- Create account
- View source
- View history
- Community portal
- Recent changes
- Random page
- Admin noticeboard
- Update History
- What links here
- Related changes
- Special pages
- Printable version
- Permanent link
- Page information
- Page values
Overview Space Rig Assignments
Assignments are short quests, consisting of a series of missions . You can have one active assignment at a time, and choose it at the Assignment Board in the Space Rig .
There are currently 31 assignments available: Conquering Hoxxes IV , Four Promotion Assignments , Seven Prestige , Sixteen Weapon License Assignments , One assignment for unlocking Hazard 5 difficulty, Two Seasonal Assignments , One assignment for unlocking the Mineral Trade Terminal , One assignment for unlocking Industrial Sabotage , Heavy Duty and Weekly Assignments . Additionally the Weekly Core Hunt reward Infused Matrix Core after completing Breach The Core .
- 1.1 Objective: Conquer Hoxxes IV
- 1.2 Company Benefits: Mineral Trading Network
- 1.3 Objective: Breach The Core
- 1.4 New Hazard Level: Lethal
- 1.5 Spec Ops: Industrial Sabotage
- 1.6 Warning: Rival Escalation
- 1.7.1 Weekly Priority Assignment
- 1.7.2 Weekly Core Hunt
- 1.8.1 Driller
- 1.8.2 Engineer
- 1.8.3 Gunner
- 1.8.4 Scout
- 1.9.1 Driller
- 1.9.2 Engineer
- 1.9.3 Gunner
- 1.9.4 Scout
- 1.10.1 Heavy Duty
- 1.10.2 Pickaxe Hunts
- 1.10.3 Armor Hunts
- 1.11.1 Plaguefall
- 1.11.2 Critical Corruption
- 1.12.1 Lunar Convergence Cleanup
- 1.12.2 Lunar Festival 2023
- 1.12.3 Anniversary Bonus
- 1.12.4 The Great Egg Hunt
- 1.12.5 Last Year's Spring Fashion
- 1.12.6 Hoxxes Summer Cruise
- 1.12.7 Last Year's Summer Fashion
- 1.12.8 Oktoberfest Celebration
- 1.12.9 Hunt for Lederhosen
- 1.12.10 Halloween Party Special
- 1.12.11 The Horrors of Hoxxes
- 1.12.12 Yearly Performance Bonus
- 1.12.13 The Yuletide Elf Hunt
Objective: Conquer Hoxxes IV
This is a 10-mission long assignment that has to be played by every new player to unlock all available mission types and Planetary Regions . These missions are free of Mutators .
Company Benefits: Mineral Trading Network
This is a short, 3 mission long assignment that will unlock the Mineral Trade Terminal It becomes available after Conquering Hoxxes IV assignment has been completed.
Objective: Breach The Core
Upon obtaining the first promotion , the end campaign assignment mission is unlocked. Completing this 9 mission long assignment will reward the player with 6 Infused Matrix Cores, as well as unlocks the Weekly Core Hunt assignment.
New Hazard Level: Lethal
This is a 3 mission-long assignment, upon completion the player is granted access to Hazard 5 - Lethal. The assignment's missions can have mutators and have to be completed at Hazard 4.
Spec Ops: Industrial Sabotage
A one mission long assignment that will grant the player access to the mission type Industrial Sabotage upon completion.
Warning: Rival Escalation
1 Rewards a Blank Matrix Core if all Weapon Overclocks are owned 2 Rewards a Mineral Canister if all Matrix Core Cosmetics are owned
Note that this assignment is unusual, as it can provide Blank Matrix Cores before a player has promoted their first miner and unlocked The Forge and Machine Events . Because Machine Events cannot be initiated pre-promotion, the only way to preemptively use these cores is to find a Machine Event while playing with another player who has already acquired the Tritilyte Key.
These two assignments are repeatable in order to reward players for continued play. Like Deep Dives , they reset at 11am UTC on Thursdays.
Weekly Priority Assignment
Weekly Core Hunt
Dwarves will unlock these assignments once reaching specific levels, these assignments grant them licenses to various equipment.
When one of your dwarves reaches Character Level 25, they become eligible for a promotion . In order to promote, you have to complete a 4-mission long assignment, and pay a large amount of Credits and Crafting Materials.
This assignment becomes available after Conquering Hoxxes IV assignment has been completed. It's focused on the big machinery Missions and will reward 50 of each crafting materials, credits and a special helmet.
Armor hunts, season events.
Assignment temporarily available during the Season 03: Plaguefall .
Assignment temporarily available during the Season 04: Critical Corruption .
Lunar convergence cleanup.
Assignment temporarily available during the Hoxxes Lunar Festival event in January.
Lunar Festival 2023
Assignment temporarily available during the Anniversary Bonus event in February.
The Great Egg Hunt
Assignment temporarily available during the Easter event in April.
Last Year's Spring Fashion
Hoxxes summer cruise.
Assignment temporarily available during the Space Beach Party event in Summer.
Last Year's Summer Fashion
Assignment temporarily available during the Oktoberfest event in September.
Hunt for Lederhosen
Halloween party special.
Assignment temporarily available during the Halloween Season event in October.
The Horrors of Hoxxes
Yearly performance bonus.
Assignment temporarily available during the Holiday Season event at the end of the year.
The Yuletide Elf Hunt
- Inpatient Coding Support
- Outpatient Coding Support
- Acute Coding Review
- Clinical Documentation Integrity
- Profee Coding
- Profee Review
- Ambulatory Coding
- Ambulatory Review
- Coding Courses
- Pediatric Hospitals
- Provider Groups
- Ambulatory Surgery
- Behavioral Health
- Critical Access
- Urgent Care
- Rehabilitation Centers
- Rural Health Clinics
- Total Outsource
- Single Path Coding
- Interim Auditing
- Rev Cycle Mgmt
- Denial Management
- Case Mix Index
- Nucleus Client Portal
- Open Positions
- Annual Code Updates
- Medical Coding Tips
- Medical Query Tips
- Company News
- COVID-19 Coding
- Client Login
FY2022 Proposed DRG Changes
Jun 14, 2021
It is that time of year! CMS released the IPPS proposed rule on 4/27/21 outlining the proposed changes to the Inpatient Prospective Payment System (IPPS) for FY2022, which begins October 1, 2021. Later this year, sometime in August, CMS will release the Final Rule. Currently CMS is reviewing responses to their proposed rule and will address them in the final rule. This Coding Tip will only give you a brief overview of what is coming. I won’t go into the Quality Measures/Programs proposed changes in this tip. In the fall we will have the final information and will have education sessions on all of the changes to IPPS, ICD-10-CM and ICD-10-PCS changes.
FY2022 IPPS Proposed Payment Changes
- Acute care hospitals that report quality data and that are meaningful users of EHRs will receive approximately a 2.8% increase in Medicare operating rates.
- Hospitals that do not submit quality data would lose 1/4 of the market basket update (of 2.8% as above) and hospitals that are not meaningful users of EHRs will be subject to a 3/4 or -0.75 reduction of the market basket for FY 2022.
- CMS proposes to repeal the requirement it had finalized last year that hospitals report their median payer-specific negotiated rates for inpatient services, by Medicare Severity-Diagnosis Related Group, for Medicare Advantage organizations
- CMS is projecting that with the 2.8% increase and other changes to IPPS policies it will boost total IPPS payments in FY2022 by roughly $3.4 billion.
- As a result of the ongoing COVID-19 public health emergency, CMS proposes to extend its “New COVID-19 Treatments Add-on Payments” through the end of the fiscal year in which the PHE ends. (This is done by increasing the normal DRG relative weight by 20% for cases that have U07.1 coded)
- Also, in light of the COVID-19 PHE, CMS proposes adjustments to its hospital quality measurement and value programs. Specifically, for FY 2022, CMS proposes to suppress (i.e., not use) most hospital value-based purchasing program measures. As a result, hospitals would receive neutral payment adjustments under the VBP for FY 2022. In addition, CMS proposes to exclude performance data from 2020 in calculating Hospital Acquired Condition Reduction Program performance for FYs 2022 and 2023. Lastly, for the FY 2023 Hospital Readmissions Reduction Program, CMS proposes to suppress the pneumonia readmissions measure, and to exclude COVID-19 diagnosed patients from the remaining five measures.
FY2022 Proposed MS-DRG Changes
- PRE-MDC: 16 new codes were added for “introduction of CAR T cell therapy.” These codes are in represented by XW0—7 for introduction of various CAR T cell therapies via peripheral or central vein. They were added to MS-DRG 018. In connection with our proposed assignment of the listed procedure codes to Pre-MDC MS-DRG 018, we are also proposing to revise the title for Pre-MDC MS-DRG 018 “Chimeric Antigen Receptor (CAR) T-cell Immunotherapy” to “Chimeric Antigen Receptor (CAR) T-cell and Other Immunotherapies.
- MDC-3: Proposed that three codes, 0W310ZZ, 0W313ZZ and 0W214ZZ, Control of bleeding of cranial cavity should be moved out of MS-DRGs 140, 141, and 142 (Major Head and Neck Procedures with MCC, with CC, and without CC/MCC, respectively) map to MS-DRGs 23, 24, 25, 26, and 27 (for example, “craniotomy” MS-DRGs) in MDC 01. CMS agreed with the above and proposed to move them there.
- MDC-3: CMS is proposing to reassign the three procedure codes describing excision of subcutaneous tissue of chest, back, or abdomen (0JB60ZZ, 0JB70ZZ, and 0JB80ZZ) from MS-DRGs 140, 141, and 142 (Major Head and Neck Procedures with MCC, with CC, and without CC/MCC, respectively) to MS–DRGs 143, 144, and 145 (Other Ear, Nose, Mouth And Throat O.R. Procedures with MCC, with CC, and without CC/MCC, respectively) in MDC 03 for FY 2022.
