Literature DB >> 25330243

Multimodel ensembles of wheat growth: many models are better than one.

Pierre Martre1, Daniel Wallach, Senthold Asseng, Frank Ewert, James W Jones, Reimund P Rötter, Kenneth J Boote, Alex C Ruane, Peter J Thorburn, Davide Cammarano, Jerry L Hatfield, Cynthia Rosenzweig, Pramod K Aggarwal, Carlos Angulo, Bruno Basso, Patrick Bertuzzi, Christian Biernath, Nadine Brisson, Andrew J Challinor, Jordi Doltra, Sebastian Gayler, Richie Goldberg, Robert F Grant, Lee Heng, Josh Hooker, Leslie A Hunt, Joachim Ingwersen, Roberto C Izaurralde, Kurt Christian Kersebaum, Christoph Müller, Soora Naresh Kumar, Claas Nendel, Garry O'leary, Jørgen E Olesen, Tom M Osborne, Taru Palosuo, Eckart Priesack, Dominique Ripoche, Mikhail A Semenov, Iurii Shcherbak, Pasquale Steduto, Claudio O Stöckle, Pierre Stratonovitch, Thilo Streck, Iwan Supit, Fulu Tao, Maria Travasso, Katharina Waha, Jeffrey W White, Joost Wolf.   

Abstract

Crop models of crop growth are increasingly used to quantify the impact of global changes due to climate or crop management. Therefore, accuracy of simulation results is a major concern. Studies with ensembles of crop models can give valuable information about model accuracy and uncertainty, but such studies are difficult to organize and have only recently begun. We report on the largest ensemble study to date, of 27 wheat models tested in four contrasting locations for their accuracy in simulating multiple crop growth and yield variables. The relative error averaged over models was 24-38% for the different end-of-season variables including grain yield (GY) and grain protein concentration (GPC). There was little relation between error of a model for GY or GPC and error for in-season variables. Thus, most models did not arrive at accurate simulations of GY and GPC by accurately simulating preceding growth dynamics. Ensemble simulations, taking either the mean (e-mean) or median (e-median) of simulated values, gave better estimates than any individual model when all variables were considered. Compared to individual models, e-median ranked first in simulating measured GY and third in GPC. The error of e-mean and e-median declined with an increasing number of ensemble members, with little decrease beyond 10 models. We conclude that multimodel ensembles can be used to create new estimators with improved accuracy and consistency in simulating growth dynamics. We argue that these results are applicable to other crop species, and hypothesize that they apply more generally to ecological system models.
© 2014 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Entities:  

Keywords:  ecophysiological model; ensemble modeling; model intercomparison; process-based model; uncertainty; wheat (Triticum aestivum L.)

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25330243     DOI: 10.1111/gcb.12768

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Glob Chang Biol        ISSN: 1354-1013            Impact factor:   10.863


  27 in total

1.  Earth observations and integrative models in support of food and water security.

Authors:  Stephanie Schollaert Uz; Alex C Ruane; Bryan N Duncan; Compton J Tucker; George J Huffman; Iliana E Mladenova; Batu Osmanoglu; Thomas R H Holmes; Amy McNally; Christa Peters-Lidard; John D Bolten; Narendra Das; Matthew Rodell; Sean McCartney; Martha C Anderson; Brad Doorn
Journal:  Remote Sens Earth Syst Sci       Date:  2019-03-15

2.  Sensitivity and requirement of improvements of four soybean crop simulation models for climate change studies in Southern Brazil.

Authors:  R Battisti; P C Sentelhas; K J Boote
Journal:  Int J Biometeorol       Date:  2017-12-02       Impact factor: 3.787

Review 3.  Modelling the coordination of the controls of stomatal aperture, transpiration, leaf growth, and abscisic acid: update and extension of the Tardieu-Davies model.

Authors:  François Tardieu; Thierry Simonneau; Boris Parent
Journal:  J Exp Bot       Date:  2015-03-14       Impact factor: 6.992

4.  Climate Change and Management Impacts on Soybean N Fixation, Soil N Mineralization, N2O Emissions, and Seed Yield.

Authors:  Elvis F Elli; Ignacio A Ciampitti; Michael J Castellano; Larry C Purcell; Seth Naeve; Patricio Grassini; Nicolas C La Menza; Luiz Moro Rosso; André F de Borja Reis; Péter Kovács; Sotirios V Archontoulis
Journal:  Front Plant Sci       Date:  2022-04-27       Impact factor: 6.627

5.  Agricultural big data and methods and models for food security analysis-a mini-review.

Authors:  Khalil A Ammar; Ahmed M S Kheir; Ioannis Manikas
Journal:  PeerJ       Date:  2022-06-29       Impact factor: 3.061

6.  In silico system analysis of physiological traits determining grain yield and protein concentration for wheat as influenced by climate and crop management.

Authors:  Pierre Martre; Jianqiang He; Jacques Le Gouis; Mikhail A Semenov
Journal:  J Exp Bot       Date:  2015-03-24       Impact factor: 6.992

7.  Improving the use of crop models for risk assessment and climate change adaptation.

Authors:  Andrew J Challinor; Christoph Müller; Senthold Asseng; Chetan Deva; Kathryn Jane Nicklin; Daniel Wallach; Eline Vanuytrecht; Stephen Whitfield; Julian Ramirez-Villegas; Ann-Kristin Koehler
Journal:  Agric Syst       Date:  2018-01       Impact factor: 5.370

8.  Optimization of multi-environment trials for genomic selection based on crop models.

Authors:  R Rincent; E Kuhn; H Monod; F-X Oury; M Rousset; V Allard; J Le Gouis
Journal:  Theor Appl Genet       Date:  2017-05-24       Impact factor: 5.699

9.  Plasticity of Sorghum Stem Biomass Accumulation in Response to Water Deficit: A Multiscale Analysis from Internode Tissue to Plant Level.

Authors:  Lisa Perrier; Lauriane Rouan; Sylvie Jaffuel; Anne Clément-Vidal; Sandrine Roques; Armelle Soutiras; Christelle Baptiste; Denis Bastianelli; Denis Fabre; Cécile Dubois; David Pot; Delphine Luquet
Journal:  Front Plant Sci       Date:  2017-09-01       Impact factor: 5.753

10.  The impact of weather and increased atmospheric CO2 from 1892 to 2016 on simulated yields of UK wheat.

Authors:  John W G Addy; Richard H Ellis; Andy J Macdonald; Mikhail A Semenov; Andrew Mead
Journal:  J R Soc Interface       Date:  2021-06-16       Impact factor: 4.118

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.