An improved CROPR model for estimating cotton yield under soil aeration stress

Abstract

Accurate estimation of crop yield under aeration stress is crucial for field water table management. In this study, the CROPR crop model was improved in two aspects: (i) a new aeration factor, which was related to a drainage index, was proposed and used to represent the condition of soil aeration; and (ii) a multiplicative structure, instead of the original additive structure, was used in the calculation of dry matter accumulation to include the after-effect of aeration stress. Four-year lysimeter experiments on cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) growth under aeration stress were conducted from 2008 to 2011 to calibrate and validate both the original and improved CROPR. The results indicated that the improved CROPR performed better than the original CROPR and was suitable for simulating cotton yield under aeration stress. In the calibration, with the improved CROPR, the root-mean-squared error (RMSE) of seed cotton yield was 832.84 kg ha–1 with a normalised value (NRMSE) of 15.87%, whereas with the original CROPR, the RMSE was 973.03 kg ha–1 with an NRMSE of 18.55%. In the validation, with the improved CROPR, the RMSE of seed cotton yield was 686.22 kg ha–1 with an NRMSE of 14.87%; with the original CROPR, the RMSE was 1019.02 kg ha–1 with an NRMSE of 22.08%.

The Effects of Flood, Drought, and Flood Followed by Drought on Yield in Cotton

“…The relationships between crop dry matter yield and economic yield (e.g., seed cotton yield) have been widely proven stable; thus, in applications of dry matter models under water stress, the dry matter output is directly converted to economic yield by local-verified regression relationships [37,48,49]. As found in our experimental results (Table 3), the relationship between dry matter yield and seed cotton yield was the closest and most stable among the various yield index relationships, regardless of the presence of water stress, which supports the wide application of this relationship.…”

“…At the end of The soil type of the lysimeter soils was classified as silty clay loam soil according to the US soil texture classification [36], with a saturated water content and a field capacity (FC) of 44.6% and 32.0% (in volumetric moisture content), respectively. In addition, each lysimeter was equipped with an automatically controlled water supply and drainage system (designed by Wuhan University, China, [13,37]) capable of regulating the water tables to designated levels.…”

Enhancing APSIM to simulate excessive moisture effects on root growth

“…A threshold value, known as the critical AFPS value, is used to inhibit root growth or other processes as soil moisture approaches saturation. Based on this concept, various aeration stress functions have been conceptualized (Jones et al, 1991;Asseng et al, 1997a, b;Calmon et al, 1999) and extended (Bartholomeus et al, 2008;Šimůnek and Hopmans, 2009) or have been implemented in simulation models (Qian et al, 2017;Hartmann et al, 2017). In most cases, experimental data were not available and a critical AFPS value of about 5% has been used because it provided plausible simulations (Asseng et al, 1997b) and because this value falls within the range of observed values in experimental studies (Huck, 1970;Boru et al, 2003;Yamauchi et al, 2018).…”

Responses of Cotton at Different Growth Stages to Aeration Stress under the Influence of High Temperature

“…H eavy rains and excessive irrigation can cause waterlogging (perched water table) or submergence (presence of ponded water) under poor drainage conditions. Both waterlogging and submergence can induce aeration stress, which can restrict crop growth (Brisson et al, 2002; Phukan et al, 2015; Qian et al, 2017). Cotton ( Gossypium hirsutum .…”

“…The effect of aeration stress on cotton growth and yield is closely associated with the duration and timing of the stress, and the flooding depth/groundwater table (Hodgson, 1982; Hodgson and Chan, 1982; Bange et al, 2004; Shaw et al, 2013; Qian et al, 2015; Qian et al, 2017). Cotton growth and yield are generally considered to be less sensitive to aeration stress at the boll‐opening stage (Qian et al, 2015; Zhang et al, 2016; Wang et al, 2017).…”