Evaluating a Leaf‐Level Canopy Assimilation Model Linked to CERES‐Maize
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The simple approach of calculating crop growth rate as the product of intercepted light and radiation use efficiency may not adequately represent plant growth under stress conditions. We developed a photosynthesis and respiration model for maize ( Zea mays L.) and linked it to CERES‐Maize v.3.7, calling the new model CERES‐PR. The purpose of this work was to evaluate CERES‐PR simulation of photosynthesis at three levels of integration: instantaneous leaf assimilation, hourly canopy assimilation, and seasonal crop growth under conditions where water and N supply were not limiting growth. Instantaneous leaf assimilation measured in field plots were obtained in the central portion of the 13th leaf on three dates during the grain filling to test the model at the leaf level. Carbon dioxide fluxes measured above the canopy with the eddy correlation technique were used to test the model at the canopy level. The progression of leaf area index (LAI) and aboveground biomass from experiments planted at latitudes ranging from 21 to 45° N was used to evaluate the seasonal simulation of crop growth. CERES‐PR was in close agreement with measured values. A sensitivity analysis indicated that the temperature function affecting leaf assimilation have a large impact in the simulated growth and grain yield. The new model provides opportunities to simulate plant processes more realistically under stress. Our future efforts will focus on developing new modules to simulate energy balance and stomatal conductance to incorporate into CERES‐PR leaf‐level C, water, and N balances.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".