IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/agiwat/v97y2010i7p1051-1062.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

SWAP, CropSyst and MACRO comparison in two contrasting soils cropped with maize in Northern Italy

Author

Listed:
  • Bonfante, A.
  • Basile, A.
  • Acutis, M.
  • De Mascellis, R.
  • Manna, P.
  • Perego, A.
  • Terribile, F.

Abstract

The quantification of the water balance terms within soil-crop-climate systems is required to derive proper management for plant growth and irrigation. A large number of available models use the well known Richards' equation for the simulation of water redistribution at field scale. Despite their common basis of the representation of water flow in the unsaturated zone, apparently similar hydrological models give different answers if applied in the same pedological, climatic and agronomic scenarios. The objective of the present study was evaluating and comparing the performance of three well known models (SWAP, MACRO and CropSyst) based on the solution of the Richards' equation: in a structured fine soil (Calciustepts located in Cerese, Mantova, Italy) and in a structured fine loamy over sandy soil (Hapludalf located in Caviaga, Lodi, Italy), both cropped with maize. The models were compared on the basis of their reliability to predict soil water content, measured by TDR, at 10 depths over 2 years. We compared the three models on the basis of difference-based indexes (CRM and RMSE) and correlation statistics (r and EF): at three depths (0-0.15, -0.4 and -1.0m), in terms of soil water content profile following a drainage process on bare soil and on soil water content over the whole soil profiles. Although water retention and hydraulic conductivity curves were properly measured in laboratory on undisturbed soil samples, all three models required calibration and validation to obtain good quality simulations. The performances of the three models were quite similar: the average of all (models, sites and depths) root mean square error (RMSE) was 0.032cm3cm-3 (±0.007). Generally, SWAP had the best performance especially in simulating surface infiltration and drying processes, followed by CropSyst and then MACRO. The better performance of SWAP respect the other two models seemed rely on the hydraulic properties parameterization (van Genuchten-Mualem vs. Campbell equation), and to the different techniques used for the numerical solutions of Richards' equation close to the bottom and upper boundaries. Moreover, despite its rather good performance, CropSyst, due to its internal numerical constraints in the parameterization of the retention and conductivity functions, needed a very strong calibration then loosing part of its "physical basis" towards an increasing of its empiricism.

Suggested Citation

  • Bonfante, A. & Basile, A. & Acutis, M. & De Mascellis, R. & Manna, P. & Perego, A. & Terribile, F., 2010. "SWAP, CropSyst and MACRO comparison in two contrasting soils cropped with maize in Northern Italy," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 97(7), pages 1051-1062, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:agiwat:v:97:y:2010:i:7:p:1051-1062
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0378-3774(10)00073-9
    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. Confalonieri, Roberto & Acutis, Marco & Bellocchi, Gianni & Donatelli, Marcello, 2009. "Multi-metric evaluation of the models WARM, CropSyst, and WOFOST for rice," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 220(11), pages 1395-1410.
    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. Noshadi, Masoud & Jamshidi, Sajad, 2014. "Modification of water movement equations in the PRZM3 for simulating pesticides in soil profile," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 143(C), pages 38-47.
    2. Bonfante, A. & Monaco, E. & Manna, P. & De Mascellis, R. & Basile, A. & Buonanno, M. & Cantilena, G. & Esposito, A. & Tedeschi, A. & De Michele, C. & Belfiore, O. & Catapano, I. & Ludeno, G. & Salinas, 2019. "LCIS DSS—An irrigation supporting system for water use efficiency improvement in precision agriculture: A maize case study," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 176(C).
    3. Bonfante, A. & Alfieri, S.M. & Albrizio, R. & Basile, A. & De Mascellis, R. & Gambuti, A. & Giorio, P. & Langella, G. & Manna, P. & Monaco, E. & Moio, L. & Terribile, F., 2017. "Evaluation of the effects of future climate change on grape quality through a physically based model application: a case study for the Aglianico grapevine in Campania region, Italy," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 152(C), pages 100-109.
    4. Bonfante, A. & Sellami, M.H. & Abi Saab, M.T. & Albrizio, R. & Basile, A. & Fahed, S. & Giorio, P. & Langella, G. & Monaco, E. & Bouma, J., 2017. "The role of soils in the analysis of potential agricultural production: A case study in Lebanon," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 156(C), pages 67-75.
    5. Wang, Xiaowen & Li, Liang & Ding, Yibo & Xu, Jiatun & Wang, Yunfei & Zhu, Yan & Wang, Xiaoyun & Cai, Huanjie, 2021. "Adaptation of winter wheat varieties and irrigation patterns under future climate change conditions in Northern China," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 243(C).
    6. Shafiei, Mojtaba & Ghahraman, Bijan & Saghafian, Bahram & Davary, Kamran & Pande, Saket & Vazifedoust, Majid, 2014. "Uncertainty assessment of the agro-hydrological SWAP model application at field scale: A case study in a dry region," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 324-334.
    7. Dokoohaki, Hamze & Gheysari, Mahdi & Mousavi, Sayed-Farhad & Zand-Parsa, Shahrokh & Miguez, Fernando E. & Archontoulis, Sotirios V. & Hoogenboom, Gerrit, 2016. "Coupling and testing a new soil water module in DSSAT CERES-Maize model for maize production under semi-arid condition," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 163(C), pages 90-99.
    8. Xiaowen Wang & Huanjie Cai & Liang Li & Xiaoyun Wang, 2020. "Estimating Soil Water Content and Evapotranspiration of Winter Wheat under Deficit Irrigation Based on SWAP Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(22), pages 1-29, November.