- MDC-4: Proposal to reassign Laser Interstitial Therapy (LITT) procedure codes from MS-DRGs 981, 982, and 983 (Extensive O.R. Procedures Unrelated to Principal Diagnosis with MCC, with CC, and without CC/MCC, respectively) to MS-DRGs 987, 988, and 989 (Non-extensive O.R. Procedures Unrelated to Principal Diagnosis with MCC, with CC, and without CC/MCC, respectively) for FY 2022. Of the LITT procedures currently assigned to MS–DRGs 163, 164, 165, 166, 167, and 168, we found 17 procedure codes in MS-DRGs 163, 164, and 165 describing laser interstitial thermal therapy (LITT) of body parts that do not describe areas within the respiratory system, which would not be clinically appropriate to maintain in the logic. Therefore, we are proposing to reassign these 17 procedure codes from their current MS-DRG assignments in MDC 04, and from the additional MDCs and MS-DRGs identified during our review that were found to be clinically inappropriate, to their clinically MDC and MS-DRGs as shown in Table 6P.2b in the proposed rule.
- MDC-4: CMS was asked to look at “Repair of esophagus” codes that were erroneously assigned to MS-DRGS 163-165 for Major Chest Procedures. As a result of our preliminary review of ALL codes in MS-DRGs 163, 164, 165, 166, 167, and 168 for Major Chest Procedures and Other Respiratory System Procedures for FY 2022 we are proposing the reassignment of 26 procedure codes (9 procedure codes describing repair of pulmonary or thoracic structures, and 17 procedure codes describing procedures performed on the sternum or ribs) from MS-DRGs 166, 167, and 168 to MS-DRGs 163, 164, and 165 in MDC 04. See Table 6P.2c in the proposed rule. Example is 02QP4ZZ, Repair Pulmonary Trunk, Percutaneous Endoscopic Approach. CMS plans to do data analyses of all codes in Tables 6P1e and 6P1f to see if these MS-DRGS are warranted and also analysis of the creation of the new procedure codes assigned to these MS-DRGs. MDC-5: Impella heart assist devices currently are assigned to MS-DRG 215 (Other Heart Assist System Implant). CMS received a request to reassign certain cases reporting procedure codes describing the insertion of a percutaneous short-term external heart assist device from MS-DRG 215 to MS-DRGs 216, 217, and 218 (Cardiac Valve and Other Major Cardiothoracic Procedures WITH Cardiac Catheterization with MCC, with CC, and without CC/MCC, respectively) and MS-DRGs 219, 220, 221 (Cardia Valve and Other Major Cardiothoracic Procedures WITHOUT Cardiac Catheterization with MCC, with CC, and without CC/MCC, respectively. Codes involved are 5A0221D for assistance with cardiac output Impeller pump and 02HA3RJ/02HA0RJ/02HA4RJ for insertion of short-term external heart assist system intraoperative, various approaches.
- MDC-5: A requester stated if I21.A1, Type 2 MI is coded with PDX in MDC 05, DRGs 280-282 (Acute Myocardial Infarction, Discharged Alive with MCC, with CC, and without CC/MCC, respectively) is assigned. A type 2 myocardial infarction is not a true acute myocardial infarction. CMS did not agree with changing MS-DRGs 280-282 but did propose modifications to the GROUPER logic to allow cases reporting diagnosis code I21.A1 (Myocardial infarction type 2) as a secondary diagnosis to group to MS-DRGs 222 and 223 (Cardiac Defibrillator Implant with Cardiac Catheterization with AMI, HF or Shock with and without MCC, respectively) when reported with a listed procedure code for clinical consistency with the other MS-DRGs describing acute myocardial infarction.
- MDC-5: CMS received requests to add ICD-10-CM diagnosis code B33.24 (Viral cardiomyopathy) to the list of principal diagnoses for MS-DRGs 314, 315, and 316 (Other Circulatory System Diagnoses with MCC, with CC, and without CC/MCC, respectively) in MDC 05. Other viral diagnoses such as B33.20, viral carditis, B33.21, viral endocarditis, B33.22, viral myocarditis and B33.23, viral pericarditis are assigned to MDC 5 whereas B33.24 had been assigned to MDC 18 (Infectious and Parasitic Diseases). CMS is in agreement with this change.
- 0SPC4JC (remove patellar surface) with 0SRV0JZ (Replace tibial surface with synthetic)
- 0SPT4HZ (remove femoral surface) with 0sRV0JZ (Replace tibial surface with synthetic)
- 0SPV4JZ (remove tibial surface) with 0SRV0JZ (Replace tibial surface with synthetic)
- T80.82XA Complication of immune effector cellular therapy, initial encounter
- T80.82XD Complication of immune effector cellular therapy, subsequent encounter
- T80.82XS Complication of immune effector cellular therapy, sequela
With the finalization of new diagnosis codes T80.82- -as above, diagnosis code T80.89XA would no longer be reported and these cases would instead report new diagnosis code T80.82XA, as of October 1, 2021. Therefore, we are proposing to revise the structure of MS-DRGs 814, 815, and 816 by removing the logic that includes a principal diagnosis of T80.89XA with a secondary diagnosis of any CRS code D89.8- from MS-DRGs 814, 815, and 816 effective FY 2022.
OR to NON-OR and NON-OR to OR MS-DRG Changes
- Previously three control of bleeding in cranial cavity codes were assigned into various MDCs and MS-DRGs. These procedures always involve drilling into skull. Therefore, we are proposing to add procedure codes 0W310ZZ, 0W313ZZ, and 0W314ZZ to MDC 01 in MS-DRGs 23, 24, 25, 26, and 27 (“craniotomy” MS-DRGs) for FY 2022.
- 0JB60ZZ, 0JB70ZZ and 0JB80ZZ for Excision of chest or back or abdomen subcutaneous tissue and fascia, open approach
- 23 LITT procedures (D0Y-KZZ, DBY-KZZ, DDY-KZZ, DFY-KZZ, DGY-KZZ, DMY-KZZ, DVY0KZZ) depending on body part were listed as extensive OR procedures. Five procedure codes describing repair of esophagus, 0DQ50ZZ, 0DQ53ZZ, 0DQ54ZZ, 0DQ57ZZ, 0DQ58ZZ
- 0T9D0ZZ, Drainage of urethra, open approach
CMS states these should be “non-extensive” procedures as they are not extensive. Reassigning the above procedure codes listed from MS-DRGs 981, 982, and 983 (Extensive O.R. Procedure Unrelated to Principal Diagnosis with MCC, with CC, without CC/MCC, respectively) to MS-DRGs 987, 988, and 989 (Non-Extensive Procedure Unrelated to Principal Diagnosis with MCC, with CC, without CC/MCC, respectively) when unrelated PDX for FY 2022.
- 22 procedure codes for drainage of various sites of subcutaneous tissue have been changed from “OR Procedures” to NON-OR Procedures . They should not have been OR procedures to begin with.
- Add XW0Q316, Introduction of Eladocagene exuparvovec into cranial cavity and brain, percutaneous, new technology group 6 as OR procedure and assign them to MSDRGs 628, 629, and 630; (Other Endocrine, Nutritional OR procedures) or MSDRGS 987-989 (Non extensive OR procedures with unrelated principal). This is because a burr hole is needed.
- For 0BBN0ZX (Excision of right pleura, open approach, diagnostic) and 0BBP0ZX (Excision of left pleura, open approach, diagnostic) CMS will be adding as an O.R. procedure assigned to MS-DRGs 166, 167, and 168 (Other Respiratory System O.R. procedures with MCC, CC, without CC/MCC, respectively). They typically require the use of an operating room.
- CMS is proposing to add code 02WY3DZ (great vessel) as an O.R. procedure assigned to MS-DRGs 270, 271, and 272 (Other Major Cardiovascular Procedures, with MCC, with CC, and without CC/MCC, respectively) in MDC 05 (Diseases and Disorders of the Circulatory System). We are also proposing to add codes 03WY3DZ, 04WY3DZ, 05WY3DZ, and 06WY3DZ as O.R. procedures assigned to MS-DRGs 252, 253, and 254 (Other Vascular Procedures with MCC, with CC, and without CC/MCC, respectively) in MDC 05 (Diseases and Disorders of the Circulatory System).
- CMS is proposing to add the two procedure codes describing percutaneous reposition of the sacroiliac joint with internal fixation procedures (0SS734Z and 0SS834Z as O.R. procedures, assigned to MS-DRGs 515, 516, and 517 (Other Musculoskeletal System and Connective Tissue O.R. Procedures with MCC, with CC, and without CC/MCC, respectively) in MDC 08 (Diseases and Disorders of the Musculoskeletal System and Connective Tissue) and to MS–DRGs 987, 988, and 989 (Non- Extensive O.R. Procedure Unrelated to Principal Diagnosis with MCC, with CC and without MCC/CC, respectively). CMS is also proposing to add the two procedure codes describing percutaneous reposition of the hip joint with internal fixation procedures (0SS934Z and 0SSB34Z) as O.R. procedures, assigned to MS-DRGs 480, 481, and 482 (Hip and Femur Procedures Except Major Joint with MCC, with CC, and without CC/MCC, respectively) in MDC 08 (Diseases and Disorders of the Musculoskeletal System and Connective Tissue) and to MS–DRGs 987, 988, and 989 (Non- Extensive O.R. Procedure Unrelated to Principal Diagnosis with MCC, with CC and without MCC/CC, respectively).
- Adding 8 procedure codes for insertion of or removal of spacer in/of shoulder joint, (0RH–8Z, 0RP—8Z to MS-DRGs 510, 511, and 512 (Shoulder, Elbow or Forearm Procedures, Except Major Joint Procedures with MCC, with CC, and without CC/MCC, respectively) in MDC 08 (Diseases and Disorders of the Musculoskeletal System and Connective Tissue) and to MS–DRGs 987, 988, and 989 (Non-Extensive O.R. Procedure Unrelated to Principal Diagnosis with MCC, with CC and without MCC/CC, respectively).
