A Modular Structure for Crop Simulation Models: Implemented in the SIMPOTATO Model

Hodges, Thomas K.; Johnson, Scott Lee; Johnson, Brian P.

doi:10.2134/agronj1992.00021962008400050027x

Cited by 43 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Previous studies also tested various potato cultivars but were often limited in the number of cultivars. Other studies had analyzed model performance for a single cultivar with the models SIMPOTATO and DANUBIA (Hodges et al, 1992;Gayler et al, 2002;Lenz-Wiedemann et al, 2010); six cultivars with the model SUBSTOR-potato (Griffin et al, 1993); seven cultivars with the model DAISY (Heidmann et al, 2008); and 10 cultivars with the model INFOCROP (Aggarwal et al, 2006). Only one model, SOLANUM, was used to compare simulated and observed yields for a large number of potato species (Condori et al, 2010).…”

Section: Cultivars Of the Developed Worldmentioning

confidence: 99%

Performance of the SUBSTOR-potato model across contrasting growing conditions

Raymundo

Asseng

Prassad

et al. 2017

Field Crops Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Cultivars Of the Developed Worldmentioning

confidence: 99%

Performance of the SUBSTOR-potato model across contrasting growing conditions

Raymundo

Asseng

Prassad

et al. 2017

Field Crops Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The data can be used to test leaf area predictions across a wide range of temperatures from potato models such as SIMPOTATO (Hodges, 1992) or SUBSTOR (IBSNAT, 1993) that depict canopy growth as a single large stem and homogenous leaf layer. More sophisticated modeling approaches that estimate canopy photosynthetic rate by integrating gas exchange from different leaf layers in the plant canopy have also been developed (Boote and Pickering, 1994;Ng and Loomis, 1984).…”

Section: Implications For Modelingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Temperature Influence on Potato Leaf and Branch Distribution and on Canopy Photosynthetic Rate

2006

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Mature potato (Solanum tuberosum L. cv. Kennebec) canopies are composed of leaves originating from main-and axillary-stem branches. Canopy leaf distribution and its corresponding contribution to wholecanopy photosynthetic rates have not been quantified. An experiment using SPAR (Soil-Plant-Atmosphere-Research) chambers maintained at 16-h day/night thermoperiods of 14/10, 17/12, 20/15, 23/18, 28/23, and 34/29°C was conducted. Mature canopies were divided into three horizontal layers of equal depth. Canopies were defoliated at each layer, from the ground upward, on successive days. Response curves for photosynthetic rate vs. irradiance were obtained after each defoliation. Leaf area within each layer followed a quadratic relationship with temperature. The largest areas were between 16.6 and 22.1°C. Main-stem leaves accounted for .50% of the total leaf area at temperatures ,22°C, while the proportion of axillary-stem leaf area in each layer increased with temperature. Canopy maximum gross photosynthetic rates, A MAX , before harvest ranged from 9.5 to 34.8 mmol CO 2 m 22 s 21 (production-area basis) and were higher at 14/10, 17/12, and 20/15°C temperatures than at 23/18, 28/23, and 34/29°C. These values were largely related to the quantity of leaf area in each chamber. The value of A MAX and canopy light use efficiency declined as successive canopy layers were removed, primarily due to decreases in canopy light interception. These results indicate that the relative proportion of main-or axillary-stem leaves are not as important for potato canopy modeling considerations as is the need to simulate the correct quantity of leaf area.

show abstract

“…Hourly leaf water potential is used as an analog for plant water stress and decreases stomatal conductance as soil water availability declines (Fleisher, Dathe, Timlin, & Reddy, ). Potato phenology is derived from the SIMPOTATO model (Hodges, Johnson, & Johnson, ). Three post‐emergence developmental stages are simulated: (i) vegetative growth, (ii) early tuber growth stage, and (iii) dominant tuber growth.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cultivar coefficient stability and effects on yield projections in the SPUDSIM model

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Crop model calibration refers to the process where values are obtained for a subset of model parameters that represent cultivar traits. Calibrated parameters, however, are just as likely to compensate for limitations in model structure as well as reflect true phenotypic characteristics. This confounding of genetics with production environment limits model accuracy particularly for climate assessments and can result in crop parameter values that are location dependent. We evaluated the calibration stability of the potato (Solanum tuberosum L.) model SPUDSIM for two cultivars grown in two sites in the United States sites using a location specific (R1) and cross-location (R2) methodology. Differences between R1 coefficient values ranged from 4 to 17% between the two sites depending on cultivar. This likely reflected over-coupling of canopy expansion rate within the model structure as well as an over-sensitivity to temperature and photoperiod. Broader site differences were observed for growth coefficients, particularly when compared with the R2 method. Validation year end-ofseason yields (17% error or less) and in-season RMSE (<36.1 g plant −1 ) were similar for both methods. The R2 calibration overpredicted yields by 5% or less as compared with R1, with a maximum discrepancy of 0.35 Mg ha −1 in climate forecasted impacts. Consistent differences between R1 and R2 calibrated models in rates of yield decline per decade were not observed for cultivar, location, or climate scenario, and averaged 0.034 Mg ha −1 yr −1 for R1 and 0.038 for R2. Thus, calibration for these cultivars and locations was relatively stable in SPUDSIM for the temperate climate evaluated.

show abstract

A Modular Structure for Crop Simulation Models: Implemented in the SIMPOTATO Model

Cited by 43 publications

References 0 publications

Performance of the SUBSTOR-potato model across contrasting growing conditions

Performance of the SUBSTOR-potato model across contrasting growing conditions

Temperature Influence on Potato Leaf and Branch Distribution and on Canopy Photosynthetic Rate

Cultivar coefficient stability and effects on yield projections in the SPUDSIM model

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About