Home << 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 >> [11–15]
List View
 | 
Citations
 | 
Details
   web
Records
Author Webber, H.; Martre, P.; Asseng, S.; Kimball, B.; White, J.; Ottman, M.; Wall, G.W.; De Sanctis, G.; Doltra, J.; Grant, R.; Kassie, B.; Maiorano, A.; Olesen, J.E.; Ripoche, D.; Rezaei, E.E.; Semenov, M.A.; Stratonovitch, P.; Ewert, F.
Title Canopy temperature for simulation of heat stress in irrigated wheat in a semi-arid environment: A multi-model comparison Type Journal Article
Year 2017 Publication Field Crops Research Abbreviated Journal Field Crops Research
Volume 202 Issue Pages 21-35
Keywords Crop model comparison; Canopy temperature; Heat stress; Wheat
Abstract Even brief periods of high temperatures occurring around flowering and during grain filling can severely reduce grain yield in cereals. Recently, ecophysiological and crop models have begun to represent such phenomena. Most models use air temperature (Tair) in their heat stress responses despite evidence that crop canopy temperature (Tc) better explains grain yield losses. Tc can deviate significantly from Tair based on climatic factors and the crop water status. The broad objective of this study was to evaluate whether simulation of Tc improves the ability of crop models to simulate heat stress impacts on wheat under irrigated conditions. Nine process-based models, each using one of three broad approaches (empirical, EMP; energy balance assuming neutral atmospheric stability, EBN; and energy balance correcting for the atmospheric stability conditions, EBSC) to simulate Tc, simulated grain yield under a range of temperature conditions. The models varied widely in their ability to reproduce the measured Tc with the commonly used EBN models performing much worse than either EMP or EBSC. Use of Tc to account for heat stress effects did improve simulations compared to using only Tair to a relatively minor extent, but the models that additionally use Tc on various other processes as well did not have better yield simulations. Models that simulated yield well under heat stress had varying skill in simulating Tc. For example, the EBN models had very poor simulations of Tc but performed very well in simulating grain yield. These results highlight the need to more systematically understand and model heat stress events in wheat.
Address 2016-10-31
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 (up)
ISSN 0378-4290 ISBN Medium Article
Area Expedition Conference
Notes CropM, ft_macsur Approved no
Call Number MA @ admin @ Serial 4824
Permanent link to this record
 
 
Author Rötter, R.P.; Palosuo, T.; Kersebaum, K.C.; Angulo, C.; Bindi, M.; Ewert, F.; Ferrise, R.; Hlavinka, P.; Moriondo, M.; Nendel, C.; Olesen, J.E.; Patil, R.H.; Ruget, F.; Takác, J.; Trnka, M.
Title Simulation of spring barley yield in different climatic zones of Northern and Central Europe: A comparison of nine crop models Type Journal Article
Year 2012 Publication Field Crops Research Abbreviated Journal Field Crops Research
Volume 133 Issue Pages 23-36
Keywords climate; crop growth simulation; model comparison; spring barley; yield variability; uncertainty; change impacts; nitrogen dynamics; high-temperature; soil-moisture; elevated co2; ceres-wheat; data set; growth; drought; sensitivity
Abstract 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. (C) 2012 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
Address 2016-10-31
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 (up)
ISSN 0378-4290 ISBN Medium Article
Area Expedition Conference
Notes CropM, ftnotmacsur Approved no
Call Number MA @ admin @ Serial 4803
Permanent link to this record
 
 
Author Yin, X.; Olesen, J.E.; Wang, M.; Öztürk, I.; Chen, F.
Title Observed and anticipated impacts and adaptation of crop production systems to climate change in the northeast farming region of China Type Manuscript
Year Publication Abbreviated Journal
Volume Issue 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 (up)
ISSN ISBN Medium
Area Expedition Conference
Notes Approved no
Call Number MA @ admin @ Serial 2911
Permanent link to this record
 
 
Author Yin, X.; Olesen, J.E.; Li, W.; Wang, M.; Zhang, H.
Title Contributions of climatic, technological and social factors to maize yield in the northeast farming region of China during 1985 to 2009 Type Manuscript
Year 2015 Publication Abbreviated Journal
Volume Issue 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 (up)
ISSN ISBN Medium
Area Expedition Conference
Notes Approved no
Call Number MA @ admin @ Serial 2912
Permanent link to this record
 
 
Author Yin, X.; Olesen, J.E.; Li, W.; Wang, M.; Öztürk, I.; Chen, F.
Title Climate effects on crop yield in the northeast farming region of China during 1961 to 2010 Type Manuscript
Year Publication Abbreviated Journal
Volume Issue 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 (up)
ISSN ISBN Medium
Area Expedition Conference
Notes Approved no
Call Number MA @ admin @ Serial 2910
Permanent link to this record