Janssen, S., Hansen, J. G., Jorgensen, J., & Jørgensen, M. S. (2015). Operational database for storing and extracting data (Vol. 6).
Abstract: This deliverable lays out the work as done as part of MACSUR CropM on data, with the focus on improving data management and have shared data curation for future use. The issue was tackled with help from the MACSUR central hub coordination in the form of Jason Jargenson from University of Reading. The data management as proposed and implemented in this deliverable is very much a bottom up process, in which partners in a meeting in Spring 2013 in Aarhus investigated the best way forward for data management across activities in CropM.As a follow up to this, the work was mainly divided in three parts: 1. The Open Data Journal for Agricultural Research, mainly focused on long term data archival and citation of data sets, as input and outputs to the modelling work, as part of MACSUR, lead by Wageningen UR 2. The Geonetwork data catalog hosted at Aarhus Universitet, that allows for operational access and storage of data sets as part of the ongoing work, also for restricted access of the consortium, and as a first step to visualization, lead by Aarhus Universitet. 3. The work on rating data sets, that provides a tool for improving data set access in an early phase for connecting them to models, lead by Reading University. At the end of the deliverable some next steps are giving for data activities in the context of AgMIP and beyond. No Label
|
Janssen, S., Houtkamp, J., De Groot, H., & Schils, R. (2015). Online web tool for data visualization (Vol. 6).
Abstract: This deliverable lays out the work as done as part of MACSUR CropM on data, with the focus on providing a web tool for visualization of model output. It was decided early on that not a specific MACSUR web tool would be developed as part of MACSUR for phase 1, and mostly results would be visualized in other available tools, such as the Global Yield Gap Atlas, which are recognised resources for visualizations. Only in relationship to the MACSUR Geonetwork data catalog hosted at Aarhus University some developments where started. Operationally speaking, most data was still being generated during phase 1, so there was not enough to visualize on specific websites and partners did not commit financial resources to their development, and only in kind was available. No Label
|
Kässi, P., Känkänen, H., Niskanen, O., Lehtonen, H., & Höglind, M. (2015). Farm level approach to manage grass yield variation under climate change in Finland and north-western Russia. Biosystems Engineering, 140, 11–22.
Abstract: Cattle feeding in Northern Europe is based on grass silage, but grass growth is highly dependent on weather conditions. If ensuring sufficient silage availability in every situation is prioritised, the lowest expected yield level determines the cultivated area in farmers’ decision-making. One way to manage the variation in grass yield is to increase grass production and silage storage capacity so that they exceed the annual consumption at the farm. The cost of risk management in the current and the projected future climate was calculated taking into account grassland yield and yield variability for three study areas under current and mid-21st century climate conditions. The dataset on simulated future grass yields used as input for the risk management calculations were taken from a previously published simulation study. Strategies investigated included using up to 60% more silage grass area than needed in a year with average grass yields, and storing silage for up to 6 months more than consumed in a year (buffer storage). According to the results, utilising an excess silage grass area of 20% and a silage buffer storage capacity of 6 months were the most economic ways of managing drought risk in both the baseline climate and the projected climate of 2046-2065. It was found that the silage yield risk due to drought is likely to decrease in all studied locations, but the drought risk and costs implied still remain significant. (C) 2015 IAgrE. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
|
|
Katajajuuri, J. - M., Pulkkinen, H., Hietala, S., Järvenranta, K., Virkajärvi, P., Nousiainen, J. I., et al. (2015). A holistic, dynamic model to quantify and mitigate the environmental impacts of cattle farming. Advances in Animal Biosciences, 6(01), 35–36.
|
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
|
