toggle visibility Search & Display Options

Select All    Deselect All
 |   | 
Details
   print
  Records Links
Author Nendel, C.; Ewert, F.; Rötter, R.P.; Rosenzweig, C.; Jones, J.W.; Hatfield, J.L.; Asseng, S.; Ruane, A.C.; Banse, M.; Tiffin, R.; Brouwer, F.; Sinabell, F.; Scollan, N.; Meijs, J.; Angulo, C.; Antle, J.M.; Baigorria, G.; Basso, B.; Bindi, M.; Boote, K.J.; Gaiser, T.; Janssen, S.; Kersebaum, K.C.; Nelson, G.; Olesen, J.E.; Palosuo, T.; Porter, C.H.; Porter, J.R.; Rivington, M.; Semenov, M.; Stewart, D.; Thorburn, P.; Trnka, M.; van Ittersum, M.K.; Verhagen, J.; Wallach, D.; Winter, J.M. url  openurl
  Title Addressing challenges and uncertainties for, the use of agro-ecosystem models to, assess climate change impact and food security across scales Type Conference Article
  Year 2013 Publication Abbreviated Journal  
  Volume Issue (up) Pages  
  Keywords CropM  
  Abstract  
  Address  
  Corporate Author Thesis  
  Publisher Place of Publication Editor  
  Language Summary Language Original Title  
  Series Editor Series Title Abbreviated Series Title  
  Series Volume Series Issue Edition  
  ISSN ISBN Medium  
  Area Expedition Conference Climate Change and Regional Responses Conference, Dresden, 2013-05-27 to 2013-05-27  
  Notes Approved no  
  Call Number MA @ admin @ Serial 2679  
Permanent link to this record
 

 
Author Webber, H.; Gaiser, T.; Oomen, R.; Teixeira, E.; Zhao, G.; Wallach, D.; Zimmermann, A.; Ewert, F. openurl 
  Title Uncertainty in future irrigation water demand and risk of crop failure for maize in Europe Type Journal Article
  Year 2016 Publication Environmental Research Letters Abbreviated Journal Environ. Res. Lett.  
  Volume Issue (up) Pages  
  Keywords crop model; impact assessment; crop water use; evapotranspiration; irrigation; drought; uncertainty  
  Abstract While crop models are widely used to assess the change in crop productivity with climate change, their skill in assessing irrigation water demand or the risk of crop failure in large area impact assessments is relatively unknown. The objective of this study is to investigate which aspects of modeling crop water use (reference crop evapotranspiration (ET0), soil water extraction, soil evaporation, soil water balance and root growth) contributes most to the variability in estimates of maize crop water use and the risk of crop failure, and demonstrate the resulting uncertainty in a climate change impact study for Europe. The SIMPLACE crop modeling framework was used to couple the LINTUL5 crop model in factorial combinations of 2-3 different approaches for simulating the 5 aspects of crop water use, resulting in 51 modeling approaches. Using experiments in France and New Zeland, analysis of total sensitivity revealed that ET0 explained the most variability in both irrigated maize water use and rainfed grain yield levels, with soil evaporation also imporatant in the French experiment. In the European impact study, net irrigation requirement differed by 36% between the Penman and Hargreaves ET0 methods in the baseline period. Average EU grain yields were similar between models, but differences approached 1-2 tonnes in parts of France and Southern Europe. EU wide esimates of crop failure in the historical period ranged between 5.4 years for Priestley-Taylor to every 7.9 years for the Penman ET0 methods. While the uncertainty in absolute values between models was significant, estimates of relative changes were similar between models, confirming the utility of crop models in assessing climate change impacts. If ET0 estimates in crop models can be improved, through the use of appropriate methods, uncertainty in irrigation water demand as well as in yield estimates under drought can be reduced.  
  Address 2016-09-13  
  Corporate Author Thesis  
  Publisher Place of Publication Editor  
  Language Language Summary Language Newsletter July Original Title  
  Series Editor Series Title Abbreviated Series Title  
  Series Volume Series Issue Edition  
  ISSN ISBN Medium Article  
  Area CropM Expedition Conference  
  Notes CropM; wos; ft=macsur; Approved no  
  Call Number MA @ admin @ Serial 4778  
Permanent link to this record
 

