Acta Univ. Agric. Silvic. Mendelianae Brun. 2015, 63(4), 1177-1186 | DOI: 10.11118/actaun201563041177

Calibration and Validation of the Crop Growth Model DAISY for Spring Barley in the Czech Republic

Eva Pohanková1,2, Petr Hlavinka1,2, Jozef Takáč3, Zdeněk ®alud1,2, Miroslav Trnka1,2
1 Department of Agrosystems and Bioclimatology, Mendel University in Brno, Zemědělská 1, 613 00 Brno, Czech Republic
2 Global Change Research Centre, Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic, v.v.i., Bělidla 986/4a, 603 00 Brno, Czech Republic
3 Soil Science and Conservation Research Institute, Gagarinova 10, 827 13 Bratislava, Slovak Republic

In this paper, the crop growth model DAISY for spring barley (cultivar "Tolar") was calibrated and subsequently validated in three different soil-climate locations in the Czech Republic - Lednice (48°48'51'' N, 16°48'46'' E, altitude 180 m), Věrovany (49°27'39'' N, 17°17'42'' E, altitude 210 m) and Domanínek (49°31'42'' N, 16°14'13'' E, altitude 560 m). The calibration and validation were based on data from a multi-year field experiment from the Central Institute for Supervising and Testing in Agriculture and from a two-year field experiment in Domanínek (2011 and 2012) that was conducted by the Institute of Agrosystems and Bioclimatology in cooperation with the Global Change Research Centre AS CR. The calibration for Lednice, Věrovany and Domanínek was performed using 4 growth seasons from each station, the subsequent validation for Lednice and Věrovany was performed based on 3 growth seasons from each station, and that for Domanínek was based on 6 growth seasons. The value of the RMSE (root mean square error) statistic for flowering was 2 days for calibration and 4 days for validation on average; for maturity, the RMSE was 11 days for both calibration and validation. The average RMSE for the yields was 0.9 t.ha-1 for calibration and 1.6 t.ha-1 for validation. According to the statistical index MBE (mean bias error) for the flowering phenological phase, the crop growth model DAISY showed a delay of 2 days in both calibration and validation. There was also delay of 6 days in calibration and of 8 days in validation for maturity. According to the MBE, the crop growth model DAISY underestimates the yield by 0.2 t.ha-1 for calibration and underestimates the yield by 0.4 t.ha-1 for validation.

Keywords: spring barley, crop growth model, DAISY, "Tolar", field experiments, phenology, growth dynamics
Grants and funding:

This study was supported by the National grant agency project "Crop models as tools to improve production potential and food security" No. QJ1310123 and by KONTAKT II project "Water resources in the Czech agriculture under climate change" No. LD13030. This work was supported by the Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports of CR within the National Sustainability Program I (NPU I), grant number LO1415.

Prepublished online: September 2, 2015; Published: September 1, 2015  Show citation

ACS AIP APA ASA Harvard Chicago IEEE ISO690 MLA NLM Turabian Vancouver
Pohanková, E., Hlavinka, P., Takáč, J., ®alud, Z., & Trnka, M. (2015). Calibration and Validation of the Crop Growth Model DAISY for Spring Barley in the Czech Republic. Acta Universitatis Agriculturae et Silviculturae Mendelianae Brunensis, 63(4), 1177-1186. doi: 10.11118/actaun201563041177
Share...
Download citation
  • BibTeX (.bib)
  • Bookends (.ris)
  • EasyBib (.ris)
  • EndNote (.enw)
  • EndNote 8 (.xml)
  • ISI WoS (.isi)
  • Medlars (.medlars)
  • Mendeley (.ris)
  • MODS (.xml)
  • Papers (.ris)
  • RefWorks (.txt)
  • RefManager (.ris)
  • RIS (.ris)
  • MS Word (.xml)
  • Zotero (.ris)
    • Open full article

