ArticleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America2024
Observational evidence for groundwater influence on crop yields in the United States.
Article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Rethinking yield stability through phenotypic plasticity and its link to modern statistical methods.Journal of experimental botany · 2026Review
- A coupled spatial reduction-reconstruction and LSTM framework (SRR-LSTM) for groundwater level prediction in large irrigation districts.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Climate, Rotation, and Tillage Impacts on Soybean Yield Gains in a 50-Year Experiment.Global change biology · 2025Article
- Breeding progress is a major contributor to improved regional maize water productivity.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Integrating soil health and manure practices to advance sustainability for US dairy farms.Journal of environmental qualityReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
As climate change shifts crop exposure to dry and wet extremes, a better understanding of factors governing crop response is needed. Recent studies identified shallow groundwater-groundwater within or near the crop rooting zone-as influential, yet existing evidence is largely based on theoretical crop model simulations, indirect or static groundwater data, or small-scale field studies. Here, we use observational satellite yield data and dynamic water table simulations from 1999 to 2018 to provide field-scale evidence for shallow groundwater effects on maize yields across the United States Corn Belt. We identify three lines of evidence supporting groundwater influence: 1) crop model simulations better match observed yields after improvements in groundwater representation; 2) machine learning analysis of observed yields and modeled groundwater levels reveals a subsidy zone between 1.1 and 2.5 m depths, with yield penalties at shallower depths and no effect at deeper depths; and 3) locations with groundwater typically in the subsidy zone display higher yield stability across time. We estimate an average 3.4% yield increase when groundwater levels are at optimum depth, and this effect roughly doubles in dry conditions. Groundwater yield subsidies occur ~35% of years on average across locations, with 75% of the region benefitting in at least 10% of years. Overall, we estimate that groundwater-yield interactions had a net monetary contribution of approximately $10 billion from 1999 to 2018. This study provides empirical evidence for region-wide groundwater yield impacts and further underlines the need for better quantification of groundwater levels and their dynamic responses to short- and long-term weather conditions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.