- CMS is proposing to add codes 0WC40ZZ, 0WC44ZZ, 0WC50ZZ, 0WC54ZZ for Extirpation of matter from upper or lower jaw, open or percutaneous endoscopic as O.R. procedures assigned to MS-DRGs 143, 144 and 145 (Other Ear, Nose, Mouth and Throat O.R. procedures, with MCC, with CC, and without CC/MCC, respectively) in MDC 03 (Diseases and Disorders of the Ear, Nose, Mouth and Throat).
- One requestor identified 22 ICD-10-PCS procedure codes that describe the open extirpation of matter from the subcutaneous tissue and fascia (0JC-0ZZ) that are currently not recognized as O.R. procedures. CMS is proposing to add the 22 ICD-10-PCS listed previously as O.R. procedures assigned to MS-DRGs 579, 580 and 581 (Other Skin, Subcutaneous Tissue and Breast Procedures, with MCC, with CC, and without CC/MCC, respectively) in MDC 09 (Diseases and Disorders of the Skin, Subcutaneous Tissue and Breast) and MS-DRGs 907, 908, and 909 (Other O.R. Procedures for Injuries with MCC, with CC, and without CC/MCC, respectively) in MDC 21 (Injuries, Poisonings and Toxic Effects of Drugs).
- CMS is proposing to maintain the current non-O.R. designation of ICD-10-PCS procedure codes 0TCB8ZZ and 0TCC8ZZ Extirpation of matter from bladder or balder neck endoscopic. We are also proposing to remove ICD-10-PCS procedure codes 0TC08ZZ, 0TC18ZZ, 0TC38ZZ, 0TC48ZZ, 0TC68ZZ, and 0TC78ZZ (Extirpation of matter from kidneys, kidney pelvis and ureters, as O.R. procedures. Under this proposal, these procedures would no longer impact MS-DRG assignment.
- CMS is proposing to remove procedure codes 0U9L0ZX and 0U9LXZX (Drainage of vestibular gland open or external) as O.R. procedures. Under this proposal, these procedure codes would no longer impact MS-DRG assignment.
We will be sending a follow up coding tip when the FY2022 IPPS Final Rule is published
References https://s3.amazonaws.com/public-inspection.federalregister.gov/2020-19637.pdf https://www.cms.gov/medicare/acute-inpatient-pps/fy-2021-ipps-final-rule-home-page#1735 Website for MS-DRG Manual Version 39 for FY2022: https://www.cms.gov/icd10m/version39-fullcode-cms/fullcode_cms/P0001.html https://www.cms.gov/Medicare/Medicare-Fee-for-Service-Payment/AcuteInpatientPPS/MS-DRG-Classifications-and-Software.html https://www.cms.gov/medicare/icd-10/2022-icd-10-pcs
Health Information Associates offers solutions for the following markets : short-term acute, general medicine/surgical, pediatric, academic/teaching, critical access, rehab, long-term acute, skilled nursing, surgery center, pain center, infusion center, wound center, cancer center, dialysis, home health, and imaging center.
The information contained in this post is valid at the time of posting. Viewers are encouraged to research subsequent official guidance in the areas associated with the topic as they can change rapidly.
Leave a Comment
What to Consider Before Your Next Medical Coding Audit
Sneak peek at 2022 icd-10-pcs procedure additions and changes, need to earn ceus.
Our coding education platform, HIAlearn.com, offers courses related to this topic and many more. Subscribe today and access more than 200 courses accepted by AHIMA for CEUs, with a selection also accepted by AAPC.
- Medical Coding Tips (267)
- Industry News (200)
- COVID-19 Coding (13)
- Query Tips (13)
- Company News (10)
- Holidays (6)
- Annual Code Updates (5)
Subscribe to our Newsletter
Recent blogs, excision vs. resection icd-10-..., procedures performed via burr ..., posterior spinal fusion with a..., atrial fibrillation, related blogs from medical coding tips, excision vs. resection icd-10-pcs.
The focus of this coding tip is on the excisi...
Procedures Performed Via Burr Hole
With the implementation of ICD-10-PCS came mo...
Posterior Spinal Fusion with Anterior Spinal Fusio...
During some of our recent coding reviews, we ...
The introduction of ICD-10-CM expanded the nu...
Weekly medical coding tips and coding education delivered directly to your inbox.
Deep Rock Galactic: How to Change Class
Here's how to change class in Deep Rock Galactic so that you can find the perfect class for your playstyle.
New players may find themselves lost on how to change class in Deep Rock Galactic . There are four classes to switch between, each one with its own unique abilities to make use of on assignments. Like any other games with classes, though, you’ll want to try them all out to find the best role for you.
Changing classes in Deep Rock Galactic is easier than you might think, and we’ll go over it as well as why you may not be able to change class in this guide.
How to Change Class in Deep Rock Galactic
If you’ve just started Deep Rock Galactic and are doing the tutorial assignment, you will not be able to change class until you either leave the tutorial or finish it. The tutorial must be done with the Gunner.
There are four total classes in Deep Rock Galactic :
You cannot change class while in an assignment ; you can only change class in the lobby.
Go to your (or any other player’s) quarters and look for the Character Selection terminal , which will be to the right if you’ve just spawned or to the left if you’re coming in from the main area of the lobby. Use the Character Selection terminal then make your selection, and you’ll be able to switch to any other dwarf you’d like!.
It’s worth noting that you can’t change class to one that overlaps another, so if you can’t select a dwarf it’s because someone else in your game is currently playing that class.
There is actually a way to get around DRG not allowing duplicate classes : When loading into another player’s game, you can press the “Q” or “E” keys on PC or the triggers on console to swap classes. This can overwrite the game not normally allowing duplicate classes, but only if you do not choose a class while in a solo lobby beforehand.
- Deep Rock Galactic : How to Promote a Dwarf
- Deep Rock Galactic : How to Unlock Weapons
That’s all you need to know about how to change class in Deep Rock Galactic . If you found this guide helpful, check out our other Deep Rock Galactic guides here on GameSkinny.
About the author
Ogryns are good lads. Simple as. Anyway, I'm basically a human tornado and I love jank. Also simple as.
More Stories by Ashley Shankle
- View history
Promotion Terminal in the Memorial Hall
Promotion Benefits [ ]
Promotion Granted screen
After paying a fee, promoting a class will grant the following bonuses for that specific class:
- +1 Honor Badge
- +1 Active Perk Slot (once per Class only)
- Permanent ability to activate Machine Events with the Tritilyte Key for all Classes
- New Assignments: Breach The Core and the Weekly Core Hunt
- Access to Deep Dives and The Forge
- +1 Blank Matrix Core , +1 Infused Core, +1 Matrix Core Cosmetics
Honor Badge [ ]
Promotion fee example
Available Honor Badges
The player is granted an Honor Badge upon their first promotion; it borders the character portrait with a bronze border and one white star. Every subsequent promotion will add another white star, for a maximum of three stars. After the fourth promotion, the border switches from bronze to silver, and the amount of white stars will reset back to 1. Upon reaching three more promotions, the border switches from silver to gold; then from gold to platinum; then from platinum to diamond; then finally from diamond to legendary; the highest border for the Honor Badge. Promotions after that will not change the border, however will still allow the player to continue increasing their Character Level .
The list of Honor Badges goes as follows:
Benefits From Multiple Promotions [ ]
- Promotions were known as Retirement in Update 18: Job Opportunities and changed in Update 19 . Instead of keeping all unlocked class items, Retirement reset all unlocked class items.
- Update 30: Going 1.0 added three more Honor Badges: Platinum, Diamond and Legendary.
- 1 Promotion
- 2 Equipment
- 3 Machine Events
Identify potential drg problems and audit targets.
- Short stays
- Three-day stays
- Error-prone DRG assignments
More Like This
News: juvenile ards patients have a nearly 28% readmission rates, report says, q&a: newborn mortality severity, news: cms releases 2024 pps final rule on end-stage renal disease, guest column | cdi and coding challenges related to heart failure.
- To save this word, you'll need to log in. Log In
Definition of DRG
called also diagnosis related group
1980, in the meaning defined above
Dictionary Entries Near DRG
Cite this entry.
“DRG.” Merriam-Webster.com Dictionary , Merriam-Webster, https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/DRG. Accessed 21 Nov. 2023.
Medical definition of drg.
(Entry 1 of 2)
Medical Definition of DRG (Entry 2 of 2)
Subscribe to America's largest dictionary and get thousands more definitions and advanced search—ad free!
Can you solve 4 words at once?
Word of the day.
See Definitions and Examples »
Get Word of the Day daily email!
Games & Quizzes
.DRG File Extension
- 1. AllyCAD Drawing File
- 2. I-Doser Audio Drug File
AllyCAD Drawing File
What is a drg file.
Three-dimensional drawing created by AllyCAD, a program used to create engineering and architectural designs; contains a 3D model, commonly of an assembly part or a structure; used to store designs in the planning process before manufacturing or construction.
DRG files can be exported to common 3D CAD formats. For example, users can conduct batch exports of DRG files to .DXF or .DWG files by selecting Settings → DXF/DWG Conversion Settings in AllyCAD.
The file startup.drg stores the default drawing when AllyCAD is opened and can be modified by the user. AllyCAD also makes periodic DRG backup files while users edit drawings. These backups are created with the naming convention AbackupX.drg , where "X" is an incremental number for the backup.
Programs that open or reference DRG files
I-doser audio drug file.
Audio file, called a "digital dose," used by I-Doser, a program that attempts to induce certain moods in the listener; contains a stereo audio track created using binaural recording techniques; also contains information about the "dose" and a screenshot image.
