Search

The main aim of the current study was to present the abilities of widely used crop models to simulate four different field crops (winter wheat, spring barley, silage maize and winter oilseed rape). The 13 models were tested under Central European conditions represented by three locations in the Czech Republic, selected using temperature and precipitation gradients for the target crops in this region. Based on observed crop phenology and yield from 1991 to 2010, performances of individual models and their ensemble were analyzed. Modelling of anthesis and maturity was generally best simulated by the ensemble median (EnsMED) compared to the ensemble mean and individual models. The yield was better simulated by the best models than estimated by an ensemble. Higher accuracy was achieved for spring crops, with the best results for silage maize, while the lowest accuracy was for winter oilseed rape according to the index of agreement (IA). Based on EnsMED, the root mean square errors (RMSEs) for yield was 1365 kg/ha for winter wheat, 1105 kg/ha for spring barley, 1861 kg/ha for silage maize and 969 kg/ha for winter oilseed rape. The AQUACROP and EPIC models performed best in terms of spread around the line of best fit (RMSE, IA). In some cases, the individual models failed. For crop rotation simulations, only models with reasonable accuracy (i.e. without failures) across all included crops within the target environment should be selected. Application crop models ensemble is one way to increase the accuracy of predictions, but lower variability of ensemble outputs was confirmed., info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess

The main aim of the current study was to present the abilities of widely used crop models to simulate four different field crops (winter wheat, spring barley, silage maize and winter oilseed rape). The 13 models were tested under Central European conditions represented by three locations in the Czech Republic, selected using temperature and precipitation gradients for the target crops in this region. Based on observed crop phenology and yield from 1991 to 2010, performances of individual models and their ensemble were analyzed. Modelling of anthesis and maturity was generally best simulated by the ensemble median (EnsMED) compared to the ensemble mean and individual models. The yield was better simulated by the best models than estimated by an ensemble. Higher accuracy was achieved for spring crops, with the best results for silage maize, while the lowest accuracy was for winter oilseed rape according to the index of agreement (IA). Based on EnsMED, the root mean square errors (RMSEs) for yield was 1365 kg/ha for winter wheat, 1105 kg/ha for spring barley, 1861 kg/ha for silage maize and 969 kg/ha for winter oilseed rape. The AQUACROP and EPIC models performed best in terms of spread around the line of best fit (RMSE, IA). In some cases, the individual models failed. For crop rotation simulations, only models with reasonable accuracy (i.e. without failures) across all included crops within the target environment should be selected. Application crop models ensemble is one way to increase the accuracy of predictions, but lower variability of ensemble outputs was confirmed.

Accurate estimation of the soil water balance of the soil-plant-atmosphere system is key to determining the availability of water resources and their optimal management. Evapotranspiration and leaching are the main sinks of water from the system affecting soil water status and hence crop yield. The accuracy of soil water content and evapotranspiration simulations affects crop yield simulations as well. DSSAT is a suite of field-scale, process-based crop models to simulate crop growth and development. A "tipping bucket" water balance approach is currently used in DSSAT for soil hydrologic and water redistribution processes. By comparison, HYDRUS-1D is a hydrological model to simulate water flow in soils using numerical solutions of the Richards equation, but its approach to crop-related process modeling is rather limited. Both DSSAT and HYDRUS-1D have been widely used and tested in their separate areas of use. The objectives of our study were: (1) to couple HYDRUS-1D with DSSAT to simulate soil water dynamics, crop growth and yield, (2) to evaluate the coupled model using field experimental datasets distributed with DSSAT for different environments, and (3) to compare HYDRUS-1D simulations with those of the tipping bucket approach using the same datasets. Modularity in the software design of both DSSAT and HYDRUS-1D made it easy to couple the two models. The pairing provided the DSSAT interface an ability to use both the tipping bucket and HYDRUS-1D simulation approaches. The two approaches were evaluated in terms of their ability to estimate the soil water balance, especially soil water contents and evapotranspiration rates. Values of the d index for volumetric water contents were 0.9 and 0.8 for the original and coupled models, respectively. Comparisons of simulations for the pod mass for four soybean and four peanut treatments showed relatively high d index values for both models (0.94-0.99).