|
|
Nendel, C., Wieland, R., Mirschel, W., Specka, X., Guddat, C., & Kersebaum, K. C. (2013). Simulating regional winter wheat yields using input data of different spatial resolution. Field Crops Research, 145, 67–77.
Abstract: The success of using agro-ecosystem models for the high-resolution simulation of agricultural yields for larger areas is often hampered by a lack of input data. We investigated the effect of different spatially resolved soil and weather data used as input for the MONICA model on its ability to reproduce winter wheat yields in the Federal State of Thuringia, Germany (16,172 km(2)). The combination of one representative soil and one weather station was insufficient to reproduce the observed mean yield of 6.66 +/- 0.87 t ha(-1) for the federal state. Use of a 100 m x 100 m grid of soil and relief information combined with just one representative weather station yielded a good estimator (7.01 +/- 1.47 t ha(-1)). The soil and relief data grid used in combination with weather information from 14 weather stations in a nearest neighbour approach produced even better results (6.60 +/- 1.37 t ha(-1)); the same grid used with 39 additional rain gauges and an interpolation algorithm that included an altitude correction of temperature data slightly overpredicted the observed mean (7.36 +/- 1.17 t ha(-1)). It was concluded that the apparent success of the first two high-resolution approaches over the latter was based on two effects that cancelled each other out: the calibration of MONICA to match high-yield experimental data and the growth-defining and -limiting effect of weather data that is not representative for large parts of the region. At the county and farm level the MONICA model failed to reproduce the 1992-2010 time series of yields, which is partly explained by the fact that many growth-reducing factors were not considered in the model. (C) 2013 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
|
|
|
|
Vitali, A., Lana, E., Amadori, M., Bernabucci, U., Nardone, A., & Lacetera, N. (2014). Analysis of factors associated with mortality of heavy slaughter pigs during transport and lairage. J. Anim. Sci., 92(11), 5134–5141.
Abstract: The study was based on data collected during 5 yr (2003-2007) and was aimed at assessing the effects of the month, slaughter house of destination (differing for stocking density, openings, brightness, and cooling device types), length of the journey, and temperature-humidity index (THI) on mortality of heavy slaughter pigs (approximately 160 kg live weight) during transport and lairage. Data were obtained from 24,098 journeys and 3,676,153 pigs transported from 1,618 farms to 3 slaughter houses. Individual shipments were the unit of observation. The terms dead on arrival (DOA) and dead in pen (DIP) refer to pigs that died during transport and in lairage at the abattoir before slaughtering, respectively. These 2 variables were assessed as the dependent counts in separate univariate Poisson regressions. The independent variables assessed univariately in each set of regressions were month of shipment, slaughter house of destination, time traveled, and each combination of the month with the time traveled. Two separate piecewise regressions were done. One used DOA counts within THI levels over pigs transported as a dependent ratio and the second used DIP counts within THI levels over pigs from a transport kept in lairage as a dependent ratio. The THI was the sole independent variable in each case. The month with the greatest frequency of deaths was July with a risk ratio of 1.22 (confidence interval: 1.06-1.36; P < 0.05) and 1.27 (confidence interval: 1.06-1.51; P < 0.05) for DOA and DIP, respectively. The lower mortality risk ratios for DOA and DIP were recorded for January and March (P < 0.05). The aggregated data of the summer (June, July, and August) versus non-summer (January, March, September, and November) months showed a greater risk of pigs dying during the hot season when considering both transport and lairage (P < 0.05). The mortality risk ratio of DIP was lower at the slaughter house with the lowest stocking density (0.64 m(2)/100 kg live weight), large open windows on the roof and sidewalls, low brightness (40 lx) lights, and high-pressure sprinklers as cooling devices. The mortality risk ratio of DOA increased significantly for journeys longer than 2 h, whereas no relationship was found between length of transport and DIP. The piecewise analysis pointed out that 78.5 and 73.6 THI were the thresholds above which the mortality rate increased significantly for DOA and DIP, respectively. These results may help the pig industry to improve the welfare of heavy slaughter pigs during transport and lairage.
|
|
|
|
Kersebaum, K., & C. (2015). Model intercomparison for calibrated models (Vol. 4).
Abstract: The study ROTATIONEFFECT aims to compare the output of different models simulating field data sets with multi-year crop rotations including different treatments.Within the first Step (1a2a) data sets (comprising a total of 301 crop growth seasons) for 5 locations in Europe were distributed to 15 interested modeller groups.For this step only minimal information for calibration were provided to the modellers. In total 15 modelling teams sent their “uncalibrated” results as single-year calculations and/or continuous calculations of rotation depending on the capability of the model. Results have been evaluated and the paper submitted (European Journal of Agronomy).Now, within the 2nd step (1b2b) modellers were provided with more information on the crop for the calibration of models. Again, results of calibrated runs were collected.6 models were capable to run the rotations as continuous runs and another set of 6 models provided single year simulations.A first overview of the improvement of predictions due to calibration has been produced. Result files have been uploaded to the web platform for CropM results at Aarhus University (Work package C2 – data management). No Label
|
|
|
|
Kersebaum, K., & C,. (2014). Results of uncalibrated model runs available (ROTATIONEFFECTS) (Vol. 3).
Abstract: The study ROTATIONEFFECT aims to compare the output of different models simulating field data sets with multi-year crop rotations including different treatments. Data sets for 5 locations in Europe were distributed to 19 interested modeller groups comprising a total of 201 crop growth seasons. In a first step only minimal information for calibration were provided to the modellers. In total 14 modelling teams sent their “uncalibrated” results as single-year calculations and/or calculations of rotation depending on the capability of the model. 7-10 models were capable to run the rotations as continuous runs. Up to 12 models provided single year simulations of at least one crop. Comparing results of models which provided both single year and continuous runs, show a little lower root mean square error for the continuous rotations runs. Cereal crop yields were generally better simulated than tuber/beet yields. Additionally, the models’ response to various treatments (irrigation/rainfed, nitrogen level, CO2 level, residue management/ tillage, catch crops) were compared to observed differences. First indicators of model performance have been developed and presented at international conferences. No Label
|
|
|
|
van Middelkoop, J. C., & Kipling, R. P. (2017). Modelling the impact of climate change on livestock productivity at the farm-scale: An inventory of LiveM outcomes (Vol. 10).
Abstract: The report presented here provides an inventory of reports and conference papers produced by the partners of the livestock and grassland modelling theme (LiveM) of the Modelling European Agriculture with Climate Change for Food Security (MACSUR) knowledge hub. The findings presented illustrate the diverse nature of the multidisciplinary LiveM research community, and provide a reference source for those seeking to identify and pull out farm-level modelling outputs from the work of MACSUR and its partners. The survey of farm-scale outputs from LiveM revealed the interdependent, dual role of a knowledge hub: to increase the capacity of modelling to meet stakeholder and societal needs under climate change, and to apply that increased capacity to provide new understanding and solutions at the policy and (the focus here) farm scale. While capacity building work across disciplines is time-consuming, difficult, and to a large extent invisible to stakeholders, such work is vital to ensuring that subsequent scientific outcomes reflect best practice, and integrated expertise. Long term, sustained funding of network-based capacity building activities is highlighted as essential to ensuring that the farm-scale modelling work highlighted here can continue to build on ongoing improvements in model quality, flexibility and stakeholder relevance.
|
|