DRG files are used to simulate a mood or feeling. Carefully crafted binaural beats attempt to synchronize brainwaves and produce certain feelings in the listener when listened to with stereo headphones.
I-Doser previously restricted DRG files to a single playback, but they now may be played multiple times after being purchased from the I-Doser Store.
NOTE: I-Doser is based off of the open source program SBaGen, which creates .SBG files. DRG files extend SBG files with encryption , dose metadata , and a screenshot image.
Programs that open DRG files
Verified by fileinfo.com.
The FileInfo.com team has independently researched all file formats and software programs listed on this page. Our goal is 100% accuracy and we only publish information about file types that we have verified.
If you would like to suggest any additions or updates to this page, please let us know .
- View all journals
- Explore content
- About the journal
- Publish with us
- Sign up for alerts
- Review Article
- Published: 14 November 2023
Climate change impacts on crop yields
- Ehsan Eyshi Rezaei ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-2603-8034 1 ,
- Heidi Webber ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-8301-5424 1 , 2 ,
- Senthold Asseng ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-7583-3811 3 ,
- Kenneth Boote 4 ,
- Jean Louis Durand 5 ,
- Frank Ewert 1 , 6 ,
- Pierre Martre ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-7419-6558 7 &
- Dilys Sefakor MacCarthy ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-8062-3499 8
Nature Reviews Earth & Environment ( 2023 ) Cite this article
- Climate-change impacts
Climate change challenges efforts to maintain and improve crop production in many regions. In this Review, we examine yield responses to warmer temperatures, elevated carbon dioxide and changes in water availability for globally important staple cereal crops (wheat, maize, millet, sorghum and rice). Elevated CO 2 can have a compensatory effect on crop yield for C3 crops (wheat and rice), but it can be offset by heat and drought. In contrast, elevated CO 2 only benefits C4 plants (maize, millet and sorghum) under drought stress. Under the most severe climate change scenario and without adaptation, simulated crop yield losses range from 7% to 23%. The adverse effects in higher latitudes could potentially be offset or reversed by CO 2 fertilization and adaptation options, but lower latitudes, where C4 crops are the primary crops, benefit less from CO 2 fertilization. Irrigation and nutrient management are likely to be the most effective adaptation options (up to 40% in wheat yield for higher latitudes compared with baseline) but require substantial investments and might not be universally applicable, for example where there are water resource constraints. Establishing multifactor experiments (including multipurpose cultivar panels), developing biotic stress modelling routines, merging process-based and data-driven models, and using integrated impact assessments, are all essential to better capture and assess yield responses to climate change.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution
Access Nature and 54 other Nature Portfolio journals
Get Nature+, our best-value online-access subscription
24,99 € / 30 days
cancel any time
Subscribe to this journal
Receive 12 digital issues and online access to articles
92,52 € per year
only 7,71 € per issue
Rent or buy this article
Prices vary by article type
Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout
Willett, W. et al. Food in the Anthropocene: the EAT–Lancet Commission on healthy diets from sustainable food systems. Lancet 393 , 447–492 (2019).
Article Google Scholar
van Dijk, M., Morley, T., Rau, M. L. & Saghai, Y. A meta-analysis of projected global food demand and population at risk of hunger for the period 2010–2050. Nat. Food 2 , 494–501 (2021).
Mueller, N. D. et al. Closing yield gaps through nutrient and water management. Nature 490 , 254–257 (2012).
Erb, K.-H. et al. Exploring the biophysical option space for feeding the world without deforestation. Nat. Commun. 7 , 11382 (2016).
van Ittersum, M. K. et al. Yield gap analysis with local to global relevance — a review. Field Crops Res. 143 , 4–17 (2013).
Lobell, D. B., Schlenker, W. & Costa-Roberts, J. Climate trends and global crop production since 1980. Science 333 , 616–620 (2011).
Foley, J. A. et al. Solutions for a cultivated planet. Nature 478 , 337–342 (2011).
Webber, H. et al. Diverging importance of drought stress for maize and winter wheat in Europe. Nat. Commun. 9 , 4249 (2018).
Asseng, S. et al. Climate change impact and adaptation for wheat protein. Glob. Change Biol. 25 , 155–173 (2019).
Tausz-Posch, S., Norton, R. M., Seneweera, S., Fitzgerald, G. J. & Tausz, M. Will intra-specific differences in transpiration efficiency in wheat be maintained in a high CO 2 world? A FACE study. Physiol. Plant. 148 , 232–245 (2013).
Wang, X. et al. Effects of elevated CO 2 on grain yield and quality in five wheat cultivars. J. Agron. Crop Sci. 208 , 733–745 (2022).
Lobell, D. B. Climate change adaptation in crop production: beware of illusions. Glob. Food Sec. 3 , 72–76 (2014).
Webber, H., Gaiser, T. & Ewert, F. What role can crop models play in supporting climate change adaptation decisions to enhance food security in Sub-Saharan Africa? Agric. Syst. 127 , 161–177 (2014).
Salm, L., Nisbett, N., Cramer, L., Gillespie, S. & Thornton, P. How climate change interacts with inequity to affect nutrition. WIREs Clim Change https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.696 (2021).
Xu, Z., Jiang, Y. & Zhou, G. Response and adaptation of photosynthesis, respiration, and antioxidant systems to elevated CO 2 with environmental stress in plants. Front. Plant Sci. 6 , 701 (2015).
Dusenge, M. E., Duarte, A. G. & Way, D. A. Plant carbon metabolism and climate change: elevated CO 2 and temperature impacts on photosynthesis, photorespiration and respiration. New Phytol. 221 , 32–49 (2019).
Wang, D. et al. Effects of elevated CO 2 on the tolerance of photosynthesis to acute heat stress in C3, C4, and CAM species. Am. J. Bot. 95 , 165–176 (2008).
Wang, M. et al. Effects of different elevated CO 2 concentrations on chlorophyll contents, gas exchange, water use efficiency, and PSII activity on C3 and C4 cereal crops in a closed artificial ecosystem. Photosynth. Res. 126 , 351–362 (2015).
Ainsworth, E. A. et al. A meta-analysis of elevated [CO 2 ] effects on soybean ( Glycine max ) physiology, growth and yield. Glob. Change Biol. 8 , 695–709 (2002).
Högy, P. et al. Effects of elevated CO 2 on grain yield and quality of wheat: results from a 3-year free-air CO 2 enrichment experiment. Plant Biol. 11 , 60–69 (2009).
Du, Y., Lu, R. & Xia, J. Impacts of global environmental change drivers on non‐structural carbohydrates in terrestrial plants. Funct. Ecol. 34 , 1525–1536 (2020).
Kumar, A. et al. Yield and yield-attributing traits of rice ( Oryza sativa L.) under lowland drought and suitability of early vigor as a selection criterion. Field Crops Res. 114 , 99–107 (2009).
Boyer, J. S. Leaf enlargement and metabolic rates in corn, soybean, and sunflower at various leaf water potentials. Plant Physiol. 46 , 233–235 (1970).
Farooq, M., Wahid, A., Kobayashi, N., Fujita, D. & Basra, S. M. A. Plant drought stress: effects, mechanisms and management. Agron. Sustain. Dev. 29 , 185–212 (2009).
Purushothaman, R. et al. Association of mid-reproductive stage canopy temperature depression with the molecular markers and grain yields of chickpea ( Cicer arietinum L.) germplasm under terminal drought. Field Crops Res. 174 , 1–11 (2015).
Xu, W. et al. Drought stress condition increases root to shoot ratio via alteration of carbohydrate partitioning and enzymatic activity in rice seedlings. Acta Physiol. Plant. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11738-014-1760-0 (2015).
Liu, E. K., Mei, X. R., Yan, C. R., Gong, D. Z. & Zhang, Y. Q. Effects of water stress on photosynthetic characteristics, dry matter translocation and WUE in two winter wheat genotypes. Agric. Water Manag. 167 , 75–85 (2016).
Swann, A. L. S., Hoffman, F. M., Koven, C. D. & Randerson, J. T. Plant responses to increasing CO 2 reduce estimates of climate impacts on drought severity. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 113 , 10019–10024 (2016).
Bourgault, M. et al. Early vigour in wheat: could it lead to more severe terminal drought stress under elevated atmospheric CO 2 and semi-arid conditions? Glob. Change Biol. 26 , 4079–4093 (2020).
Chenu, K. et al. Simulating the yield impacts of organ-level quantitative trait loci associated with drought response in maize: a ‘gene-to-phenotype’ modeling approach. Genetics 183 , 1507–1523 (2009).
San Celedonio, R. P., de, Abeledo, L. G. & Miralles, D. J. Physiological traits associated with reductions in grain number in wheat and barley under waterlogging. Plant Soil 429 , 469–481 (2018).
Pan, J., Sharif, R., Xu, X. & Chen, X. Mechanisms of waterlogging tolerance in plants: research progress and prospects. Front. Plant Sci. 11 , 627331 (2020).
Liu, K. et al. Genetic factors increasing barley grain yields under soil waterlogging. Food Energy Sec. https://doi.org/10.1002/fes3.238 (2020).
Fatima, Z. et al. The fingerprints of climate warming on cereal crops phenology and adaptation options. Sci. Rep. 10 , 18013 (2020).
Mohammadi, S., Rydgren, K., Bakkestuen, V. & Gillespie, M. A. K. Impacts of recent climate change on crop yield can depend on local conditions in climatically diverse regions of Norway. Sci. Rep. 13 , 3633 (2023).
Lobell, D. B. et al. The critical role of extreme heat for maize production in the United States. Nat. Clim. Change 3 , 497–501 (2013).
Eyshi Rezaei, E., Webber, H., Gaiser, T., Naab, J. & Ewert, F. Heat stress in cereals: mechanisms and modelling. Eur. J. Agron. 64 , 98–113 (2015).
