The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Cotton yields as influenced by ENSO at different planting dates and spatial aggregation levels
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
According to county-level analyses, ENSO had little and spatially less consistent effects on cotton fiber yields in Georgia, but the effect became more evident at larger spatial scales.
“According to county level analyses, ENSO had little and spatially less consistent effects, but the effect became more evident at larger spatial scales.”
From Development and Application of Process-based Simulation Models for Cotton Production: A Review of Past, Present, and Future Directions (2014) · cites this paper as Paz et al. (2012)
According to regional-level analysis, the fiber yield difference among ENSO phases was minimal for average planting dates, but substantial if planting date deviated from the average.
“According to regional level analysis, the fiber yield difference among ENSO phases was minimal for average planting dates, but substantial if planting date deviated from the average.”
From Development and Application of Process-based Simulation Models for Cotton Production: A Review of Past, Present, and Future Directions (2014) · cites this paper as Paz et al. (2012)
Citations
Cites
The DSSAT cropping system model
Jones, J. W., Hoogenboom, G., Porter, C. H., Boote, K. J., Batchelor, W. D., Hunt, L. A., Wilkens, P. W., Singh, U., Gijsman, A. J., & Ritchie, J. T. (2003) · European Journal of Agronomy · doi:10.1016/s1161-0301(02)00107-7 · Cited by 4,465
Self-citationUse of Global Sensitivity Analysis for CROPGRO Cotton Model Development
Pathak, T. B., Fraisse, C. W., Jones, J. W., Messina, C. D., & Hoogenboom, G. (2007) · Transactions of the ASABE · doi:10.13031/2013.24082 · Cited by 68
Self-citation
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 40
- Ahuja, 2007, Whole-system integration and modeling essential to agricultural science and technology for the 21st century, J. Crop Improv., 19, 73, 10.1300/J411v19n01_04 · DOI
- Brolley, 2007, Experimental drought threat forecast for Florida, Agric. Forest Meteorol., 145, 84, 10.1016/j.agrformet.2007.04.003 · DOI
- Cabrera, 2006, Impact of climate information on reducing farm risk by optimizing crop insurance strategy, Trans. ASABE, 49, 1223, 10.13031/2013.21722 · DOI
- Christopher, J.P., 2007. Improving irrigated cropping systems on the High Plains using crop simulation models. M.S. Thesis. Kansas State University.
- Culpepper, 2009, Weed control and crop response to glufosinate applied to ‘PHY 485 WRF’ cotton, Weed Technol., 23, 356, 10.1614/WT-08-168.1 · DOI
- de Wit, 2005, Spatial resolution of precipitation and radiation: The effect on regional crop yield forecasts, Agric. Forest Meteorol., 135, 156, 10.1016/j.agrformet.2005.11.012 · DOI
- Fraisse, 2006, AgClimate: a climate forecast information system for agricultural risk management in the southeastern USA, Comput. Electron Agric., 53, 13, 10.1016/j.compag.2006.03.002 · DOI
- Fraisse, 2008, El Niño–Southern Oscillation influences on soybean yields in eastern Paraguay, Int. J. Climatol., 28, 1399, 10.1002/joc.1641 · DOI
- Garcia y Garcia, 2005, Evaluation of an improved daily solar radiation generator for the southeastern USA, Climate Res., 29, 91, 10.3354/cr029091 · DOI
- Garcia y Garcia, 2006, Analysis of interannual variation of peanut yield in Georgia using a dynamic crop simulation model, Trans. ASAE, 49, 2005, 10.13031/2013.22281 · DOI
- Garcia y Garcia, 2008, Impact of generated solar radiation on simulated crop growth and yield, Ecol. Modell., 210, 312, 10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2007.08.003 · DOI · Paper page
- Garcia y Garcia, 2010, Enso-based climate variability affects water use efficiency of rainfed cotton grown in the southeastern USA, Agric. Ecosyst. Environ., 139, 629, 10.1016/j.agee.2010.10.009 · DOI · Paper page
- Garnett, 1992, The impact of large-scale atmospheric circulations and anomalies on Indian monsoon droughts and floods and on world grain yields – a statistical analysis, Agric. Forest. Meteorol., 61, 113, 10.1016/0168-1923(92)90028-3 · DOI
- Guerra, 2007, Irrigation water use estimates based on crop simulation models and kriging, Agric. Water Manage, 89, 199, 10.1016/j.agwat.2007.01.010 · DOI · Paper page
- Hammer, 2001, Advances in application of climate prediction in agriculture, Agric. Syst., 70, 515, 10.1016/S0308-521X(01)00058-0 · DOI
- Handler, 1990, USA corn yields, the El Niño and agricultural drought: 1867–1988, Int. J. Climatol., 10, 819, 10.1002/joc.3370100804 · DOI
- Hansen, 1998, ENSO influences on agriculture in the southeastern United States, J. Clim., 11, 404, 10.1175/1520-0442(1998)011<0404:EIOAIT>2.0.CO;2 · DOI
- Jagtap, 2002, Adaptation and evaluation of the CROPGRO-soybean model to predict regional yield and production, Agric. Ecosyst. Environ., 93, 73, 10.1016/S0167-8809(01)00358-9 · DOI
- Jones, 2000, Potential benefits of climate forecast to agriculture, Agric. Ecosyst. Environ., 82, 169, 10.1016/S0167-8809(00)00225-5 · DOI
- Kiladis, 1989, Global climatic anomalies associated with extremes in the Southern Oscillation, J. Clim., 2, 1069, 10.1175/1520-0442(1989)002<1069:GCAAWE>2.0.CO;2 · DOI
- Lobell, 2006, Evaluating strategies for improved water use in spring wheat with CERES, Agric. Water Manage., 84, 249, 10.1016/j.agwat.2006.02.007 · DOI
- López-Cedrón, 2008, Improving the CERES-Maize model ability to simulate water deficit impact on maize production and yield components, Agron. J., 100, 296, 10.2134/agrojnl2007.0088 · DOI
- Mavromatis, 2002, El Niño-Southern oscillation effects on peanut yield and nitrogen leaching, Clim. Res., 22, 129, 10.3354/cr022129 · DOI
- Messina, C., Ramkrishnan, P.B., Jones, J.W., Boote, K.J., Hoogenboom, G., Ritchie, J.T., 2004. A simulation model of cotton growth and development for CSM. In: Proc. Biological Systems Simulation Conference. University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, pp. 54–55.
