Modeling Crop Water Productivity Using a Coupled SWAT–MODSIM Model
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study examines the water productivity of irrigated wheat and maize yields in Karkheh River Basin (KRB) in the semi-arid region of Iran using a coupled modeling approach consisting of the hydrological model (SWAT) and the river basin water allocation model (MODSIM). Dynamic irrigation requirements instead of constant time series of demand were considered. As the cereal production of KRB plays a major role in supplying the food market of Iran, it is necessary to understand the crop yield-water relations for irrigated wheat and maize in the lower part of KRB (LKRB) where most of the irrigated agricultural plains are located. Irrigated wheat and maize yields (Y) and consumptive water use (AET) were modeled with uncertainty analysis at a subbasin level for 1990–2010. Simulated Y and AET were used to calculate crop water productivity (CWP). The coupled SWAT–MODSIM approach improved the accuracy of SWAT outputs by considering the water allocation derived from MODSIM. The results indicated that the highest CWP across this region was 1.31 kg·m−3 and 1.13 kg·m−3 for wheat and maize, respectively; and the lowest was less than 0.62 kg·m−3 and 0.58 kg·m−3. A close linear relationship was found for CWP and yield. The results showed a continuing increase for AET over the years while CWP peaks and then declines. This is evidence of the existence of a plateau in CWP as AET continues to increase and evidence of the fact that higher AET does not necessarily result in a higher yield.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".