Walker, B. J., VanLoocke, A., Bernacchi, C. J. & Ort, D. R. The costs of photorespiration to food production now and in the future. Annu. Rev. Plant Biol. 67 , 107–129 (2016).
Farooq, M., Bramley, H., Palta, J. A. & Siddique, K. H. Heat stress in wheat during reproductive and grain-filling phases. Crit. Rev. Plant Sci. 30 , 491–507 (2011).
Heckathorn, S. A., Giri, A., Mishra, S. & Bista, D. in Climate Change and Plant Abiotic Stress Tolerance (eds Tuteja, N. & Gill, S. S.) 109–136 (Wiley, 2013).
Giri, A., Heckathorn, S., Mishra, S. & Krause, C. Heat stress decreases levels of nutrient-uptake and -assimilation proteins in tomato roots. Plants https://doi.org/10.3390/plants6010006 (2017).
Kuroyanagi, T. & Paulsen, G. M. Mediation of high-temperature injury by roots and shoots during reproductive growth of wheat. Plant Cell Environ. 11 , 517–523 (1988).
Lyman, N. B., Jagadish, K. S. V., Nalley, L. L., Dixon, B. L. & Siebenmorgen, T. Neglecting rice milling yield and quality underestimates economic losses from high-temperature stress. PLoS ONE 8 , e72157 (2013).
García, G. A., Dreccer, M. F., Miralles, D. J. & Serrago, R. A. High night temperatures during grain number determination reduce wheat and barley grain yield: a field study. Glob. Change Biol. 21 , 4153–4164 (2015).
Sadok, W. & Jagadish, S. V. K. The hidden costs of nighttime warming on yields. Trends Plant Sci. 25 , 644–651 (2020).
Peraudeau, S. et al. Increase in night temperature in rice enhances respiration rate without significant impact on biomass accumulation. Field Crops Res. 171 , 67–78 (2015).
Lamichhane, J. R. Rising risks of late-spring frosts in a changing climate. Nat. Clim. Change 11 , 554–555 (2021).
Zohner, C. M. et al. Late-spring frost risk between 1959 and 2017 decreased in North America but increased in Europe and Asia. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 117 , 12192–12200 (2020).
Muleke, A. et al. Earlier crop flowering caused by global warming alleviated by irrigation. Environ. Res. Lett. 17 , 44032 (2022).
Zhu, P. et al. The critical benefits of snowpack insulation and snowmelt for winter wheat productivity. Nat. Clim. Change 12 , 485–490 (2022).
Zanis, P. et al. Climate change penalty and benefit on surface ozone: a global perspective based on CMIP6 Earth system models. Environ. Res. Lett. 17 , 24014 (2022).
Mills, G. et al. Closing the global ozone yield gap: quantification and cobenefits for multistress tolerance. Glob. Change Biol. 24 , 4869–4893 (2018).
Ainsworth, E. A. Understanding and improving global crop response to ozone pollution. Plant J. 90 , 886–897 (2017).
Bebber, D. P., Ramotowski, M. A. T. & Gurr, S. J. Crop pests and pathogens move polewards in a warming world. Nat. Clim. Change 3 , 985–988 (2013).
Delgado-Baquerizo, M. et al. The proportion of soil-borne pathogens increases with warming at the global scale. Nat. Clim. Change 10 , 550–554 (2020).
Early, R. et al. Global threats from invasive alien species in the twenty-first century and national response capacities. Nat. Commun. 7 , 12485 (2016).
Wang, C. et al. Occurrence of crop pests and diseases has largely increased in China since 1970. Nat. Food 3 , 57–65 (2022).
Pang, J., Ryan, M. H., Lambers, H. & Siddique, K. H. Phosphorus acquisition and utilisation in crop legumes under global change. Curr. Opin. Plant Biol. 45 , 248–254 (2018).
Donatelli, M. et al. Modelling the impacts of pests and diseases on agricultural systems. Agric. Syst. 155 , 213–224 (2017).
AbdElgawad, H., Hassan, Y. M., Alotaibi, M. O., Mohammed, A. E. & Saleh, A. M. C3 and C4 plant systems respond differently to the concurrent challenges of mercuric oxide nanoparticles and future climate CO 2 . Sci. Total Environ. 749 , 142356 (2020).
Wang, L., Feng, Z. & Schjoerring, J. K. Effects of elevated atmospheric CO 2 on physiology and yield of wheat ( Triticum aestivum L.): a meta-analytic test of current hypotheses. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 178 , 57–63 (2013).
Tardieu, F., Simonneau, T. & Muller, B. The physiological basis of drought tolerance in crop plants: a scenario-dependent probabilistic approach. Annu. Rev. Plant Biol. 69 , 733–759 (2018).
Daryanto, S., Wang, L. & Jacinthe, P.-A. Global synthesis of drought effects on cereal, legume, tuber and root crops production: a review. Agric. Water Manag. 179 , 18–33 (2017).
Tian, L.-X. et al. How does the waterlogging regime affect crop yield? A global meta-analysis. Front. Plant Sci. 12 , 634898 (2021).
Men, S. et al. Effects of supplemental nitrogen application on physiological characteristics, dry matter and nitrogen accumulation of winter rapeseed ( Brassica napus L.) under waterlogging stress. Sci. Rep. 10 , 10201 (2020).
Wang, N., Wang, L. & Chen, H. Waterlogging tolerance of the invasive plant Aegilops tauschii translates to increased competitiveness compared to Triticum aestivum . Acta Physiol. Plant. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11738-021-03230-4 (2021).
Porter, J. R. & Gawith, M. Temperatures and the growth and development of wheat: a review. Eur. J. Agron. 10 , 23–36 (1999).
Sánchez, B., Rasmussen, A. & Porter, J. R. Temperatures and the growth and development of maize and rice: a review. Glob. Change Biol. 20 , 408–417 (2014).
Cohen, I., Zandalinas, S. I., Huck, C., Fritschi, F. B. & Mittler, R. Meta-analysis of drought and heat stress combination impact on crop yield and yield components. Physiol. Plant. 171 , 66–76 (2021).
Zhang, T. et al. Climate change may outpace current wheat breeding yield improvements in North America. Nat. Commun. 13 , 5591 (2022).
Di, H., Fang, S., Liang, H., Wang, E. & Wu, D. Contrasting yield responses of winter and spring wheat to temperature rise in China. Environ. Res. Lett. 15 , 124038 (2020).
Zscheischler, J. et al. Future climate risk from compound events. Nat. Clim. Change 8 , 469–477 (2018).
Lesk, C. et al. Compound heat and moisture extreme impacts on global crop yields under climate change. Nat. Rev. Earth Environ. 3 , 872–889 (2022).
Heino, M. et al. Increased probability of hot and dry weather extremes during the growing season threatens global crop yields. Sci. Rep. 13 , 3583 (2023).
Qaseem, M. F., Qureshi, R. & Shaheen, H. Effects of pre-anthesis drought, heat and their combination on the growth, yield and physiology of diverse wheat ( Triticum aestivum L.) genotypes varying in sensitivity to heat and drought stress. Sci. Rep. 9 , 6955 (2019).
Bheemanahalli, R., Vennam, R. R., Ramamoorthy, P. & Reddy, K. R. Effects of post-flowering heat and drought stresses on physiology, yield, and quality in maize ( Zea mays L.). Plant Stress 6 , 100106 (2022).
Da Costa, M. V. J. et al. Combined drought and heat stress in rice: responses, phenotyping and strategies to improve tolerance. Rice Sci. 28 , 233–242 (2021).
Pradhan, A., Aher, L., Hegde, V., Jangid, K. K. & Rane, J. Cooler canopy leverages sorghum adaptation to drought and heat stress. Sci. Rep. 12 , 4603 (2022).
Côté, I. M., Darling, E. S. & Brown, C. J. Interactions among ecosystem stressors and their importance in conservation. Proc. Biol. Sci. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2015.2592 (2016).
Zandalinas, S. I. & Mittler, R. Plant responses to multifactorial stress combination. New Phytol. 234 , 1161–1167 (2022).
Savin, R. & Nicolas, M. E. Effects of short periods of drought and high temperature on grain growth and starch accumulation of two malting barley cultivars. Funct. Plant Biol 23 , 201 (1996).
Rizhsky, L., Liang, H. & Mittler, R. The combined effect of drought stress and heat shock on gene expression in tobacco. Plant Physiol. 130 , 1143–1151 (2002).
Sadok, W., Lopez, J. R. & Smith, K. P. Transpiration increases under high-temperature stress: potential mechanisms, trade-offs and prospects for crop resilience in a warming world. Plant Cell Environ. 44 , 2102–2116 (2021).
Li, Y., Li, H., Li, Y. & Zhang, S. Improving water-use efficiency by decreasing stomatal conductance and transpiration rate to maintain higher ear photosynthetic rate in drought-resistant wheat. Crop J. 5 , 231–239 (2017).
Abdelhakim, L. O. A. et al. The effect of individual and combined drought and heat stress under elevated CO 2 on physiological responses in spring wheat genotypes. Plant Physiol. Biochem. 162 , 301–314 (2021).
Hussain, H. A. et al. Interactive effects of drought and heat stresses on morpho-physiological attributes, yield, nutrient uptake and oxidative status in maize hybrids. Sci. Rep. 9 , 3890 (2019).
Tardieu, F. Any trait or trait-related allele can confer drought tolerance: just design the right drought scenario. J. Exp. Bot. 63 , 25–31 (2012).
Kimball, B. A. Crop responses to elevated CO 2 and interactions with H 2 O, N, and temperature. Curr. Opin. Plant Biol. 31 , 36–43 (2016).
Wall, G. W. Elevated atmospheric CO 2 alleviates drought stress in wheat. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 87 , 261–271 (2001).
