The use of crop models to assess crop production and food security
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The global food supply and food security are altered by field, soil, and weather conditions during crop production. Researching food productivity became crucial as the global population increased. In particular, crop losses bring low food supply and price instabilities at the regional and global levels. With that in mind, we reviewed ten crop models and the most simulated impacts from soil-crop-atmosphere interactions in maize, rice, and wheat production. Since 2012, modellers have mainly used APSIM to predict water availability, temperature changes and Greenhouse Gas  (GHG) concentration to predict crop phenology, growth and development, grain filling and nutrient content, and yield. Since 2013, AquaCrop has been used to simulate scenarios focused on water balance in crop production systems, water stress and irrigation planning. Interestingly, Biome-BGCMuso was developed as a biogeochemical model and was not considered good by crop modellers. However, After updates, version v6.2 can simulate different management and field conditions for fifteen crops, considering heat, nitrogen and drought stress. Since 2008, crop modellers used CropSyst to evaluate water availability, nitrogen use efficiency (UE), temperature shifts and GHG concentration in rainfed and irrigated crop systems. Since 2002,  crop modellers have used DAISY to predict crop growth, nitrogen and water UE, grain content, yield gap, and losses. Since 2011, researchers have used DSSAT-CERES for mitigation strategy planning by predicting crop growth, soil characteristics, changes in land use, and nitrogen and water UE. Since 2015, JULES has been used to determine land-atmosphere interactions, changes in land use and GHG impacts on agriculture. Since 2008, ORYZA modellers have mainly predicted nitrogen and water UE, salinity impacts, and toxicity to rice. STICS was developed in 1996, and since 2008, it has been primarily used to simulate fertilization and irrigation systems, nitrogen leaching, and water availability. Since 2000, researchers have used WOFOST to analyze water availability, crop growth, and productivity under temperature changes. Crop models are fast and reliable resources when simulating crop production and food availability.
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 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".