MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2585601716 · doi:10.1017/s0021859616000290

Using the CSM–CERES–Maize model to assess the gap between actual and potential yields of grain maize

2016· article· en· W2585601716 on OpenAlexaffabout
Qi Jing, Jiali Shang, Ted Huffman, Budong Qian, Elizabeth Pattey, Jiangui Liu, Taifeng Dong, C. F. Drury, Nicolas Tremblay

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Agricultural Science · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicCrop Yield and Soil Fertility
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDSSATCultivarYield (engineering)Grain yieldAgronomyZea maysMathematicsCrop simulation modelEnvironmental scienceSimulation modelingCrop yieldBiologyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

SUMMARY Maize in Canada is grown mainly in the south-eastern part of the country. No comprehensive studies on Canadian maize yield levels have been done so far to analyse the barriers of obtaining optimal yields associated with cultivar, environmental stress and agronomic management practices. The objective of the current study was to use a modelling approach to analyse the gaps between actual and potential (determined by cultivar, solar radiation and temperature without any other stresses) maize yields in Eastern Canada. The CSM–CERES–Maize model in DSSAT v4·6 was calibrated and evaluated with measured data of seven cultivars under different nitrogen (N) rates across four sites. The model was then used to simulate grain yield levels defined as: yield potential (YP), water-limited (YW, rainfed), and water- and N-limited yields with N rates 80 kg/ha (YW, N-80N) and 160 kg/ha (YW, N-160N). The options were assessed to further increase grain yield by analysing the yield gaps related to water and N deficiencies. The CSM–CERES–Maize model simulated the grain yields in the experiments well with normalized root-mean-squared errors <0·20. The model was able to capture yield variations associated with varying N rates, cultivar, soil type and inter-annual climate variability. The seven calibrated cultivars used in the experiments were divided into three grades according to their simulated YP: low, medium and high. The simulation results for the 30-year period from 1981 to 2010 showed that the average YPwas 15 000 kg/ha for cultivars with high yield potential. The YPis generally about 6000 kg/ha greater than the actual yield (YA) at each experimental site in Eastern Canada. Two-thirds of this gap between YPand YAis probably associated with water stress, as a gap of approximately 4000 kg/ha between the YWand the YPwas simulated. This gap may be reduced through crop management, such as introducing irrigation to improve the distribution of available water during the growing season. The simulated yields indicated a gap of about 3000 and 1000 kg/ha between YWand YW,N-80N for cultivars with high YPand low YP, respectively. The gap between YWand YW,N-160N decreased to <2000 kg/ha for high Ypcultivars with little difference for the low Ypcultivars. The different yield gaps among cultivars suggest that cultivars with high YPrequire high N rates but cultivars with low YPmay need only low N rates.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.585
Threshold uncertainty score0.835

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.114
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.180 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations13
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Agricultural ScienceSame topicCrop Yield and Soil FertilityFrench-language works237,207