O’Leary, G. J. et al. Response of wheat growth, grain yield and water use to elevated CO 2 under a free-air CO 2 enrichment (FACE) experiment and modelling in a semi-arid environment. Glob. Change Biol. 21 , 2670–2686 (2015).
Gray, S. B. et al. Intensifying drought eliminates the expected benefits of elevated carbon dioxide for soybean. Nat. Plants 2 , 16132 (2016).
Manderscheid, R., Erbs, M. & Weigel, H.-J. Interactive effects of free-air CO 2 enrichment and drought stress on maize growth. Eur. J. Agron. 52 , 11–21 (2014).
Ottman, M. J. et al. Elevated CO 2 increases sorghum biomass under drought conditions. New Phytol. 150 , 261–273 (2001).
Widodo, W., Vu, J. C., Boote, K. J., Baker, J. T. & Allen, L. H. Elevated growth CO 2 delays drought stress and accelerates recovery of rice leaf photosynthesis. Environ. Exp. Bot. 49 , 259–272 (2003).
Zhang, J., Jiang, H., Song, X., Jin, J. & Zhang, X. The responses of plant leaf CO 2 /H 2 O exchange and water use efficiency to drought: a meta-analysis. Sustainability 10 , 551 (2018).
Li, S., Li, X., Wei, Z. & Liu, F. ABA-mediated modulation of elevated CO 2 on stomatal response to drought. Curr. Opin. Plant Biol. 56 , 174–180 (2020).
Ewert, F. et al. Effects of elevated CO 2 and drought on wheat: testing crop simulation models for different experimental and climatic conditions. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 93 , 249–266 (2002).
Abdelhakim, L. O. A., Zhou, R. & Ottosen, C.-O. Physiological responses of plants to combined drought and heat under elevated CO 2 . Agronomy 12 , 2526 (2022).
Dias de Oliveira, E. et al. Can elevated CO 2 combined with high temperature ameliorate the effect of terminal drought in wheat. Funct. Plant Biol. 40 , 160–171 (2013).
Broughton, K. J. et al. Warming alters the positive impact of elevated CO 2 concentration on cotton growth and physiology during soil water deficit. Funct. Plant Biol. 44 , 267–278 (2017).
Siebert, S., Ewert, F., Eyshi Rezaei, E., Kage, H. & Graß, R. Impact of heat stress on crop yield — on the importance of considering canopy temperature. Environ. Res. Lett. 9 , 44012 (2014).
Cao, Q., Li, G. & Liu, F. Elevated CO 2 enhanced water use efficiency of wheat to progressive drought stress but not on maize. Front. Plant Sci. 13 , 953712 (2022).
Anwar, K., Joshi, R., Dhankher, O. P., Singla-Pareek, S. L. & Pareek, A. Elucidating the response of crop plants towards individual, combined and sequentially occurring abiotic stresses. Int. J. Mol. Sci. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms22116119 (2021).
Zandalinas, S. I., Mittler, R., Balfagón, D., Arbona, V. & Gómez-Cadenas, A. Plant adaptations to the combination of drought and high temperatures. Physiol. Plant. 162 , 2–12 (2018).
Jacques, C., Salon, C., Barnard, R. L., Vernoud, V. & Prudent, M. Drought stress memory at the plant cycle level: a review. Plants https://doi.org/10.3390/plants10091873 (2021).
Sharma, B., Singh, B. N., Dwivedi, P. & Rajawat, M. V. S. Interference of climate change on plant–microbe interaction: present and future prospects. Front. Agron . https://doi.org/10.3389/fagro.2021.725804 (2022).
Aggarwal, P., Vyas, S., Thornton, P. & Campbell, B. M. How much does climate change add to the challenge of feeding the planet this century? Environ. Res. Lett. 14 , 43001 (2019).
Xiong, W. et al. Increased ranking change in wheat breeding under climate change. Nat. Plants 7 , 1207–1212 (2021).
Still, C. J., Berry, J. A., Collatz, G. J. & DeFries, R. S. Global distribution of C 3 and C 4 vegetation: carbon cycle implications. Glob. Biogeochem. Cycles 17 , 6-1–6-14 (2003).
White, J. W., Hoogenboom, G., Kimball, B. A. & Wall, G. W. Methodologies for simulating impacts of climate change on crop production. Field Crops Res. 124 , 357–368 (2011).
Hasegawa, T. et al. A global dataset for the projected impacts of climate change on four major crops. Sci. Data 9 , 58 (2022).
Riahi, K. et al. The Shared Socioeconomic Pathways and their energy, land use, and greenhouse gas emissions implications: an overview. Glob. Environ. Change 42 , 153–168 (2017).
Knox, J., Daccache, A., Hess, T. & Haro, D. Meta-analysis of climate impacts and uncertainty on crop yields in Europe. Environ. Res. Lett. 11 , 113004 (2016).
Hamilton, E. W., Heckathorn, S. A., Joshi, P., Wang, D. & Barua, D. Interactive effects of elevated CO 2 and growth temperature on the tolerance of photosynthesis to acute heat stress in C3 and C4 species. J. Integr. Plant Biol. 50 , 1375–1387 (2008).
Liu, W. et al. Future climate change significantly alters interannual wheat yield variability over half of harvested areas. Environ. Res. Lett. 16 , 94045 (2021).
Ostberg, S., Schewe, J., Childers, K. & Frieler, K. Changes in crop yields and their variability at different levels of global warming. Earth Syst. Dynam. 9 , 479–496 (2018).
Carr, T. W. et al. Climate change impacts and adaptation strategies for crops in West Africa: a systematic review. Environ. Res. Lett. 17 , 53001 (2022).
Faye, B. et al. Impacts of 1.5 versus 2.0 °C on cereal yields in the West African Sudan Savanna. Environ. Res. Lett. 13 , 34014 (2018).
Wallach, D., Mearns, L. O., Ruane, A. C., Rötter, R. P. & Asseng, S. Lessons from climate modeling on the design and use of ensembles for crop modeling. Clim. Change 139 , 551–564 (2016).
Vesely, F. M., Paleari, L., Movedi, E., Bellocchi, G. & Confalonieri, R. Quantifying uncertainty due to stochastic weather generators in climate change impact studies. Sci. Rep. 9 , 9258 (2019).
Hoffmann, H. et al. Impact of spatial soil and climate input data aggregation on regional yield simulations. PLoS ONE 11 , e0151782 (2016).
Bassu, S. et al. How do various maize crop models vary in their responses to climate change factors. Glob. Change Biol. 20 , 2301–2320 (2014).
Challinor, A. J. et al. Improving the use of crop models for risk assessment and climate change adaptation. Agric. Syst. 159 , 296–306 (2018).
Tao, F. et al. Contribution of crop model structure, parameters and climate projections to uncertainty in climate change impact assessments. Glob. Change Biol. 24 , 1291–1307 (2018).
Chapagain, R. et al. Decomposing crop model uncertainty: a systematic review. Field Crops Res. 279 , 108448 (2022).
Siebert, S., Webber, H., Zhao, G. & Ewert, F. Heat stress is overestimated in climate impact studies for irrigated agriculture. Environ. Res. Lett. 12 , 54023 (2017).
Fang, L. et al. Neglecting acclimation of photosynthesis under drought can cause significant errors in predicting leaf photosynthesis in wheat. Glob. Change Biol. 29 , 505–521 (2023).
Kropff, M. J., Teng, P. S. & Rabbinge, R. The challenge of linking pest and crop models. Agric. Syst. 49 , 413–434 (1995).
Stöckle, C. O. & Kemanian, A. R. Can crop models identify critical gaps in genetics, environment, and management interactions? Front. Plant Sci. 11 , 737 (2020).
Wada, Y. et al. Multimodel projections and uncertainties of irrigation water demand under climate change. Geophys. Res. Lett. 40 , 4626–4632 (2013).
Aragüés, R. et al. Soil salinization as a threat to the sustainability of deficit irrigation under present and expected climate change scenarios. Irrig. Sci. 33 , 67–79 (2015).
Wang, J. et al. Forty years of irrigation development and reform in China. Aust. J. Agric. Resour. Econ. 64 , 126–149 (2020).
Moriondo, M. et al. Impact and adaptation opportunities for European agriculture in response to climatic change and variability. Mitig. Adapt. Strateg. Glob. Change 15 , 657–679 (2010).
Tanaka, A. et al. Adaptation pathways of global wheat production: Importance of strategic adaptation to climate change. Sci. Rep. 5 , 14312 (2015).
Giller, K. E. & Ewert, F. Australian wheat beats the heat. Nat. Clim. Change 9 , 189–190 (2019).
Ewert, F. Opportunities in climate change? Nat. Clim. Change 2 , 153–154 (2012).
Voss-Fels, K. P. et al. Breeding improves wheat productivity under contrasting agrochemical input levels. Nat. Plants 5 , 706–714 (2019).
Reckling, M. et al. Diversification improves the performance of cereals in European cropping systems. Agron. Sustain. Dev . https://doi.org/10.1007/s13593-022-00850-z (2022).
Mohammed, A. & Misganaw, A. Modeling future climate change impacts on sorghum ( Sorghum bicolor ) production with best management options in Amhara Region, Ethiopia. CABI Agric. Biosci. https://doi.org/10.1186/s43170-022-00092-9 (2022).
Kothari, K. et al. Potential benefits of genotype-based adaptation strategies for grain sorghum production in the Texas High Plains under climate change. Eur. J. Agron. 117 , 126037 (2020).
Carbone, G. J. et al. Response of soybean and sorghum to varying spatial scales of climate change scenarios in the southeastern United States. Clim. Change 60 , 73–98 (2003).
Akinseye, F. M. et al. Improving sorghum productivity under changing climatic conditions: a modelling approach. Field Crops Res. 246 , 107685 (2020).
Liu, T. et al. A case study of climate-smart management in foxtail millet ( Setaria italica ) production under future climate change in Lishu county of Jilin, China. Agric. Forest Meteorol. 292–293 , 108131 (2020).
