IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecomod/v480y2023ics0304380023000558.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A new module to simulate surface crop residue decomposition: Description and sensitivity analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Tadiello, Tommaso
  • Gabbrielli, Mara
  • Botta, Marco
  • Acutis, Marco
  • Bechini, Luca
  • Ragaglini, Giorgio
  • Fiorini, Andrea
  • Tabaglio, Vincenzo
  • Perego, Alessia

Abstract

In the agroecosystem, surface crop residues are widely recognized as affecting many processes such as soil water dynamics, crop growth, nitrogen and carbon cycling. For this reason, developing models that simulate the effect of surface residues and their decomposition is crucial, especially while modeling conservation agriculture. To date, even though many cropping systems and C-oriented models differently simulate the evolution of surface residue biomass, a comprehensive approach is still missing. In this study, we developed a new simulation module that explicitly simulates the decomposition of surface residues, by including all the variables and processes that are relevant for agroecosystem's simulation. This module has been later integrated into the ARMOSA cropping system model. To quantify the contribution of each parameter to the simulated outputs (i.e., decomposed biomass), a sensitivity analysis (SA) was conducted, comparing the result with the APSIM model used as a benchmark. The SA was conducted on four different crop residues (maize, rye, soybean and wheat) over three different years. In addition, for each crop residue, we verified whether parameters changed their relevance depending on the considered time period. The most critical parameters of the new module reflected the importance of air temperature, soil water content and residue biomass in the decomposition process. The potential decomposition rate had minor importance, highlighting that, when setting crop-specific values, other environment-related parameters are more relevant for the actual decomposition rate. In the case of APSIM model, the potential decomposition rate and the optimum temperature for this process resulted in the first two ranks. Finally, concordance coefficients were used to compare SA outputs: compared to APSIM, the new model showed higher concordance passing from one crop residue to another, even when comparing the different simulation periods within the same crop. In summary, this work presented a novelty in surface crop residue representation and provided a deep survey of the module behavior and characteristics.

