Listen to this PodcastMore 60-Second Earth
Climate change may already be hitting you—in the stomach. A new analysis reveals that higher average temperatures in Montana over the last six decades equal less wheat.
Plant scientist Luther Talbert of Montana State University and his colleagues looked at weather records for the Mountain State from 1950 to 2007. The month of March has had the most warming overall, increasing by nearly 0.1 degree Celsius per year on average. As a result, farmers now plant wheat 10 days earlier.
In addition, higher temperatures in July linked up to less wheat to harvest and lighter grains.
In 2007, the U.S. grew 12.8 million metric tons of hard red spring wheat, which is primarily used to make bread. Yields of this staple grain have increased exponentially since the 1950s because better farming practices and new wheat breeds have more than made up for those hot Julys.
Such innovations will have to continue since the future is likely to be even hotter, according to the scientists. Breeding wheat to deal with high heat is compulsory if we want our daily bread.
—David Biello
See what we're tweeting about
21 Comments
Add CommentLet's see, wheat yields have gone up exponentially and it's gotten 0.6 C warmer. Looks like the biggest impact is on obesity in America.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWheat, and other plants, will not necessarily need to be "re-engineered" to deal with heat. Just plant them farther to the North.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisFarther north is Canada. Good for the Canadians, maybe a little hard on the US farmers. Also, the largest amount of really good soil is in the US. The soil gets thinner and less fertile farther north, so there is a net loss of production,.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisFarther north is Canada. Good for the Canadians, maybe a little hard on the US farmers. Also, the largest amount of really good soil is in the US. The soil gets thinner and less fertile farther north, so there is a net loss of production,.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisW heat grows just fine in Kansas! So why would a slight warming trend hurt the wheat in Montana? Looking back over the centurys, warmer temps have always increased world food production and cooler temps such as during the mini-ice age have led to famine.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisW heat grows just fine in Kansas! So why would a slight warming trend hurt the wheat in Montana? Looking back over the centurys, warmer temps have always increased world food production and cooler temps such as during the mini-ice age have led to famine.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisGosh, it's interesting to note that although Montana is cooler than Kansas and Kansas produces so much red wheat, that somehow magic statistics are affecting the wheat growth there
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisget a rope
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWhen Ug99 gets here, not if, then we'll see which is the more detrimental to production. http://www.ars.usda.gov/Main/docs.htm?docid=14649
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisOne sentence says there is less wheat to harvest and the next says that yield has gone up exponentially.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIs there less wheat to harvest or have the yields gone up exponentially?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI would
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI would really like to see the raw data for wheat production and temperature in Montana(used in the study). If a farmer switched crops to a more profitable crop does that ding the results? What about pests and fungus' which effects crops -- often these elements can gain a foothold faster than the development of pesticides / fungicides can keep up.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe point is farmers are having to change because of CG. As it said hard winter wheat is used for bread. Red wheat is not worth as much as it's not as good food. Many crops need the colder weather. Crops, birds, etc have moved 200-300 miles north in the last 30 yrs. Also the south is getting drier hurting yields.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAnd US glaciers are almost gone which will lead to farther crop losses as summer river flows slow or stop for the west, midwest. Then see if the GW deniers are still being stupid.
It's like the yellow corn used for ethanol isn't human food but for animals thus little impact as ethanol mash is a higher quality feed than raw corn is. White corn is what humans eat.
David B can you on your coming PBS energy program look into how much more cost effective home/building RE is because no land, transmission or utility markup, profits and how much PV, wind generators have dropped in price and still dropping?
Modern wheat has high starch yields, but low protein. So we have to eat meat to get the protein. To get the meat we have to feed cattle cereals and soja so they get the protein. Modern wheat also requires much fertilizer compared to barley or more traditional cereals.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisHere's an interesting twist on global warming:
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this...[o]ne of the reasons paleontologists today believe one of the reasons dinosaurs grew so large, was that they werent cold-blooded like todays lizards; they were lukewarm-blooded....But another reason for their size may have been the sweltering oxygen-rich environment that came to dominate the dinosaur era; an environment triggered by volcanism....It was global warming gone wild; CO2 levels increased over 500 percent and temperatures soared. In the greenhouse conditions this created, huge tropical forests spread over many of the continents....Many scientists believe that evolving for millions of years, in this warm, oxygen-rich world, allowed the lukewarm-blooded dinosaurs to reach their enormous sizes. Huge dinosaurs may have been a biological response to a volcanically over-active planet....65 million years ago. The planet was lush. Vegetation was thick on the surface. Living things were prospering like never before."
[2007. How the Earth was Made, DVD. London: Pioneer Productions for the History Channel, 55 min., ff., 1 hr., 3 min.]
The study, "Climatic change and agronomic performance of hard red spring wheat from 1950 to 2007" appears in the peer-reviewed journal Crop Science. Access to the abstract is free, here: www.crops.org/publications/crop-science
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIncreased CO2 increases crop yield so I expect more, not less wheat.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI think you are misreading the data "...1950 to 2007. The month of March has had the most warming overall, increasing by nearly 0.1 degrees Celsius per year on average". This would indicate a 5.7 deg C increase. That hasn't happened.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe temps should be in deg F rather than deg C Funny there was NO mention of 1910, when the average March temp was 46 deg F
Natural climate change in conjunction with the deliberate human engineeringof weather...including such things as felling trees to create oxygen/ CO2 imbalnce...plus ingredients in what are called chemtrails...& lets not forget the illegal ingredient (whos name escapes me right now) that has & is periodically added to fuels, can in itself create drought conditions, It is also detrimental to plants & human health...but you see its not just drought it is the changing of the PH of soil conditions...plus The deliberate tinkering with food seeds..plus genetic engineering. Nothing is separate, each of these plus more create the whole.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIs climate change man created? Ofcourse it is. It is deliberate & evil. Usually when we are asked is climate change man created it is to confuse the issue & have the non thinkers believe it is the citizens who are responsible (Oh lets not forget the Cows...Do Sheep not break wind???) Most of the garbage we are fed is just that GARBAGE. Ive been watching this grow since I read about HAARP in 1969.
There are many variables. Farming practices have changed dramatically, especially with respect to low or minimum till farming -- this has made a significant impact on the ability to plant earlier in the spring. Once again, here is an article that calls into question the validity of the AGW pundits -- and I am more sceptical than ever....
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this