Singh, P. et al. An assessment of yield gains under climate change due to genetic modification of pearl millet. Sci. Total Environ. 601–602 , 1226–1237 (2017).
Murrell, E. G. Can agricultural practices that mitigate or improve crop resilience to climate change also manage crop pests? Curr. Opin. Insect Sci. 23 , 81–88 (2017).
Levidow, L. et al. Improving water-efficient irrigation: prospects and difficulties of innovative practices. Agric. Water Manag. 146 , 84–94 (2014).
Elliott, J. et al. Constraints and potentials of future irrigation water availability on agricultural production under climate change. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 111 , 3239–3244 (2014).
Nielsen, J. Ø. & Reenberg, A. Cultural barriers to climate change adaptation: a case study from northern Burkina Faso. Glob. Environ. Change 20 , 142–152 (2010).
Zhang, X. et al. Quantifying nutrient budgets for sustainable nutrient management. Glob. Biogeochem. Cycles https://doi.org/10.1029/2018GB006060 (2020).
Chartzoulakis, K. & Bertaki, M. Sustainable water management in agriculture under climate change. Agric. Agric. Sci. Procedia 4 , 88–98 (2015).
Rosenzweig, C. et al. Assessing agricultural risks of climate change in the 21st century in a global gridded crop model intercomparison. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 111 , 3268–3273 (2014).
Tigchelaar, M., Battisti, D. S., Naylor, R. L. & Ray, D. K. Future warming increases probability of globally synchronized maize production shocks. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 115 , 6644–6649 (2018).
Braun, Jvon The food crisis isn’t over. Nature 456 , 701 (2008).
Headey, D. & Fan, S. Anatomy of a crisis: the causes and consequences of surging food prices. Agric. Econ. 39 , 375–391 (2008).
Johnstone, S. & Mazo, J. Global warming and the Arab Spring. Survival 53 , 11–17 (2011).
Pugh, T. A. M. et al. Climate analogues suggest limited potential for intensification of production on current croplands under climate change. Nat. Commun. 7 , 12608 (2016).
Zhu, P. et al. Warming reduces global agricultural production by decreasing cropping frequency and yields. Nat. Clim. Change https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-022-01492-5 (2022).
Müller, C. et al. Implications of climate mitigation for future agricultural production. Environ. Res. Lett. 10 , 125004 (2015).
Tilman, D., Balzer, C., Hill, J. & Befort, B. L. Global food demand and the sustainable intensification of agriculture. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 108 , 20260–20264 (2011).
Hasegawa, T. et al. Extreme climate events increase risk of global food insecurity and adaptation needs. Nat. Food 2 , 587–595 (2021).
Wheeler, T. & Braun, Jvon Climate change impacts on global food security. Science 341 , 508–513 (2013).
Parfitt, J., Barthel, M. & Macnaughton, S. Food waste within food supply chains: quantification and potential for change to 2050. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B 365 , 3065–3081 (2010).
Iizumi, T. & Ramankutty, N. How do weather and climate influence cropping area and intensity. Glob. Food Sec. 4 , 46–50 (2015).
Sloat, L. L. et al. Climate adaptation by crop migration. Nat. Commun. 11 , 1243 (2020).
Möhring, N. et al. Pathways for advancing pesticide policies. Nat. Food 1 , 535–540 (2020).
Santeramo, F. G., Russo, I. & Lamonaca, E. Italian subsidised crop insurance: what the role of policy changes. Q Open https://doi.org/10.1093/qopen/qoac031 (2022).
Zabel, F., Putzenlechner, B. & Mauser, W. Global agricultural land resources — a high resolution suitability evaluation and its perspectives until 2100 under climate change conditions. PLoS ONE 9 , e107522 (2014).
Ray, D. K. et al. Climate change has likely already affected global food production. PLoS ONE 14 , e0217148 (2019).
Laurance, W. F., Sayer, J. & Cassman, K. G. Agricultural expansion and its impacts on tropical nature. Trends Ecol. Evol. 29 , 107–116 (2014).
Wang, D. et al. Amplifying meteorological droughts across middle- and low-latitude Northern Hemisphere. Front. Earth Sci . https://doi.org/10.3389/feart.2022.914232 (2022).
You, L. et al. What is the irrigation potential for Africa? A combined biophysical and socioeconomic approach. Food Policy 36 , 770–782 (2011).
Rosa, L. Adapting agriculture to climate change via sustainable irrigation: biophysical potentials and feedbacks. Environ. Res. Lett. 17 , 63008 (2022).
West, P. C. et al. Leverage points for improving global food security and the environment. Science 345 , 325–328 (2014).
Johnson, J. A., Runge, C. F., Senauer, B., Foley, J. & Polasky, S. Global agriculture and carbon trade-offs. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 111 , 12342–12347 (2014).
Dinku, T. in Extreme Hydrology and Climate Variability (eds Melesse, A. M. et al.) 71–80 (Elsevier, 2019).
Waha, K., Huth, N., Carberry, P. & Wang, E. How model and input uncertainty impact maize yield simulations in West Africa. Environ. Res. Lett. 10 , 24017 (2015).
Becker, A. et al. A description of the global land-surface precipitation data products of the Global Precipitation Climatology Centre with sample applications including centennial (trend) analysis from 1901–present. Earth Syst. Sci. Data 5 , 71–99 (2013).
Freduah, B. et al. Sensitivity of maize yield in smallholder systems to climate scenarios in semi-arid regions of West Africa: accounting for variability in farm management practices. Agronomy 9 , 639 (2019).
Folberth, C. et al. Uncertainty in soil data can outweigh climate impact signals in global crop yield simulations. Nat. Commun. 7 , 11872 (2016).
Ojeda, J. J. et al. Implications of data aggregation method on crop model outputs — the case of irrigated potato systems in Tasmania, Australia. Eur. J. Agron. 126 , 126276 (2021).
Nelson, G. C. et al. Climate change effects on agriculture: economic responses to biophysical shocks. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 111 , 3274–3279 (2014).
Zhao, W., Qu, Y., Zhang, L. & Li, K. Spatial-aware SAR-optical time-series deep integration for crop phenology tracking. Remote Sens. Environ. 276 , 113046 (2022).
Chen, Y., Zhang, Z. & Tao, F. Improving regional winter wheat yield estimation through assimilation of phenology and leaf area index from remote sensing data. Eur. J. Agron. 101 , 163–173 (2018).
Zhou, H. et al. Improving soil moisture estimation via assimilation of remote sensing product into the DSSAT crop model and its effect on agricultural drought monitoring. Remote Sens. 14 , 3187 (2022).
Cheng, Z. et al. Preliminary study of soil available nutrient simulation using a modified WOFOST model and time-series remote sensing observations. Remote Sens. 10 , 64 (2018).
Jin, X. et al. A review of data assimilation of remote sensing and crop models. Eur. J. Agron. 92 , 141–152 (2018).
Arend, D. et al. From data to knowledge — big data needs stewardship, a plant phenomics perspective. Plant J. 111 , 335–347 (2022).
Benes, B. et al. Multiscale computational models can guide experimentation and targeted measurements for crop improvement. Plant J. 103 , 21–31 (2020).
Webber, H., Rezaei, E. E., Ryo, M. & Ewert, F. Framework to guide modeling single and multiple abiotic stresses in arable crops. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 340 , 108179 (2022).
Onogi, A. Integration of crop growth models and genomic prediction. Methods Mol. Biol. 2467 , 359–396 (2022).
Los Campos, G., de, Pérez-Rodríguez, P., Bogard, M., Gouache, D. & Crossa, J. A data-driven simulation platform to predict cultivars’ performances under uncertain weather conditions. Nat. Commun. 11 , 4876 (2020).
Rasche, L. & Taylor, R. A. J. EPIC‐GILSYM: modelling crop–pest insect interactions and management with a novel coupled crop–insect model. J. Appl. Ecol. https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2664.13426 (2019).
Bondad, J., Harrison, M. T., Whish, J., Sprague, S. & Barry, K. Integrated crop-disease models: new frontiers in systems thinking. Farming Syst. 1 , 100004 (2023).
Tonnang, H. E., Sokame, B. M., Abdel-Rahman, E. M. & Dubois, T. Measuring and modelling crop yield losses due to invasive insect pests under climate change. Curr. Opin. Insect Sci. 50 , 100873 (2022).
Falconnier, G. N. et al. Modelling climate change impacts on maize yields under low nitrogen input conditions in sub-Saharan Africa. Glob. Change Biol. 26 , 5942–5964 (2020).
Wang, X. et al. Emergent constraint on crop yield response to warmer temperature from field experiments. Nat. Sustain. 3 , 908–916 (2020).
Allen, L. H. et al. Fluctuations of CO 2 in free-air CO 2 enrichment (FACE) depress plant photosynthesis, growth, and yield. Agric. Forest Meteorol. 284 , 107899 (2020).
Ainsworth, E. A., Leakey, A. D. B., Ort, D. R. & Long, S. P. FACE-ing the facts: inconsistencies and interdependence among field, chamber and modeling studies of elevated CO 2 impacts on crop yield and food supply. New Phytol. 179 , 5–9 (2008).
Martre, P. et al. Multimodel ensembles of wheat growth: many models are better than one. Glob. Change Biol. 21 , 911–925, (2015).
Asseng, S. et al. Rising temperatures reduce global wheat production. Nat. Clim. Change 5 , 143–147 (2015).
Zhao, C. et al. Temperature increase reduces global yields of major crops in four independent estimates. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 114 , 9326–9331 (2017).
Knutti, R. The end of model democracy? Clim. Change 102 , 395–404 (2010).
Shahhosseini, M., Martinez-Feria, R. A., Hu, G. & Archontoulis, S. V. Maize yield and nitrate loss prediction with machine learning algorithms. Environ. Res. Lett. 14 , 124026 (2019).
