CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 49Climate change impacts on agricultureRemote Sensing in AgricultureIrrigation Practices and Water Management

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Impact of generated solar radiation on simulated crop growth and yield

Garcia y Garcia, Axel, Guerra, Larry C., Hoogenboom, Gerrit·2008·Ecological Modelling
DOI 10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2007.08.003
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2007.08.003

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 35

  1. Angstrom, 1924, Solar and terrestrial radiation, Q. J. R. Meteorol. Soc., 50, 121, 10.1002/qj.49705021008 · DOI
  2. Ball, 2004, Evaluation of solar radiation prediction models in North America, Agron. J., 96, 391, 10.2134/agronj2004.0391 · DOI
  3. Bert, 2007, Sensitivity of CERES-Maize simulated yields to uncertainty in soil properties and daily solar radiation, Agric. Syst., 94, 150
  4. Bristow, 1984, On the relationship between incoming solar radiation and daily maximum and minimum temperature, Agric. For. Meteorol., 31, 159, 10.1016/0168-1923(84)90017-0 · DOI
  5. Cooter, 1995, A solar radiation model for use in biological applications in the south and southeastern USA, Agric. For. Meteorol., 78, 31, 10.1016/0168-1923(95)02241-4 · DOI
  6. Cooter, 1990, The impact of climate change on continuous corn production in the southern USA, Climatic Change, 16, 53, 10.1007/BF00137346 · DOI
  7. Donatelli, 2003, RadEst 3.0: software to estimate daily radiation data from commonly available meteorological variables, Eur. J. Agron., 18, 363, 10.1016/S1161-0301(02)00130-2 · DOI
  8. Dubrovský, 2000, Sensitivity of CERES-Maize yields to statistical structure of daily weather series, Climatic Change, 46, 447, 10.1023/A:1005681809065 · DOI
  9. Earl, 2003, Effect of drought stress on leaf and whole canopy radiation use efficiency and yield of maize, Agron. J., 95, 688, 10.2134/agronj2003.0688 · DOI
  10. Elizondo, 1994, Development of a neural network model to predict daily solar radiation, Agric. For. Meteorol., 71, 115, 10.1016/0168-1923(94)90103-1 · DOI
  11. Fodor, 2003, 4M-software package for modelling cropping systems, Eur. J. Agron., 18, 389, 10.1016/S1161-0301(02)00126-0 · DOI
  12. Fodor, 2005, Sensitivity of crop models to the inaccuracy of meteorological observations, Phys. Chem. Earth, 30, 53, 10.1016/j.pce.2004.08.020 · DOI
  13. Garcia y Garcia, 2005, Evaluation of an improved daily solar radiation generator for the southeastern USA, Climate Res., 29, 91, 10.3354/cr029091 · DOI
  14. Goodin, 1999, Estimating solar irradiance fro crop modeling using daily air temperature data, Agron. J., 91, 845, 10.2134/agronj1999.915845x · DOI
  15. Grant, 2004, Ability to predict solar radiation values from interpolated climate records for use in crop simulation models, Agric. For. Meteorol., 127, 65, 10.1016/j.agrformet.2004.07.016 · DOI
  16. Hansen, 1999, Stochastic daily solar irradiance for biological modeling applications, Agric. For. Meteorol., 94, 63
  17. Hartkamp, 2003, Comparison of three weather generators for crop modeling: a case study for subtropical environments, Agric. Syst., 76, 539, 10.1016/S0308-521X(01)00108-1 · DOI
  18. Heinemann, 2002, The impact of potential errors in rainfall observation on the simulation of crop growth, development and yield, Ecol. Model., 157, 1, 10.1016/S0304-3800(02)00209-0 · DOI
  19. Hodges, 1987, Using the CERES-Maize model to estimate production for the U.S. corn belt, Agric. For. Meteorol., 40, 293, 10.1016/0168-1923(87)90043-8 · DOI
  20. Hoogenboom, 1995, Decision support system to study climate change impacts on crop production, Agron. J., 59, 51
  21. Hoogenboom, 2000, Contribution of agrometeorology to the simulation of crop production and its applications, Agric. For. Meteorol., 103, 157
  22. Hubbard, 1994, Spatial variability of daily weather variables in the High Plains of the USA, Agric. For. Meteorol., 68, 41
  23. Hunt, 2001, Agronomic data: advances in documentation and protocols for exchange and use, Agric. Syst., 70, 477, 10.1016/S0308-521X(01)00056-7 · DOI · Paper page
  24. Hunt, 1998, Estimation of solar radiation for use in crop modelling, Agric. For. Meteorol., 91, 300
  25. Kiniry, 1992, A general, process-oriented model for two competing plant species, Trans. ASAE, 35, 801, 10.13031/2013.28665 · DOI
  26. Kobayashi, 2000, Comparing simulated and measured values using mean squared deviation and its components, Agron. J., 92, 345, 10.2134/agronj2000.922345x · DOI
  27. Lizaso, 2005, Development of a leaf-level canopy assimilation model for CERES-Maize, Agron. J., 97, 722, 10.2134/agronj2004.0171 · DOI
  28. Meinke, 1995, Evaluation of radiation and temperature data generators in the Australian tropics and sub-tropics using crop simulation models, Agric. For. Meteorol., 72, 295, 10.1016/0168-1923(94)02159-H · DOI
  29. Priestley, 1972, On the assessment of surface heat and evaporation using large scale parameters, Mon. Weather Rev., 100, 81, 10.1175/1520-0493(1972)100<0081:OTAOSH>2.3.CO;2 · DOI
  30. Richardson, 1981, Stochastic simulation of daily precipitation, temperature, and solar radiation, Water Resources Res., 17, 182, 10.1029/WR017i001p00182 · DOI
  31. Rivington, 2005, Evaluation of three model estimations of solar radiation at 24 UK stations, Agric. For. Meteorol., 132, 228, 10.1016/j.agrformet.2005.07.013 · DOI
  32. Rivington, 2006, Evaluating uncertainty introduced to process-based simulation model estimates by alternative sources of meteorological data, Agric. Syst., 88, 451, 10.1016/j.agsy.2005.07.004 · DOI
  33. Soltani, 2000, Evaluation of WGEN for generating long term weather data for crop simulations, Agric. For. Meteorol., 102, 1, 10.1016/S0168-1923(00)00100-3 · DOI
  34. Weiss, 2004, Simulation of daily solar irradiance, Agric. For. Meteorol., 123, 187, 10.1016/j.agrformet.2003.12.002 · DOI
  35. Xie, 2003, The ALMANAC's model sensitivity to input variables, Agric. Syst., 78, 1, 10.1016/S0308-521X(03)00002-7 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Garcia y Garcia, A., Guerra, L. C., & Hoogenboom, G.
Affiliations
University of Georgia (US)
ORCID
Hoogenboom, Gerrit
Venue
Ecological Modelling
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2008-01
Volume
210
Issue
3
Pages
312-326
ISSN
0304-3800 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2007.08.003
OpenAlex
W2021319150
Cited by
49
References
2
Citations by year
2024: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 8 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 5
FWCI
3.42
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/ (tdm)
Locations
  • Ecological Modelling (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Agronomy and Crop Science › Climate change impacts on agriculture
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Remote Sensing in Agriculture
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Soil Science › Irrigation Practices and Water Management
Keywords
solar radiation estimation, daily solar radiation, crop yield simulation, cotton, maize, groundnut, CERES-Maize, DSSAT, rainfed and irrigated conditions, evapotranspiration, aboveground biomass, model bias

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