    References

    1. ABRAHAMSEN, P., HANSEN, S. 2000. Daisy: An Open Soil-Crop-Atmosphere System Model. Environmental Modelling and Software, 15: 313-330. DOI: 10.1016/S1364-8152(00)00003-7 Go to original source...
    2. ABRAHAMSEN, P. 1999. Daisy Program Reference Manual. Copenhagen: Royal Veterinary and Agricultural University, Deparment of Agricultural Sciences, Laboratory for Agrohydrology and Bioclimatology, Copenhagen.
    3. AMTHOR, J. 2001. Effects of atmospheric CO2 concentration on wheat yield: review of results from experiments using various approaches to kontrol CO2 concentration. Field Crops Research, 73: 1-34. DOI: 10.1016/S0378-4290(01)00179-4 Go to original source...
    4. BATTS, G. R., MORISON, J. I. L, ELLIS, R. H., HADLEY, P. 1997. Effects of CO2 and temperature on growth and yield of crop of winter wheat over four season. European Journal of Agronomy, 7: 43-52. DOI: 10.1016/S1161-0301(97)00022-1 Go to original source...
    5. BROWN, R. A., ROSENBERG, N. J. 1997. Sensitivity of crop yield and water use to change in a range of climatic factors and CO2 concentrations: a simulation study applying EPIC to the central USA. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology, 83: 171-203. DOI: 10.1016/S0168-1923(96)02352-0 Go to original source...
    6. DAVIES, J. A., MCKAY, D. C. 1988. Evaluation of selected models for estimating solar radiation on horizontal surfaces. Solar Energy, 43: 153-168. DOI: 10.1016/0038-092X(89)90027-3 Go to original source...
    7. EITZINGER, J., TRNKA, M., SEMERÁDOVÁ, D., THALER, S., SVOBODOVÁ, E., HLAVINKA, P., ©I©KA, B., TAKÁČ, J., MALATINSKÁ, L., NOVÁKOVÁ, M., DUBROVSKÝ, M., ®ALUD, Z. 2013. Regional climate change impacts on agricultural crop production in Central and Eastern Europe - hotspots, regional differences and common trends. Journal of Agricultural Science, 151: 787-812. DOI: 10.1017/S0021859612000767 Go to original source...
    8. HANSEN, S. 2000. Daisy, a flexible Soil-Plant-Atmosphere system Model Equation. Copenhagen: The Royal Veterinary and Agricultural University.
    9. HAY, R., PORTER, J. 2006. The Physiology of crop yield. Second edition. Blackwell Publishing.
    10. IPCC. 2013. Summary for Policymakers. In: STOCKER, T. F., QIN, D., PLATTNER, G.-K., TIGNOR, M., ALLEN, S. K., BOSCHUNG, J., NAUELS, A., XIA, Y., BEX, V. and MIDGLEY, P. M. (eds.), Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA: Cambridge University Press.
    11. KRŐBEL, R., SUN, Q., INGWERSEN, J., CHEN, X., ZHANG, F., MŰLLER, T., RŐMHELD, V. 2010. Modelling water dynamics with DNDC and DAISY in a soil of the North China Plain: A Compaq study. Enviromental Modelling & Software, 25: 583-601. DOI: 10.1016/j.envsoft.2009.09.003 Go to original source...
    12. PACHEPSKY, Y., TIMLIN, D., RAWLS, W. 2003. Generalized Richards' equation to simulate water transport in unsaturated soils. Journal of Hydrology, 272: 3-13. DOI: 10.1016/S0022-1694(02)00251-2 Go to original source...
    13. RICHARDS, L. A. 1931. Capillarity condition of liquids through porous mediums. Physics, Journal of General and Applied Physics, American Physical Society, 1: 318-333. DOI: 10.1063/1.1745010 Go to original source...
    14. ROSENZWEIG, C., JONES, J. W., HATFIELD, J. L., RUANE, A. C., BOOTE, K. J., THORBURN, P., ANTLE, J. M., NELSON, G. C., PORTER, C., JANSSEN, S., ASSENG, S., BASSO, B., EWERT, F., WALLACH, D., BAIGORRIA, G., WINTER, J. M. 2013. The Agricultural Model Intercomparison and Improvement Project (AgMIP): Protocols and pilot studies. Agricultiral and Forest Meteorology, 170: 166-182. DOI: 10.1016/j.agrformet.2012.09.011 Go to original source...
    15. RŐTTER, R., PALOSUO, T., KERSEBAUM, K. C., ANGULO, C., BINDI, M., EWERT, F., FERRISE, R., HLAVINKA, P., MORIONDO, M., NENDEL, C., OLSEN, J. E., PATIL, R. H., RUGER, F., TAKÁČ, J., TRNKA, M. 2012. Simulation of spring barley yield in different climatic zones of Northern and Central Europe: A comparison of nine crop models. Field Crops Research, 133: 23-36. DOI: 10.1016/j.fcr.2012.03.016 Go to original source...
    16. TAKÁČ, J., ©I©KA, B. 2011. Calibration and Validation of DAISY model in Conditions of the Slovak Republic. Vedecké práce Výskumného ústavu pôdoznalectva a ochrany pôdy, 216: 161-172.
    17. THALER, S., EITZINGER, J., TRNKA, M., DUBROVSKY, M. 2012. Impacts of climate change and alternative adaptation options on winter wheat yield and water productivity in a dry climate in Central Europe. Journal of Agricultural Science, 150: 537-555. DOI: 10.1017/S0021859612000093 Go to original source...
    18. TOMI©KA, Z., SLÁDKOVÁ, J., VAŇKOVÁ, L. 2003. Bodové hodnocení produkční schopnosti půd (Vybraná stanoviątě ČR) - Souhrnná zpráva. Praha: Výzkumný ústav meliorací a ochrana půdy Praha, 88, 96, 145.
    19. VÚPS. 2009. Barley year book 2009. Výzkumný ústav pivovarský a sladařský a. s.
    20. WŐSTEN, J. H. M., LILLY, A., NEMES, A., LE BAS, C. 1999. Development and use of a database of hydraulic properties of European soils. Geoderma, 90: 169-185. DOI: 10.1016/S0016-7061(98)00132-3 Go to original source...

    This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License (CC BY NC ND 4.0), which permits non-comercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original publication is properly cited. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.


    Return to the content