Feng, P., Wang, B., Liu, D. L., Waters, C. & Yu, Q. Incorporating machine learning with biophysical model can improve the evaluation of climate extremes impacts on wheat yield in south-eastern Australia. Agric. Forest Meteorol. 275 , 100–113 (2019).
Leng, G. Keeping global warming within 1.5 °C reduces future risk of yield loss in the United States: a probabilistic modeling approach. Sci. Total Environ. 644 , 52–59 (2018).
Ewert, F. et al. Crop modelling for integrated assessment of risk to food production from climate change. Environ. Model. Softw. 72 , 287–303 (2015).
Ruane, A. C. & McDermid, S. P. Selection of a representative subset of global climate models that captures the profile of regional changes for integrated climate impacts assessment. Earth Persp. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40322-017-0036-4 (2017).
Ciscar, J.-C., Rising, J., Kopp, R. E. & Feyen, L. Assessing future climate change impacts in the EU and the USA: insights and lessons from two continental-scale projects. Environ. Res. Lett. 14 , 84010 (2019).
Piontek, F. et al. Integrated perspective on translating biophysical to economic impacts of climate change. Nat. Clim. Change 11 , 563–572 (2021).
Lacoste, M. et al. On-farm experimentation to transform global agriculture. Nat. Food 3 , 11–18 (2022).
Hu, S., Wang, Y. & Yang, L. Response of rice yield traits to elevated atmospheric CO 2 concentration and its interaction with cultivar, nitrogen application rate and temperature: a meta-analysis of 20 years FACE studies. Sci. Total Environ. 764 , 142797 (2021).
Ainsworth, E. A. & Long, S. P. What have we learned from 15 years of free-air CO 2 enrichment (FACE)? A meta-analytic review of the responses of photosynthesis, canopy properties and plant production to rising CO 2 . New Phytol. 165 , 351–371 (2005).
Li, P. et al. Photosynthesis and yield response to elevated CO 2 , C4 plant foxtail millet behaves similarly to C3 species. Plant Sci. 285 , 239–247 (2019).
Markelz, R. J. C., Strellner, R. S. & Leakey, A. D. B. Impairment of C 4 photosynthesis by drought is exacerbated by limiting nitrogen and ameliorated by elevated [CO 2 ] in maize. J. Exp. Bot. 62 , 3235–3246 (2011).
Matsuura, A., An, P., Murata, K. & Inanaga, S. Effect of pre- and post-heading waterlogging on growth and grain yield of four millets. Plant Prod. Sci. 19 , 348–359 (2016).
Orchard, P. W. & Jessop, R. S. The response of sorghum and sunflower to short-term waterlogging. Plant Soil 81 , 119–132 (1984).
Pardales, J. R., Kono, Y. & Yamauchi, A. Response of the different root system components of sorghum to incidence of waterlogging. Environ. Exp. Bot. 31 , 107–115 (1991).
Zhang, R. D. et al. Changes in photosynthesis, chloroplast ultrastructure, and antioxidant metabolism in leaves of sorghum under waterlogging stress. Photosynthesis 57 , 1076–1083 (2019).
Singh, V. et al. Genotypic differences in effects of short episodes of high-temperature stress during reproductive development in sorghum. Crop Sci. 56 , 1561–1572 (2016).
Prasad, P., Djanaguiraman, M., Stewart, Z. P. & Ciampitti, I. A. in Agroclimatology (eds Hatfield, J. L. et al.) 201–241 (American Society of Agronomy, Crop Science Society of America, and Soil Science Society of America, 2020).
Hou, P. et al. Quantifying maize grain yield losses caused by climate change based on extensive field data across China. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 174 , 105811 (2021).
Ottman, M. J., Kimball, B. A., White, J. W. & Wall, G. W. Wheat growth response to increased temperature from varied planting dates and supplemental infrared heating. Agron. J. 104 , 7–16 (2012).
Kimball, B. A., White, J. W., Wall, G. W., Ottman, M. J. & Martre, P. Wheat response to a wide range of temperatures, as determined from the Hot Serial Cereal (HSC) experiment. Open Data J. Agric. Res. 4 , 16–21 (2018).
Challinor, A. J. et al. A meta-analysis of crop yield under climate change and adaptation. Nat. Clim. Change 4 , 287–291 (2014).
Srivastava, A., Naresh Kumar, S. & Aggarwal, P. K. Assessment on vulnerability of sorghum to climate change in India. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 138 , 160–169 (2010).
Getachew, F., Bayabil, H. K., Hoogenboom, G., Teshome, F. T. & Zewdu, E. Irrigation and shifting planting date as climate change adaptation strategies for sorghum. Agric. Water Manag. 255 , 106988 (2021).
Eyshi Rezaei, E., Gaiser, T., Siebert, S. & Ewert, F. Adaptation of crop production to climate change by crop substitution. Mitig. Adapt. Strateg. Glob. Change 20 , 1155–1174 (2015).
Ullah, A. et al. Assessing climate change impacts on pearl millet under arid and semi-arid environments using CSM-CERES-Millet model. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. Int. 26 , 6745–6757 (2019).
Faye, A. et al. Millet and sorghum yield simulations under climate change scenarios in Senegal. Reg. Environ. Change https://doi.org/10.1007/s10113-022-01940-0 (2022).
Sultan, B. et al. Assessing climate change impacts on sorghum and millet yields in the Sudanian and Sahelian savannas of West Africa. Environ. Res. Lett. 8 , 14040 (2013).
Jägermeyr, J. et al. Climate impacts on global agriculture emerge earlier in new generation of climate and crop models. Nat. Food 2 , 873–885 (2021).
Portmann, F. T., Siebert, S. & Döll, P. MIRCA2000 — global monthly irrigated and rainfed crop areas around the year 2000: a new high-resolution data set for agricultural and hydrological modeling. Glob. Biogeochem. Cycles https://doi.org/10.1029/2008GB003435 (2010).
Chadalavada, K. et al. Simulating potential impacts of future climate change on post-rainy season sorghum yields in India. Sustainability 14 , 334 (2022).
Asseng, S., Zhu, Y., Basso, B., Wilson, T. & Cammarano, D. Simulation modeling: applications in cropping systems. In Encyclopedia of Agriculture and Food Systems , 102–112 (Elsevier, 2014).
Hammer, G., Messina, C., Wu, A. & Cooper, M. Biological reality and parsimony in crop models — why we need both in crop improvement! in silico Plants https://doi.org/10.1093/insilicoplants/diz010 (2019).
Wang, E. et al. Improving process-based crop models to better capture genotype×environment×management interactions. J. Exp. Bot. 70 , 2389–2401 (2019).
Wehner, M. et al. Changes in extremely hot days under stabilized 1.5 and 2.0 °C global warming scenarios as simulated by the HAPPI multi-model ensemble. Earth Syst. Dynam. 9 , 299–311 (2018).
Corbeels, M., Berre, D., Rusinamhodzi, L. & Lopez-Ridaura, S. Can we use crop modelling for identifying climate change adaptation options? Agric. Forest Meteorol. 256–257 , 46–52 (2018).
Webber, H., Hoffmann, M. & Rezaei, E. E. in Agroclimatology (eds Hatfield, J. L. et al.) 519–546 (American Society of Agronomy, Crop Science Society of America, and Soil Science Society of America, 2020).
We acknowledge the support of the Agricultural Model Intercomparison and Improvement Project AgMIP. E.E.R. acknowledges support from the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG, German Research Foundation, project no. 520102751). F.E. acknowledges support by the DFG under Germany’s Excellence Strategy — EXC 2070–390732324. P.M. acknowledges support by the EU Project Horizon 2020 (grant no. 727247). J.-L.D. and P.M. acknowledge support by the Agriculture and Forestry in the Face of Climate Change: Adaptation and Mitigation (CLIMAE) Meta-Program and the AgroEcoSystem Division of the French National Research Institute for Agriculture, Food and Environment (INRAE).
Authors and affiliations.
Leibniz Centre for Agricultural Landscape Research (ZALF), Müncheberg, Germany
Ehsan Eyshi Rezaei, Heidi Webber & Frank Ewert
Institute of Environmental Sciences, Brandenburg University of Technology, Cottbus, Germany
Department of Life Science Engineering, Digital Agriculture, HEF World Agricultural Systems Center, Technical University of Munich, Freising, Germany
Agricultural and Biological Engineering, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA
Unité de Recherches Pluridisciplinaire Prairies et Plantes Fourragères (P3F), INRAE, Lusignan, France
Jean Louis Durand
Institute of Crop Science and Resource Conservation (INRES), University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany
LEPSE, Université Montpellier, INRAE, Institut Agro Montpellier, Montpellier, France
Soil and Irrigation Research Centre, College of Basic and Applied Sciences, University of Ghana, Kpong, Ghana
Dilys Sefakor MacCarthy
You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar
H.W. conceived the idea and outlined the structure. E.E.R. researched data for the article, prepared the visualizations and wrote the article. All authors contributed substantially to the discussion of the content, and reviewed and/or edited the manuscript.
Correspondence to Ehsan Eyshi Rezaei .
The authors declare no competing interests.
Peer review information.
Nature Reviews Earth & Environment thanks Matthew Harrison and the other, anonymous, reviewer(s) for their contribution to the peer review of this work.
Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
Reprints and Permissions
About this article
Cite this article.
Rezaei, E.E., Webber, H., Asseng, S. et al. Climate change impacts on crop yields. Nat Rev Earth Environ (2023). https://doi.org/10.1038/s43017-023-00491-0
Accepted : 20 September 2023
Published : 14 November 2023
DOI : https://doi.org/10.1038/s43017-023-00491-0
Share this article
Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:
Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.
Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative
- Explore articles by subject
- Guide to authors
- Editorial policies
Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.