IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/agisys/v98y2008i2p135-146.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Analysis of two variants of a spatially distributed crop model, using wavelet transforms and geostatistics

Author

Listed:
  • Pringle, M.J.
  • Marchant, B.P.
  • Lark, R.M.

Abstract

Models of crop yield are important for the assessment and optimization of agricultural systems. It is therefore necessary that crop models are suitably validated. In many circumstances, a model is required for prediction at a particular spatial scale (e.g. at a within-field scale for precision agriculture), and validation of the model should account for this. We compared spatially explicit methods to validate a grain yield model applied to a transect of 267 contiguous 0.72 - 0.72 m plots on an arable field at Silsoe, eastern England. Grain yield of wheat was determined in each plot during two growing seasons, and a crop model was used to predict the yield retrospectively. We used two variants of the model, each of which used different spatial variables as input. Observed and predicted yield were then compared with non-spatial statistics, but also with wavelet transforms (i.e. the adapted maximal overlap discrete wavelet transform) and geostatistics (i.e. a linear mixed model estimated by residual maximum likelihood). The latter two are spatially explicit statistical methods. The most successful of the variants required as input the daily evolution of leaf-area index in each plot. Validation of this variant with spatial statistics revealed that (i) the variance of the predictions tended to underestimate that of the observations, particularly at relatively coarse spatial scales, however, in relative terms, the distribution of observed variance across scales was described adequately by the model; (ii) the correlation of the predictions with the observations was weak at relatively fine scales but strong at relatively coarse scales; (iii) there was evidence that the correlation of the predictions with the observations was not uniform across the transect at relatively fine scales, which was possibly due to the underlying soil variation; and, (iv) the spatial pattern of model error suggested that some of the fine-scale yield variation, especially in the first growing season, could be attributed to soil compaction, a process not included in the model. These details were not apparent with non-spatial statistics; wavelets and geostatistics are therefore more appropriate tools for validating a spatially distributed crop model. We conclude that this variant of the model is therefore potentially useful for precision agriculture where we need to predict crop behaviour within small management zones, at the scale of tens of metres, but not to predict yield at finer scales. We outline how the most appropriate statistical technique for a particular study depends on whether the observations can be sampled regularly in space, whether we can assume the statistics are uniform across the landscape, the number of spatial scales of interest, and whether interpolation of the predictions, observations, and errors is required.

