toggle visibility Search & Display Options

Select All    Deselect All
 |   | 
Details
   print
  Records Links
Author Sándor, R.; Ma, S.; Acutis, M.; Barcza, Z.; Ben, T., H.; Doro, L.; Hidy, D.; Köchy, M.; Lellei-Kovács, E.; Minet, J.; Perego, A.; Rolinski, S.; Ruget, F.; Seddaiu, G.; Wu, L.; Bellocchi, G. url  openurl
  Title Uncertainty in simulating biomass yield and carbon-water fluxes from Euro-Mediterranean grasslands under climate changes Type Conference Article
  Year 2014 Publication Abbreviated Journal  
  Volume Issue Pages  
  Keywords LiveM  
  Abstract  
  Address  
  Corporate Author Thesis  
  Publisher (up) 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 International Livestock Modelling and Research Colloquium, Bilbao, Spain, 2014-10-14 to 2014-10-16  
  Notes Approved no  
  Call Number MA @ admin @ Serial 2788  
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. url  doi
openurl 
  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 (up) Place of Publication Editor  
  Language English Summary Language Original Title  
  Series Editor Series Title Abbreviated Series Title  
  Series Volume Series Issue Edition  
  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 Ma, S.; Acutis, M.; Barcza, Z.; Ben, T., H.; Doro, L.; Hidy, D.; Köchy, M.; Minet, J.; Lellei-Kovács, E.; Perego, A.; Rolinski, S.; Ruget, F.; Seddaiu, G.; Wu, L.; Bellocchi, G. url  openurl
  Title The grassland model intercomparison of the MACSUR (Modelling European Agriculture with Climate Change for Food Security) European knowledge hub Type Conference Article
  Year 2014 Publication Abbreviated Journal  
  Volume Issue Pages  
  Keywords LiveM  
  Abstract  
  Address  
  Corporate Author Thesis  
  Publisher (up) 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 7th International Congress on Environmental Modelling and Software, 2014-06-15 to 2014-06-19  
  Notes Approved no  
  Call Number MA @ admin @ Serial 2618  
Permanent link to this record
 

 
Author Sándor, R.; Barcza, Z.; Acutis, M.; Doro, L.; Hidy, D.; Köchy, M.; Minet, J.; Lellei-Kovács, E.; Ma, S.; Perego, A.; Rolinski, S.; Ruget, F.; Sanna, M.; Seddaiu, G.; Wu, L.; Bellocchi, G. url  doi
openurl 
  Title Multi-model simulation of soil temperature, soil water content and biomass in Euro-Mediterranean grasslands: Uncertainties and ensemble performance Type Journal Article
  Year 2016 Publication European Journal of Agronomy Abbreviated Journal European Journal of Agronomy  
  Volume Issue Pages  
  Keywords Biomass; Grasslands; Modelling; Multi-model ensemble; Soil processes  
  Abstract • We simulate biomass, soil water content (SWC) and temperature (ST) in grasslands. • We compare nine models to the multi-model median (MMM) at nine sites. • With model calibration, we obtain satisfactory estimates of ST, less of SWC and biomass. • We observe discrepancies across models in the simulation of grassland processes. • We improve performance with multi-model approach. This study presents results from a major grassland model intercomparison exercise, and highlights the main challenges faced in the implementation of a multi-model ensemble prediction system in grasslands. Nine, independently developed simulation models linking climate, soil, vegetation and management to grassland biogeochemical cycles and production were compared in a simulation of soil water content (SWC) and soil temperature (ST) in the topsoil, and of biomass production. The results were assessed against SWC and ST data from five observational grassland sites representing a range of conditions – Grillenburg in Germany, Laqueuille in France with both extensive and intensive management, Monte Bondone in Italy and Oensingen in Switzerland – and against yield measurements from the same sites and other experimental grassland sites in Europe and Israel. We present a comparison of model estimates from individual models to the multi-model ensemble (represented by multi-model median: MMM). With calibration (seven out of nine models), the performances were acceptable for weekly-aggregated ST (R² > 0.7 with individual models and >0.8–0.9 with MMM), but less satisfactory with SWC (R² < 0.6 with individual models and < ∼ 0.5 with MMM) and biomass (R² < ∼0.3 with both individual models and MMM). With individual models, maximum biases of about −5 °C for ST, −0.3 m3 m−3 for SWC and 360 g DM m−2 for yield, as well as negative modelling efficiencies and some high relative root mean square errors indicate low model performance, especially for biomass. We also found substantial discrepancies across different models, indicating considerable uncertainties regarding the simulation of grassland processes. The multi-model approach allowed for improved performance, but further progress is strongly needed in the way models represent processes in managed grassland systems.  
  Address  
  Corporate Author Thesis  
  Publisher (up) Place of Publication Editor  
  Language Language Summary Language Original Title  
  Series Editor Series Title Abbreviated Series Title  
  Series Volume Series Issue Edition  
  ISSN 1161-0301 ISBN Medium  
  Area LiveM Expedition Conference  
  Notes Approved no  
  Call Number MA @ admin @ Serial 4768  
Permanent link to this record
 

 
Author Kersebaum, C.; Boote, J.; Jorgenson, S.; Kollas, C.; Nendel, C.; Wegehenkel, M.; Bindi, M.; Olesen, E.; Frühauf, C.; Gaiser, T.; Ruget, F.; Rötter, P.; Trnka, M. openurl 
  Title A scheme to evaluate suitability of experimental data for model testing and improvement Type Conference Article
  Year 2014 Publication Abbreviated Journal  
  Volume Issue Pages  
  Keywords CropM  
  Abstract  
  Address  
  Corporate Author Thesis  
  Publisher (up) 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 MACSUR CropM International Symposium and Workshop: Modelling climate change impacts on crop production for food security, Oslo, Norway, 2014-02-10 to 2014-02-12  
  Notes Approved no  
  Call Number MA @ admin @ Serial 2525  
Permanent link to this record
Select All    Deselect All
 |   | 
Details
   print

Save Citations:
Export Records: