|
|
Rötter, R. P., Palosuo, T., Kersebaum, K. - C., Angulo, C., Bindi, M., Ewert, F., et al. (2012). Simulation of spring barley yield in different climatic zones of Northern and Central Europe: A comparison of nine crop models. Field Crops Research, 133, 23–36.
Abstract: ► We compared nine crop simulation models for spring barley at seven sites in Europe. ► Applying crop models with restricted calibration leads to high uncertainties. ► Multi-crop model mean yield estimates were in good agreement with observations. ► The degree of uncertainty for simulated grain yield of barley was similar to winter wheat. ► We need more suitable data enabling us to verify different processes in the models. In this study, the performance of nine widely used and accessible crop growth simulation models (APES-ACE, CROPSYST, DAISY, DSSAT-CERES, FASSET, HERMES, MONICA, STICS and WOFOST) was compared during 44 growing seasons of spring barley (Hordeum vulgare L) at seven sites in Northern and Central Europe. The aims of this model comparison were to examine how different process-based crop models perform at multiple sites across Europe when applied with minimal information for model calibration of spring barley at field scale, whether individual models perform better than the multi-model mean, and what the uncertainty ranges are in simulated grain yields. The reasons for differences among the models and how results for barley compare to winter wheat are discussed. Regarding yield estimation, best performing based on the root mean square error (RMSE) were models HERMES, MONICA and WOFOST with lowest values of 1124, 1282 and 1325 (kg ha(-1)), respectively. Applying the index of agreement (IA), models WOFOST, DAISY and HERMES scored best having highest values (0.632, 0.631 and 0.585, respectively). Most models systematically underestimated yields, whereby CROPSYST showed the highest deviation as indicated by the mean bias error (MBE) (-1159 kg ha(-1)). While the wide range of simulated yields across all sites and years shows the high uncertainties in model estimates with only restricted calibration, mean predictions from the nine models agreed well with observations. Results of this paper also show that models that were more accurate in predicting phenology were not necessarily the ones better estimating grain yields. Total above-ground biomass estimates often did not follow the patterns of grain yield estimates and, thus, harvest indices were also different. Estimates of soil moisture dynamics varied greatly. In comparison, even though the growing cycle for winter wheat is several months longer than for spring barley, using RMSE and IA as indicators, models performed slightly, but not significantly, better in predicting wheat yields. Errors in reproducing crop phenology were similar, which in conjunction with the shorter growth cycle of barley has higher effects on accuracy in yield prediction.
|
|
|
|
Kim, Y., Berger, S., Kettering, J., Tenhunen, J., Haas, E., & Kiese, R. (2014). Simulation of N2O emissions and nitrate leaching from plastic mulch radish cultivation with LandscapeDNDC. Ecol. Res., 29(3), 441–454.
Abstract: Radish is one of the major dry field crops in Asia commonly grown with plastic mulch and high rates of N fertilization, and potentially harming the environment due to N2O emissions and nitrate leaching. Despite the widespread use of plastic mulch, biogeochemical models so far do not yet consider impacts of mulch on soil environmental conditions and biogeochemistry. In this study, we adapted and successfully tested the LandscapeDNDC model against field data by simulating crop growth, C and N turnover and associated N2O emissions as well as nitrate leaching for radish cultivation with plastic mulch and in conjunction with different rates of N fertilization (465-765 kg N ha(-1) year(-1)). Due to the sandy soil texture and monsoon climate, nitrate leaching with rates up to 350 kg N ha(-1) year(-1) was the dominant reason for overall low nitrogen use efficiency (32-43 %). Direct or indirect N2O emissions (calculated from simulated nitrate leaching rates and IPCC EFind = 0.0075) ranged between 2 and 3 kg N ha(-1) year(-1), thus contributing an equal amount to total field emissions of about 5 kg N ha(-1) year(-1). Based on our results, emission factors for direct N2O emissions ranged between 0.004 and 0.005. These values are only half of the IPCC default value (0.01), demonstrating the need of biogeochemical models for developing site and/or region specific EFs. Simulation results also revealed that changes in agricultural management by applying the fertilizer only to the rows would be an efficient mitigation strategy, effectively decreasing field nitrate leaching and N2O emissions by 50-60 %.
|
|
|
|
Mendes, L. B., Herrero, M., Havlík, P., Mosnier, A., Balieiro, S. F., Moreira, R. E. M., et al. (2016). Simulation of enteric methane emissions from individual beef cattle in tropical pastures of improving quality: a case study with the model RUMINANT. Advances in Animal Biosciences, 7(03), 233–234.
|
|
|
|
Dumont, B., Vancutsem, F., Seutin, B., Bodson, B., Destain, J. - P., & Destain, M. - F. (2012). Simulation de la croissance du blé à l’aide de modèles écophysiologiques: Synthèse bibliographique des méthodes, potentialités et limitations. Biotechnologie, Agronomie, Société et Environnement, 163, 376–386.
Abstract: Crop models describe the growth and development of a crop interacting with its surrounding agro-environmental conditions (soil, climate and the close conditions of the plant). However, the implementation of such models remains difficult because of the high number of explanatory variables and parameters. It often happens that important discrepancies appear between measured and simulated values. This article aims to highlight the different sources of uncertainty related to the use of crop models, as well as the actual methods that allow a compensation for or, at least, a consideration of these sources of error during analysis of the model results. This article presents a literature review, which firstly synthesises the general mathematical structure of crop models. The main criteria for evaluating crop models are then described. Finally, several methods used for improving models are given. Parameter estimation methods, including frequentist and Bayesian approaches, are presented and data assimilation methods are reviewed.
|
|
|
|
Ruiz-Ramos, M. (2015). Simulating wheat adaptation to climate change in Europe using an ensemble approach with impact response surfaces (Vol. 5).
Abstract: Adaptation can reduce climate change risks to crop production and is best analyzed at local scales considering regional specificities. Uncertainty inherent in modelling adaptation options is due to climate projections, downscaling and imperfections of crop models. The challenge of making effective adaptation decisions requires powerful approaches for exploiting the potential of genotype by environment by management interactions, and for generating projections informed with uncertainty.Here we present a methodology that constructs impact response surfaces (IRSs) from an ensemble of crop models and applies these to explore the adaptation potential of rainfed winter wheat at Lleida (NE Spain) in a water-limited environment. The simulation experiment includes: 1) a systematic sensitivity analysis to changes to baseline temperature and precipitation (1981-2010) through a delta change approach that accounts for seasonal differences, 2) three levels of CO2 representing present-day and future conditions until 2050 (A1B scenario), and 3) soil profiles representative for the variable conditions around Lleida. The adaptation simulations represent adjusted management practices about sowing, supplementary irrigation, and the thermal and vernalisation requirements of cultivars used.A pre-selection of the adaptation options was done iteratively, in ranges supported by literature review of crop adaptation in the Mediterranean (e.g. shifts from current sowing date between -30 and +45 days). This procedure allowed to identify a limited number of effective and feasible adaptations to be evaluated combining IRSs and probabilistic projections of climate change. No Label
|
|