Suggested Citation

  • Pringle, M.J. & Marchant, B.P. & Lark, R.M., 2008. "Analysis of two variants of a spatially distributed crop model, using wavelet transforms and geostatistics," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 98(2), pages 135-146, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:agisys:v:98:y:2008:i:2:p:135-146
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0308-521X(08)00071-1
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Fernandez, J. E. & Slawinski, C. & Moreno, F. & Walczak, R. T. & Vanclooster, M., 2002. "Simulating the fate of water in a soil-crop system of a semi-arid Mediterranean area with the WAVE 2.1 and the EURO-ACCESS-II models," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 56(2), pages 113-129, July.
    2. Verhagen, A. & Booltink, H. W. G. & Bouma, J., 1995. "Site-specific management: Balancing production and environmental requirements at farm level," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 49(4), pages 369-384.
    3. Paz, J. O. & Batchelor, W. D. & Babcock, B. A. & Colvin, T. S. & Logsdon, S. D. & Kaspar, T. C. & Karlen, D. L., 1999. "Model-based technique to determine variable rate nitrogen for corn," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 61(1), pages 69-75, July.
    4. Van Uffelen, C. G. R. & Verhagen, J. & Bouma, J., 1997. "Comparison of simulated crop yield patterns for site-specific management," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 54(2), pages 207-222, June.
    5. Pringle, M.J. & Baxter, S.J. & Marchant, B.P. & Lark, R.M., 2008. "Spatial analysis of the error in a model of soil nitrogen," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 211(3), pages 453-467.
    6. Yang, J. & Greenwood, D. J. & Rowell, D. L. & Wadsworth, G. A. & Burns, I. G., 2000. "Statistical methods for evaluating a crop nitrogen simulation model, N_ABLE," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 64(1), pages 37-53, April.
    7. S. J. Welham & R. Thompson, 1997. "Likelihood Ratio Tests for Fixed Model Terms using Residual Maximum Likelihood," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 59(3), pages 701-714.
    8. Richter, G.M. & Semenov, M.A., 2005. "Modelling impacts of climate change on wheat yields in England and Wales: assessing drought risks," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 84(1), pages 77-97, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Changwei Tan & Xinxing Zhou & Pengpeng Zhang & Zhixiang Wang & Dunliang Wang & Wenshan Guo & Fei Yun, 2020. "Predicting grain protein content of field-grown winter wheat with satellite images and partial least square algorithm," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(3), pages 1-15, March.
    2. Chen, Shichao & Parsons, David & Du, Taisheng & Kumar, Uttam & Wang, Sufen, 2021. "Simulation of yield and water balance using WHCNS and APSIM combined with geostatistics across a heterogeneous field," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 258(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Pringle, M.J. & Baxter, S.J. & Marchant, B.P. & Lark, R.M., 2008. "Spatial analysis of the error in a model of soil nitrogen," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 211(3), pages 453-467.
    2. Kropff, M. J. & Bouma, J. & Jones, J. W., 2001. "Systems approaches for the design of sustainable agro-ecosystems," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 70(2-3), pages 369-393.
    3. Basso, B. & Ritchie, J. T. & Pierce, F. J. & Braga, R. P. & Jones, J. W., 2001. "Spatial validation of crop models for precision agriculture," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 68(2), pages 97-112, May.
    4. David O. Yawson & Barry J. Mulholland & Tom Ball & Michael O. Adu & Sushil Mohan & Philip J. White, 2017. "Effect of Climate and Agricultural Land Use Changes on UK Feed Barley Production and Food Security to the 2050s," Land, MDPI, vol. 6(4), pages 1-14, October.
    5. Li-fang Wang & Juan Chen & Zhou-ping Shangguan, 2015. "Yield Responses of Wheat to Mulching Practices in Dryland Farming on the Loess Plateau," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(5), pages 1-15, May.
    6. Jing Wang & Feng Fang & Qiang Zhang & Jinsong Wang & Yubi Yao & Wei Wang, 2016. "Risk evaluation of agricultural disaster impacts on food production in southern China by probability density method," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 83(3), pages 1605-1634, September.
    7. Haidong Zhao & Lina Zhang & M. B. Kirkham & Stephen M. Welch & John W. Nielsen-Gammon & Guihua Bai & Jiebo Luo & Daniel A. Andresen & Charles W. Rice & Nenghan Wan & Romulo P. Lollato & Dianfeng Zheng, 2022. "U.S. winter wheat yield loss attributed to compound hot-dry-windy events," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 13(1), pages 1-9, December.
    8. Mayer, D. G. & Belward, J. A. & Burrage, K., 2001. "Robust parameter settings of evolutionary algorithms for the optimisation of agricultural systems models," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 69(3), pages 199-213, September.
    9. Yaojie Yue & Lin Wang & Jian Li & A-xing Zhu, 2018. "An EPIC model-based wheat drought risk assessment using new climate scenarios in China," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 147(3), pages 539-553, April.
    10. Yang, J.M. & Yang, J.Y. & Liu, S. & Hoogenboom, G., 2014. "An evaluation of the statistical methods for testing the performance of crop models with observed data," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 81-89.
    11. Juan Quijano & Miguel Jaimes & Marco Torres & Eduardo Reinoso & Luisarturo Castellanos & Jesús Escamilla & Mario Ordaz, 2015. "Event-based approach for probabilistic agricultural drought risk assessment under rainfed conditions," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 76(2), pages 1297-1318, March.
    12. El Chami, D. & Daccache, A., 2015. "Assessing sustainability of winter wheat production under climate change scenarios in a humid climate — An integrated modelling framework," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 19-25.
    13. Yang, J. & Rowell, D. L. & Burns, I. G. & Guttormsen, G. & Riley, H. & Wadsworth, G. A., 2002. "Modification and evaluation of the crop nitrogen model N_ABLE using Norwegian field data," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 72(3), pages 241-261, June.
    14. Josafhat Salinas-Ruíz & Sandra Luz Hernández-Valladolid & Juan Valente Hidalgo-Contreras & Juan Manuel Romero-Padilla, 2022. "Selection and Fitting of Mixed Models in Sugarcane Yield Trials," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-12, March.
    15. Fernandez, J. E. & Slawinski, C. & Moreno, F. & Walczak, R. T. & Vanclooster, M., 2002. "Simulating the fate of water in a soil-crop system of a semi-arid Mediterranean area with the WAVE 2.1 and the EURO-ACCESS-II models," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 56(2), pages 113-129, July.
    16. Link, Johanna & Graeff, Simone & Batchelor, William David & Claupein, Wilhelm, 2006. "Evaluating the economic and environmental impact of environmental compensation payment policy under uniform and variable-rate nitrogen management," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 91(1-2), pages 135-153, November.
    17. Martina Sartori & Davide Geneletti & Stefano Schiavo & Rocco Scolozzi, 2017. "To what extent will climate and land-use change affect EU-28 agriculture? A computable general equilibrium analysis," IEFE Working Papers 98, IEFE, Center for Research on Energy and Environmental Economics and Policy, Universita' Bocconi, Milano, Italy.
    18. Matekole, Augustus N. & Westra, John V. & Appelboom, Timothy W., 2009. "Best Management Practices: How Economical is it in Southern Agricultural Systems?," 2009 Annual Meeting, January 31-February 3, 2009, Atlanta, Georgia 46757, Southern Agricultural Economics Association.
    19. Lu Hao & Xiaoyu Zhang & Shoudong Liu, 2012. "Risk assessment to China’s agricultural drought disaster in county unit," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 61(2), pages 785-801, March.
    20. DeJonge, Kendall C. & Kaleita, Amy L. & Thorp, Kelly R., 2007. "Simulating the effects of spatially variable irrigation on corn yields, costs, and revenue in Iowa," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 92(1-2), pages 99-109, August.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:agisys:v:98:y:2008:i:2:p:135-146. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/agsy .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.