Suggested Citation

  • Tadiello, Tommaso & Gabbrielli, Mara & Botta, Marco & Acutis, Marco & Bechini, Luca & Ragaglini, Giorgio & Fiorini, Andrea & Tabaglio, Vincenzo & Perego, Alessia, 2023. "A new module to simulate surface crop residue decomposition: Description and sensitivity analysis," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 480(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecomod:v:480:y:2023:i:c:s0304380023000558
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2023.110327
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0304380023000558
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2023.110327?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    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. Paleari, Livia & Movedi, Ermes & Zoli, Michele & Burato, Andrea & Cecconi, Irene & Errahouly, Jabir & Pecollo, Eleonora & Sorvillo, Carla & Confalonieri, Roberto, 2021. "Sensitivity analysis using Morris: Just screening or an effective ranking method?," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 455(C).
    2. Nendel, C. & Berg, M. & Kersebaum, K.C. & Mirschel, W. & Specka, X. & Wegehenkel, M. & Wenkel, K.O. & Wieland, R., 2011. "The MONICA model: Testing predictability for crop growth, soil moisture and nitrogen dynamics," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 222(9), pages 1614-1625.
    3. Confalonieri, R. & Bregaglio, S. & Acutis, M., 2012. "Quantifying plasticity in simulation models," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 225(C), pages 159-166.
    4. Probert, M. E. & Dimes, J. P. & Keating, B. A. & Dalal, R. C. & Strong, W. M., 1998. "APSIM's water and nitrogen modules and simulation of the dynamics of water and nitrogen in fallow systems," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 56(1), pages 1-28, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Xenia Specka & Claas Nendel & Ralf Wieland, 2019. "Temporal Sensitivity Analysis of the MONICA Model: Application of Two Global Approaches to Analyze the Dynamics of Parameter Sensitivity," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 9(2), pages 1-29, February.
    2. Hao, Shirui & Ryu, Dongryeol & Western, Andrew W & Perry, Eileen & Bogena, Heye & Franssen, Harrie Jan Hendricks, 2024. "Global sensitivity analysis of APSIM-wheat yield predictions to model parameters and inputs," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 487(C).
    3. El-Naggar, A.G. & Hedley, C.B. & Horne, D. & Roudier, P. & Clothier, B.E., 2020. "Soil sensing technology improves application of irrigation water," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 228(C).
    4. Hampf, Anna C. & Carauta, Marcelo & Latynskiy, Evgeny & Libera, Affonso A.D. & Monteiro, Leonardo & Sentelhas, Paulo & Troost, Christian & Berger, Thomas & Nendel, Claas, 2018. "The biophysical and socio-economic dimension of yield gaps in the southern Amazon – A bio-economic modelling approach," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 165(C), pages 1-13.
    5. Michael Kuhwald & Katja Dörnhöfer & Natascha Oppelt & Rainer Duttmann, 2018. "Spatially Explicit Soil Compaction Risk Assessment of Arable Soils at Regional Scale: The SaSCiA-Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-29, May.
    6. He, Qinsi & Liu, De Li & Wang, Bin & Li, Linchao & Cowie, Annette & Simmons, Aaron & Zhou, Hongxu & Tian, Qi & Li, Sien & Li, Yi & Liu, Ke & Yan, Haoliang & Harrison, Matthew Tom & Feng, Puyu & Waters, 2022. "Identifying effective agricultural management practices for climate change adaptation and mitigation: A win-win strategy in South-Eastern Australia," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 203(C).
    7. 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.
    8. Carauta, Marcelo & Troost, Christian & Guzman-Bustamante, Ivan & Hampf, Anna & Libera, Affonso & Meurer, Katharina & Bönecke, Eric & Franko, Uwe & Ribeiro Rodrigues, Renato de Aragão & Berger, Thomas, 2021. "Climate-related land use policies in Brazil: How much has been achieved with economic incentives in agriculture?," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    9. Thomas, N., 2021. "Alternative Crop Management Methods to Increase Crop Productivity and Farmer Utility," 2021 Conference, August 17-31, 2021, Virtual 315042, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    10. Grotelüschen, Kristina & Gaydon, Donald S. & Langensiepen, Matthias & Ziegler, Susanne & Kwesiga, Julius & Senthilkumar, Kalimuthu & Whitbread, Anthony M. & Becker, Mathias, 2021. "Assessing the effects of management and hydro-edaphic conditions on rice in contrasting East African wetlands using experimental and modelling approaches," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 258(C).
    11. Marcos Jiménez Martínez & Christine Fürst, 2021. "Simulating the Capacity of Rainfed Food Crop Species to Meet Social Demands in Sudanian Savanna Agro-Ecologies," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(8), pages 1-28, August.
    12. Yang, Xuan & Zheng, Lina & Yang, Qian & Wang, Zikui & Cui, Song & Shen, Yuying, 2018. "Modelling the effects of conservation tillage on crop water productivity, soil water dynamics and evapotranspiration of a maize-winter wheat-soybean rotation system on the Loess Plateau of China using," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 166(C), pages 111-123.
    13. Farquharson, Robert J. & Cacho, Oscar J. & Mullen, John D., 2005. "An economic approach to soil fertility management for wheat production in New South Wales and Queensland," 2005 Conference (49th), February 9-11, 2005, Coff's Harbour, Australia 137866, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    14. van Oort, P.A.J. & Wang, G. & Vos, J. & Meinke, H. & Li, B.G. & Huang, J.K. & van der Werf, W., 2016. "Towards groundwater neutral cropping systems in the Alluvial Fans of the North China Plain," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 165(C), pages 131-140.
    15. Chauhan, Yashvir S., 2010. "Potential productivity and water requirements of maize-peanut rotations in Australian semi-arid tropical environments--A crop simulation study," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 97(3), pages 457-464, March.
    16. Dumbrell, Nikki P. & Kragt, Marit E. & Biggs, Jody & Meier, Elizabeth & Thorburn, Peter, 2015. "Climate change abatement and farm profitability analyses across agricultural environments," Working Papers 225674, University of Western Australia, School of Agricultural and Resource Economics.
    17. Oliver, Yvette M. & Robertson, Michael J. & Weeks, Cameron, 2010. "A new look at an old practice: Benefits from soil water accumulation in long fallows under Mediterranean conditions," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 98(2), pages 291-300, December.
    18. Kodur, S., 2017. "Improving the prediction of soil evaporation for different soil types under dryland cropping," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 193(C), pages 131-141.
    19. Vogeler, Iris & Thomas, Steve & van der Weerden, Tony, 2019. "Effect of irrigation management on pasture yield and nitrogen losses," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 216(C), pages 60-69.
    20. Eranga M. Wimalasiri & Ebrahim Jahanshiri & Tengku Adhwa Syaherah Tengku Mohd Suhairi & Hasika Udayangani & Ranjith B. Mapa & Asha S. Karunaratne & Lal P. Vidhanarachchi & Sayed N. Azam-Ali, 2020. "Basic Soil Data Requirements for Process-Based Crop Models as a Basis for Crop Diversification," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(18), pages 1-20, September.

    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:ecomod:v:480:y:2023:i:c:s0304380023000558. 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.journals.elsevier.com/ecological-modelling .

    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.