- Nash, 1970, River flow forecasting through conceptual models part I: a discussion of principles, J. Hydrol., 10, 282, 10.1016/0022-1694(70)90255-6 · DOI
- Nuti, 2006, Effect of planting date, mepiquat chloride, and glyphosate application to glyphosate-resistant cotton, Agron. J., 98, 1627, 10.2134/agronj2005.0360 · DOI
- Oram, P.A., 1989. Sensitivity of agricultural production to climatic change, an update. In: Proc. International Symposium on Climate Variability and Food Security in Developing Countries. IRRI, Los Banos, the Philippines, pp. 25–44.
- Ortiz, 2009, Adapting the CROPGRO-Cotton model to simulate cotton biomass and yield under southern root-knot nematode parasitism, Trans. ASABE, 52, 2129, 10.13031/2013.29201 · DOI
- Paz, 2007, Development of an ENSO-based irrigation decision support tool for peanut production in the Southeastern US, Comput. Electron. Agric., 55, 28, 10.1016/j.compag.2006.11.003 · DOI
- Phillips, 1999, The role of ENSO in determining climate and maize variability in the U.S. corn belt, Int. J. Climatol., 19, 877, 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0088(19990630)19:8<877::AID-JOC406>3.0.CO;2-Q · DOI
- Podestá, 2002, Use of ENSO-related climate information in agricultural decision making in Argentina: a pilot experience, Agric. Syst., 74, 371, 10.1016/S0308-521X(02)00046-X · DOI
- Richardson, 1981, Stochastic simulation of daily precipitation, temperature, and solar radiation, Water Resour. Res., 17, 182, 10.1029/WR017i001p00182 · DOI
- Ropelewski, 1986, North American precipitation and temperature patterns associated with the El Niño/South Oscillation (ENSO), Mon. Weather Rev., 114, 2352, 10.1175/1520-0493(1986)114<2352:NAPATP>2.0.CO;2 · DOI
- Solow, 1998, The value of improved ENSO prediction to US agriculture, Clim. Change, 39, 47, 10.1023/A:1005342500057 · DOI
- Steinemann, 2006, Using climate forecasts for drought management, J. Appl. Meteorol. Clim., 45, 1353, 10.1175/JAM2401.1 · DOI
- Suleiman, 2007, Evaluation of FAO-56 crop coefficient procedures for deficit irrigation management of cotton in a humid climate, Agric. Water Manage., 91, 33, 10.1016/j.agwat.2007.03.006 · DOI · Paper page
- Wassenaar, 1999, Modelling wheat yield responses to soil and climate variability at the regional scale, Clim. Res., 1999, 209, 10.3354/cr011209 · DOI
- Willmott, 1981, On the validation of models, Phys. Geogr., 2, 184, 10.1080/02723646.1981.10642213 · DOI · Paper page
- Woli, 2012, Evaluation of various methods for estimating global solar radiation in the southeastern USA, J. Appl. Meteorol. Climatol., 51, 972, 10.1175/JAMC-D-11-0141.1 · DOI
- Zamora, 2009, Modeling cotton production response to shading in a pecan alley cropping system using CROPGRO, Agroforest. Syst., 76, 423, 10.1007/s10457-008-9166-x · DOI
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Rahman, M. H. U., Ahmad, A., Wajid, A., Hussain, M., Rasul, F., Ishaque, W., Islam, M. A., Shelia, V., Awais, M., Ullah, A., et al. (2019) · Field Crops Research · doi:10.1016/j.fcr.2017.07.007 · Cited by 104
Thorp, K. R., Ale, S., Bange, M. P., Barnes, E. M., Hoogenboom, G., Lascano, R. J., McCarthy, A. C., Nair, S., Paz, J. O., Rajan, N., et al. (2014) · Journal of Cotton Science · doi:10.56454/oovc6073 · Cited by 96
Self-citationMishra, S. K., Kaur, V., & Singh, K. (2021) · Agronomy Journal · doi:10.1002/agj2.20788 · Cited by 32
Metadata
- Authors
- Paz, J. O., Woli, P., Garcia y Garcia, A., & Hoogenboom, G.
- Affiliations
- Mississippi State University (US)
- Washington State University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Woli, Prem
- Venue
- Agricultural Systems
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2012-09
- Volume
- 111
- Pages
- 45-52
- ISSN
- 0308-521X (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2003056428
- Cited by
- 44
- References
- 2
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 1
- FWCI
- 3.61
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Agricultural Systems (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- U.S. Department of Agriculture
- National Institute of Food and Agriculture
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Agronomy and Crop Science › Climate change impacts on agriculture
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Climate variability and models
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Remote Sensing in Agriculture
- Keywords
- ENSO, cotton yield, sowing date, spatial aggregation, ENSO phases, La Niña, El Niño, lint yield, crop growth simulation, southeastern United States
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review