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.

Abstract: Soil salinization is one of the most critical environmental factors affecting crop yield. It is estimated that 20% of cultivated land and 33% of irrigated agricultural land are affected by salinity. In the last decades, considerable effort to manage saline agro-ecosystems has focused on 1) controlling soil salinity to minimize/reduce the accumulation of salts in the root zone and 2) improving plants ability to cope with osmotic and ionic stress. Less attention has been given to other components of the agro-ecosystem including weed populations, which also react and adapt to soil salinization and indirectly affect plant growth and yield. Weeds represent an increasing challenge for crop systems since they have high genetic resilience and adaptation ability to adverse environmental conditions such as soil salinization. In this review, we assess current knowledge on salinity tolerance of weeds in agricultural contexts and discuss critical components of crop-weed interactions that may increase weeds competitiveness under salinity. Compared to crop species, weeds generally exhibit greater salt tolerance due to high intraspecific variability, associated with diverse physiological adaptation mechanisms (e.g. phenotipic plasticity, seed heteromorphism, allelopathy). Weed competitiveness in saline soils may be enhanced by their earlier emergence, faster growth rates and synergies occurring between soil salts and allelochemicals released by weeds. In the future, a better understanding of crop-weed relationships and molecular, physiological and agronomic stress responses under salinity is essential to design efficient strategies to achieve weed control under altered climatic and environmental conditions.

Abstract: An environmental dynamic system is usually modeled as a nonlinear system described by a set of nonlinear ODEs. A central challenge in computational modeling of environmental systems is the determination of the model parameters. In these cases, estimating these variables or parameters from other easily obtained measurements can be extremely useful. This work addresses the problem of monitoring and modeling a leaf area index and soil moisture model (LSM) using state estimation. The performances of various conventional and state-of-the-art state estimation techniques are compared when they are utilized to achieve this objective. These techniques include the extended Kalman filter (EKF), particle filter (PF), and the more recently developed technique variational filter (VF). Specifically, two comparative studies are performed. In the first comparative study, the state variables (the leaf-area index LAI, the volumetric water content of the soil layer 1, HUR1 and the volumetric water content of the soil layer 2, HUR2) are estimated from noisy measurements of these variables, and the various estimation techniques are compared by computing the estimation root mean square error (RMSE) with respect to the noise-free data. In the second comparative study, the state variables as well as the model parameters are simultaneously estimated. In this case, in addition to comparing the performances of the various state estimation techniques, the effect of number of estimated model parameters on the accuracy and convergence of these techniques are also assessed. The results of both comparative studies show that the PF provides a higher accuracy than the EKF, which is due to the limited ability of the EKF to handle highly nonlinear processes. The results also show that the VF provides a significant improvement over the PF because, unlike the PF which depends on the choice of sampling distribution used to estimate the posterior distribution, the VF yields an optimum choice of the sampling distribution, which also accounts for the observed data. The results of the second comparative study show that, for all techniques, estimating more model parameters affects the estimation accuracy as well as the convergence of the estimated states and parameters. However, the VF can still provide both convergence as well as accuracy related advantages over other estimation methods. (C) 2013 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.