    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. Nana, E. & Corbari, C. & Bocchiola, D., 2014. "A model for crop yield and water footprint assessment: Study of maize in the Po valley," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 139-149.
    2. Paleari, Livia & Confalonieri, Roberto, 2016. "Sensitivity analysis of a sensitivity analysis: We are likely overlooking the impact of distributional assumptions," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 340(C), pages 57-63.
    3. Zhu, Xiufang & Xu, Kun & Liu, Ying & Guo, Rui & Chen, Lingyi, 2021. "Assessing the vulnerability and risk of maize to drought in China based on the AquaCrop model," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 189(C).
    4. Masseroni, Daniele & Gangi, Fabiola & Galli, Andrea & Ceriani, Rodolfo & De Gaetani, Carlo & Gandolfi, Claudio, 2022. "Behind the efficiency of border irrigation: Lesson learned in Northern Italy," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 269(C).
    5. Bocchiola, D. & Brunetti, L. & Soncini, A. & Polinelli, F. & Gianinetto, M., 2019. "Impact of climate change on agricultural productivity and food security in the Himalayas: A case study in Nepal," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 171(C), pages 113-125.
    6. Confalonieri, R. & Bregaglio, S. & Acutis, M., 2010. "A proposal of an indicator for quantifying model robustness based on the relationship between variability of errors and of explored conditions," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 221(6), pages 960-964.
    7. Pagani, Valentina & Guarneri, Tommaso & Busetto, Lorenzo & Ranghetti, Luigi & Boschetti, Mirco & Movedi, Ermes & Campos-Taberner, Manuel & Garcia-Haro, Francisco Javier & Katsantonis, Dimitrios & Stav, 2019. "A high-resolution, integrated system for rice yield forecasting at district level," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 168(C), pages 181-190.
    8. Gilardelli, Carlo & Confalonieri, Roberto & Cappelli, Giovanni Alessandro & Bellocchi, Gianni, 2018. "Sensitivity of WOFOST-based modelling solutions to crop parameters under climate change," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 368(C), pages 1-14.
    9. Shrestha, Shailesh & Ciaian, Pavel & Himics, Mihay & Van Doorslaer, Benjamin, 2013. "Impacts of Climate Change on EU Agriculture," Review of Agricultural and Applied Economics (RAAE), Faculty of Economics and Management, Slovak Agricultural University in Nitra, vol. 16(2), pages 1-16, September.
    10. Shrestha, Shailesh & Himics, Mihaly & Van Doorslaer, Benjamin & Ciaian, Pavel, 2012. "EU wide regional impacts of climate change," 123rd Seminar, February 23-24, 2012, Dublin, Ireland 122546, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    11. Bocchiola, D., 2015. "Impact of potential climate change on crop yield and water footprint of rice in the Po valley of Italy," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 139(C), pages 223-237.
    12. Confalonieri, R. & Bregaglio, S. & Acutis, M., 2012. "Quantifying plasticity in simulation models," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 225(C), pages 159-166.
    13. Pin Wang & Zhao Zhang & Xiao Song & Yi Chen & Xing Wei & Peijun Shi & Fulu Tao, 2014. "Temperature variations and rice yields in China: historical contributions and future trends," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 124(4), pages 777-789, June.
    14. Li, Runwei & Wei, Chenyang & Afroz, Mahnaz Dil & Lyu, Jun & Chen, Gang, 2021. "A GIS-based framework for local agricultural decision-making and regional crop yield simulation," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 193(C).
    15. Bruelle, Guillaume & Affholder, François & Abrell, Thomas & Ripoche, Aude & Dusserre, Julie & Naudin, Krishna & Tittonell, Pablo & Rabeharisoa, Lilia & Scopel, Eric, 2017. "Can conservation agriculture improve crop water availability in an erratic tropical climate producing water stress? A simple model applied to upland rice in Madagascar," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 192(C), pages 281-293.
    16. Confalonieri, R. & Bellocchi, G. & Bregaglio, S. & Donatelli, M. & Acutis, M., 2010. "Comparison of sensitivity analysis techniques: A case study with the rice model WARM," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 221(16), pages 1897-1906.
    17. Zhang, Jing & Chen, Yi & Zhang, Zhao, 2020. "A remote sensing-based scheme to improve regional crop model calibration at sub-model component level," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 181(C).
    18. Palazzoli, I. & Maskey, S. & Uhlenbrook, S. & Nana, E. & Bocchiola, D., 2015. "Impact of prospective climate change on water resources and crop yields in the Indrawati basin, Nepal," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 133(C), pages 143-157.
    19. Bocchiola, D. & Nana, E. & Soncini, A., 2013. "Impact of climate change scenarios on crop yield and water footprint of maize in the Po valley of Italy," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 50-61.
    20. Tiecheng Bai & Nannan Zhang & Youqi Chen & Benoit Mercatoris, 2019. "Assessing the Performance of the WOFOST Model in Simulating Jujube Fruit Tree Growth under Different Irrigation Regimes," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-16, March.

    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:agiwat:v:97:y:2010:i:7:p:1051-1062. 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/agwat .

    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.