative humidity of the air, soil cubic cm of water per cubic cm of soil.
In the 1930s, it was drought when the farmers noticed it hadn’t rained for over a week, saw low levels in the cricks and ponds, saw the leaves turning brown, then felt how the soil crumbled in their hands. It boils down to much the same, except now we’ve got numbers we can run statistics on.

Susan S.
January 31, 2013 12:00 pm

I do like the fact that they are exploring the soil moisture content in this study, and do think they should also take into consideration what farmers do to help the soil retain moisture for future crops. Many farmers here in the prairies do things like grow certain crops to help soil retain moisture.
Like in Southern Saskatchewan, many grow flax now to increase that water retention of the soil itself. I did find this, but only an abstract, sounds like it is interesting in way of using crop rotations to help soil retain moisture.
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/03650340109366165
I found this of interest too, as it gives a person a greater understanding of soi content.
http://www.prairiesoilsandcrops.ca/articles/Issue-3_Article_8_scrn.pdf
This paper mentions the Drought Palmer Severity Index, and how it should not be used for Western Canada, as it is based from classifications of conditions in central Iowa, and western Kansas, mentioned on page 11 of this paper itself. Still great reading material even though it mentions the dreaded words “climate change”.
http://www.parc.ca/mcri/pdfs/papers/iacc040.pdf
There is tons of great reading material. I found this of interest also as it talks about the equations used to map the soil water curve, in this paper here. The data they used was experimental data and not models.
http://www.soilvision.com/downloads/docs/pdf/research/cangeoequa.pdf

Gerry, England
January 31, 2013 12:20 pm

There is nothing wrong with using a model as long as the science behind it is sound. In engineering we use models to predict stresses on structures without having to build a prototype. Often the model may be created using data from testing a scale model of the structure, but behind it all are sound, proven engineering laws. Nobody has created a working atmospheric model as nobody fully understands have everything interacts. Sadly, billions of many currencies are being wasted trying to prove CO2 AGW link that looks less and less likely with every cooling year.
At least this is trying to produce useful data that will be important now that we have entered a new little ice age. Food production is going to be under pressure as growing ranges shrink and weather gets more variable.

Rhys Jaggar
January 31, 2013 7:28 pm

Perhaps the greatest question to be addressed is the ability of the soil to absorb and retain water in the root growing zone under various conditions and scenarios, since the manifestations of drought are greatest when the soil’s ability to retain moisture is impaired.
\\