 
Author Ruane, A.C.; Hudson, N.I.; Asseng, S.; Camarrano, D.; Ewert, F.; Martre, P.; Boote, K.J.; Thorburn, P.J.; Aggarwal, P.K.; Angulo, C.; Basso, B.; Bertuzzi, P.; Biernath, C.; Brisson, N.; Challinor, &rew J.; Doltra, J.; Gayler, S.; Goldberg, R.; Grant, R.F.; Heng, L.; Hooker, J.; Hunt, L.A.; Ingwersen, J.; Izaurralde, R.C.; Kersebaum, K.C.; Kumar, S.N.; Müller, C.; Nendel, C.; O’Leary, G.; Olesen, J.E.; Osborne, T.M.; Palosuo, T.; Priesack, E.; Ripoche, D.; Rötter, R.P.; Semenov, M.A.; Shcherbak, I.; Steduto, P.; Stöckle, C.O.; Stratonovitch, P.; Streck, T.; Supit, I.; Tao, F.; Travasso, M.; Waha, K.; Wallach, D.; White, J.W.; Wolf, J. url  doi
openurl 
  Title Multi-wheat-model ensemble responses to interannual climate variability Type Journal Article
  Year 2016 Publication Environmental Modelling & Software Abbreviated Journal Env. Model. Softw.  
  Volume 81 Issue (up) Pages 86-101  
  Keywords Crop modeling; Uncertainty; Multi-model ensemble; Wheat; AgMIP; Climate; impacts; Temperature; Precipitation; lnterannual variability; simulation-model; crop model; nitrogen dynamics; winter-wheat; large-area; systems simulation; farming systems; yield response; growth; water  
  Abstract We compare 27 wheat models’ yield responses to interannual climate variability, analyzed at locations in Argentina, Australia, India, and The Netherlands as part of the Agricultural Model Intercomparison and Improvement Project (AgMIP) Wheat Pilot. Each model simulated 1981-2010 grain yield, and we evaluate results against the interannual variability of growing season temperature, precipitation, and solar radiation. The amount of information used for calibration has only a minor effect on most models’ climate response, and even small multi-model ensembles prove beneficial. Wheat model clusters reveal common characteristics of yield response to climate; however models rarely share the same cluster at all four sites indicating substantial independence. Only a weak relationship (R-2 <= 0.24) was found between the models’ sensitivities to interannual temperature variability and their response to long-term warming, suggesting that additional processes differentiate climate change impacts from observed climate variability analogs and motivating continuing analysis and model development efforts. Published by Elsevier Ltd.  
  Address  
  Corporate Author Thesis  
  Publisher Place of Publication Editor  
  Language English Summary Language Original Title  
  Series Editor Series Title Abbreviated Series Title  
  Series Volume Series Issue Edition  
  ISSN 1364-8152 ISBN Medium Article  
  Area Expedition Conference  
  Notes CropM, ft_macsur Approved no  
  Call Number MA @ admin @ Serial 4769  
Permanent link to this record
 

 
Author Wallach, D.; Thorburn, P.; Asseng, S.; Challinor, A.J.; Ewert, F.; Jones, J.W.; Rötter, R.; Ruane, A. url  doi
openurl 
  Title Estimating model prediction error: Should you treat predictions as fixed or random Type Journal Article
  Year 2016 Publication Environmental Modelling & Software Abbreviated Journal Env. Model. Softw.  
  Volume 84 Issue (up) Pages 529-539  
  Keywords Crop model; Uncertainty; Prediction error; Parameter uncertainty; Input uncertainty; Model structure uncertainty  
  Abstract Crop models are important tools for impact assessment of climate change, as well as for exploring management options under current climate. It is essential to evaluate the uncertainty associated with predictions of these models. We compare two criteria of prediction error; MSEPfixed, which evaluates mean squared error of prediction for a model with fixed structure, parameters and inputs, and MSEPuncertain(X), which evaluates mean squared error averaged over the distributions of model structure, inputs and parameters. Comparison of model outputs with data can be used to estimate the former. The latter has a squared bias term, which can be estimated using hindcasts, and a model variance term, which can be estimated from a simulation experiment. The separate contributions to MSEPuncertain(X) can be estimated using a random effects ANOVA. It is argued that MSEPuncertain(X) is the more informative uncertainty criterion, because it is specific to each prediction situation.  
  Address  
  Corporate Author Thesis  
  Publisher Place of Publication Editor  
  Language English Summary Language Original Title  
  Series Editor Series Title Abbreviated Series Title  
  Series Volume Series Issue Edition  
  ISSN 1364-8152 ISBN Medium Article  
  Area Expedition Conference  
  Notes CropM, ft_macsur Approved no  
  Call Number MA @ admin @ Serial 4773  
Permanent link to this record
 

 
Author Kuhnert, M.; Yeluripati, J.; Smith, P.; Hoffmann, H.; Constantin, J.; Coucheney, E.; Dechow, R.; Eckersten, H.; Gaiser, T.; Grosz, B.; Haas, E.; Kersebaum, K.-C.; Kiese, R.; Klatt, S.; Lewan, E.; Nendel, C.; Raynal, H.; Sosa, C.; Specka, X.; Teixeira, E.; Wang, E.; Weihermüller, L.; Zhao, G.; Zhao, Z.; Ewert, F. openurl 
  Title Impacts of soil and weather data aggregation in spatial modelling of net primary production of croplands Type Conference Article
  Year 2016 Publication Abbreviated Journal  
  Volume Issue (up) Pages  
  Keywords CropM;  
  Abstract  
  Address  
  Corporate Author Thesis  
  Publisher Place of Publication Belrin (Germany) Editor  
  Language Summary Language Original Title  
  Series Editor Series Title Abbreviated Series Title  
  Series Volume Series Issue Edition  
  ISSN ISBN Medium  
  Area Expedition Conference International Crop Modelling Symposium iCropM 2016, 2016-03-15 to 2016-03-17, Belrin  
  Notes Approved no  
  Call Number MA @ admin @ Serial 2579  
Permanent link to this record
Select All    Deselect All
 |   | 
Details
   print

Save Citations:
Export Records: