[go: up one dir, main page]
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/agisys/v143y2016icp61-75.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evaluation of the agricultural production systems simulator simulating Lucerne and annual ryegrass dry matter yield in the Argentine Pampas and south-eastern Australia

Author

Listed:
  • Ojeda, J.J.
  • Pembleton, K.G.
  • Islam, M.R.
  • Agnusdei, M.G.
  • Garcia, S.C.
Abstract
Modelling plant growth provides a tool for evaluating interactions between environment and management of forage crops for pasture-based livestock systems. Consequently, biophysical and farm systems models are becoming important tools for studying production systems that are based on forage crops. The Agricultural Production Systems Simulator (APSIM) is a model with the potential to compare the growth of annual forage crops and perennial pastures. However, information is limited about how accurately the Lucerne and Weed modules represent the growth and development of forage crops and pastures under different managements, soil types and environments in South America. This study evaluated the capacity of APSIM to simulate the growth rates and predict the dry matter (DM) yield of Lucerne (Medicago sativa L.) and annual ryegrass (Lolium multiflorum Lam.) in contrasting climatic regions of Argentina. In addition, at several Australian locations, DM yields of both crops were simulated to ensure that possible changes to the model not interfere with the robust APSIM performance that was already shown in south-eastern Australia. Initial simulations for Lucerne and ryegrass were made with original Lucerne and Weed modules of APSIM, respectively. Simulated DM yield was then compared with field data collected from the same crops grown in five locations in the Argentine Pampas and seven locations in south-eastern Australia over 5 of years. APSIM predicted DM yield of Lucerne at each harvest with reasonable accuracy [0.59, 0.77 and 0.77 for R2, correlation coefficient and concordance correlation coefficient (CCC), respectively]. However, these statistics improved when the DM yield was analysed by annual accumulation, with values of 0.87, 0.93 and 0.92 for R2, correlation coefficient and CCC, respectively. APSIM, generally, over-predicted DM yield of annual ryegrass at the first harvest. Nonetheless, when the Weed module was modified through changes in phenology and transpiration efficiency, performance improved (values of 0.89, 0.94 and 0.93 for R2, correlation coefficient and CCC, respectively). This study showed that annual DM yield of Lucerne can be successfully modelled by the APSIM Lucerne module without any modifications, using a crop modelling approach. However, successfully modelling of Lucerne DM yield by harvest will require further development of the model. Moreover, modification of model parameters associated with phenology and transpiration was required to enable the Weed module of APSIM simulate growth and yield of annual ryegrass in a range of geographic locations within the Argentine Pampas.

Suggested Citation

  • Ojeda, J.J. & Pembleton, K.G. & Islam, M.R. & Agnusdei, M.G. & Garcia, S.C., 2016. "Evaluation of the agricultural production systems simulator simulating Lucerne and annual ryegrass dry matter yield in the Argentine Pampas and south-eastern Australia," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 143(C), pages 61-75.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:agisys:v:143:y:2016:i:c:p:61-75
    DOI: 10.1016/j.agsy.2015.12.005
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0308521X15300639
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.agsy.2015.12.005?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. Sinclair, T.R. & Salado-Navarro, L.R. & Salas, Graciela & Purcell, L.C., 2007. "Soybean yields and soil water status in Argentina: Simulation analysis," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 94(2), pages 471-477, May.
    2. Piñeiro, Gervasio & Perelman, Susana & Guerschman, Juan P. & Paruelo, José M., 2008. "How to evaluate models: Observed vs. predicted or predicted vs. observed?," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 216(3), pages 316-322.
    3. Chapman, D.F. & Kenny, S.N. & Beca, D. & Johnson, I.R., 2008. "Pasture and forage crop systems for non-irrigated dairy farms in southern Australia. 2. Inter-annual variation in forage supply, and business risk," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 97(3), pages 126-138, June.
    4. Chapman, D.F. & Kenny, S.N. & Beca, D. & Johnson, I.R., 2008. "Pasture and forage crop systems for non-irrigated dairy farms in southern Australia. 1. Physical production and economic performance," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 97(3), pages 108-125, June.
    5. Tedeschi, Luis Orlindo, 2006. "Assessment of the adequacy of mathematical models," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 89(2-3), pages 225-247, September.
    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. Della Nave, Facundo N. & Ojeda, Jonathan J. & Irisarri, J. Gonzalo N. & Pembleton, Keith & Oyarzabal, Mariano & Oesterheld, Martín, 2022. "Calibrating APSIM for forage sorghum using remote sensing and field data under sub-optimal growth conditions," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 201(C).
    2. Ojeda, Jonathan J. & Volenec, Jeffrey J. & Brouder, Sylvie M. & Caviglia, Octavio P. & Agnusdei, Mónica G., 2018. "Modelling stover and grain yields, and subsurface artificial drainage from long-term corn rotations using APSIM," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 195(C), pages 154-171.
    3. Ojeda, Jonathan J. & Huth, Neil & Holzworth, Dean & Raymundo, Rubí & Zyskowski, Robert F. & Sinton, Sarah M. & Michel, Alexandre J. & Brown, Hamish E., 2021. "Assessing errors during simulation configuration in crop models – A global case study using APSIM-Potato," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 458(C).
    4. Baudracco, Javier & Lazzarini, Belén & Rossler, Noelia & Gastaldi, Laura & Jauregui, José & Fariña, Santiago, 2022. "Strategies to double milk production per farm in Argentina: Investment, economics and risk analysis," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 197(C).
    5. Yang, Xuan & Jia, Pengfei & Hou, Qingqing & Zhu, Min, 2023. "Quantitative sensitivity of crop productivity and water productivity to precipitation during growth periods in the Agro-Pastoral Ecotone of Shanxi Province, China, based on APSIM," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 283(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. Stirling, Sofía & Fariña, Santiago & Pacheco, David & Vibart, Ronaldo, 2021. "Whole-farm modelling of grazing dairy systems in Uruguay," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 193(C).
    2. Ojeda, Jonathan J. & Volenec, Jeffrey J. & Brouder, Sylvie M. & Caviglia, Octavio P. & Agnusdei, Mónica G., 2018. "Modelling stover and grain yields, and subsurface artificial drainage from long-term corn rotations using APSIM," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 195(C), pages 154-171.
    3. Correndo, Adrian A. & Hefley, Trevor J. & Holzworth, Dean P. & Ciampitti, Ignacio A., 2021. "Revisiting linear regression to test agreement in continuous predicted-observed datasets," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 192(C).
    4. Fariña, S.R. & Alford, A. & Garcia, S.C. & Fulkerson, W.J., 2013. "An integrated assessment of business risk for pasture-based dairy farm systems intensification," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 10-20.
    5. Chapman, D.F. & Kenny, S.N. & Lane, N., 2011. "Pasture and forage crop systems for non-irrigated dairy farms in southern Australia: 3. Estimated economic value of additional home-grown feed," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 104(8), pages 589-599, October.
    6. Vogeler, Iris & Vibart, Ronaldo & Cichota, Rogerio, 2017. "Potential benefits of diverse pasture swards for sheep and beef farming," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 154(C), pages 78-89.
    7. Berger, Horacio & Bilotto, Franco & Bell, Lindsay W. & Machado, Claudio F., 2017. "Feedbase intervention in a cow-calf system in the flooding pampas of Argentina: 2. Estimation of the marginal value of additional feed," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 158(C), pages 68-77.
    8. Smith, Andrew P. & Western, Andrew W., 2013. "Predicting nitrogen dynamics in a dairy farming catchment using systems synthesis modelling," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 144-154.
    9. Bilotto, Franco & Recavarren, Paulo & Vibart, Ronaldo & Machado, Claudio F., 2019. "Backgrounding strategy effects on farm productivity, profitability and greenhouse gas emissions of cow-calf systems in the Flooding Pampas of Argentina," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 176(C).
    10. Booth, Shawn & Walters, William J & Steenbeek, Jeroen & Christensen, Villy & Charmasson, Sabine, 2020. "An Ecopath with Ecosim model for the Pacific coast of eastern Japan: Describing the marine environment and its fisheries prior to the Great East Japan earthquake," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 428(C).
    11. Percy, A. Jemila & Edwin, M., 2023. "Studies on the performance and emission characteristics of a dual fuel VCR engine using producer gas as secondary fuel: An optimization approach using response surface methodology," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 263(PA).
    12. Luca Piciullo & Vittoria Capobianco & Håkon Heyerdahl, 2022. "A first step towards a IoT-based local early warning system for an unsaturated slope in Norway," 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. 114(3), pages 3377-3407, December.
    13. Amin, M.G. Mostofa & Šimůnek, Jirka & Lægdsmand, Mette, 2014. "Simulation of the redistribution and fate of contaminants from soil-injected animal slurry," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 17-29.
    14. 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.
    15. Salado-Navarro, Luis R. & Sinclair, Thomas R., 2009. "Crop rotations in Argentina: Analysis of water balance and yield using crop models," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 102(1-3), pages 11-16, October.
    16. María Gabriela Pizarro Inostroza & Francisco Javier Navas González & Vincenzo Landi & José Manuel León Jurado & Juan Vicente Delgado Bermejo & Javier Fernández Álvarez & María del Amparo Martínez Mart, 2020. "Software-Automatized Individual Lactation Model Fitting, Peak and Persistence and Bayesian Criteria Comparison for Milk Yield Genetic Studies in Murciano-Granadina Goats," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 8(9), pages 1-21, September.
    17. Steppe, Kathy & De Pauw, Dirk J.W. & Lemeur, Raoul, 2008. "Validation of a dynamic stem diameter variation model and the resulting seasonal changes in calibrated parameter values," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 218(3), pages 247-259.
    18. Majid Majzoubi & Eric Yanfei Zhao, 2023. "Going beyond optimal distinctiveness: Strategic positioning for gaining an audience composition premium," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 44(3), pages 737-777, March.
    19. Shuang Liu & David I Stern, 2008. "A Meta-Analysis of Contingent Valuation Studies in Coastal and Near-Shore Marine Ecosystems," Socio-Economics and the Environment in Discussion (SEED) Working Paper Series 2008-15, CSIRO Sustainable Ecosystems.
    20. Sepaskhah, Ali Reza & Fahandezh-Saadi, Saghar & Zand-Parsa, Shahrokh, 2011. "Logistic model application for prediction of maize yield under water and nitrogen management," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 99(1), pages 51-57.

    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:143:y:2016:i:c:p:61-75. 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.