CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 53Sugarcane Cultivation and ProcessingAgriculture, Soil, Plant ScienceGenetics and Plant Breeding

The DOI matches its Crossref record, with a small difference in title or year; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

A global sensitivity analysis of cultivar trait parameters in a sugarcane growth model for contrasting production environments in Queensland, Australia

Sexton, J., Everingham, Y.L., Inman-Bamber, G.·2017·European Journal of Agronomy
DOI 10.1016/j.eja.2015.11.009
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

New sugarcane cultivars are continuously developed to improve sugar industry productivity. Despite this sugarcane crop models such as the ‘Sugar’ module in the Agricultural Productions System sIMulator (APSIM-Sugar) have not been updated to reflect the most recent cultivars. The implications of misrepresenting cultivar parameters in APSIM-Sugar is difficult to judge as little research has been published on the likely values of these parameters and how uncertainty in parameter values may affect model outputs. A global sensitivity analysis can be used to better understand how cultivar parameters influence simulated yields. A Gaussian emulator was used to perform a global sensitivity analysis on simulated biomass and sucrose yield at harvest for two contrasting sugarcane-growing regions in Queensland, Australia. Biomass and sucrose yields were simulated for 42 years to identify inter-annual variability in output sensitivities to 10 parameters that represent physiological traits and can be used to simulated differences between sugarcane cultivars. Parameter main effect (Si) and total effect (STi) sensitivity indices and emulator accuracy were calculated for all year-region-output combinations. When both regions were considered together parameters representing radiation use efficiency (rue), number of green leaves (green_leaf_no) and a conductance surrogate parameter (kL) were the most influential parameters for simulated biomass in APSIM-Sugar. Simulated sucrose yield was most sensitive to rue, sucrose_fraction (representing the fraction of biomass partitioned as sucrose in the stem) and green_leaf_no. However, climate and soil differences between regions changed the level of influence cultivar parameters had on simulation outputs. Specifically, model outputs were more sensitive to changes in the transp_eff_cf and kL parameters in the Burdekin region due to lower rainfall and poor simulated soil conditions. Collecting data on influential traits that are relatively simple to measure (e.g. number of green leaves) during cultivar development would greatly contribute to the simulation of new cultivars in crop models. Influential parameters that are difficult to measure directly such as transp_eff_cf and sucrose_fraction are ideal candidates for statistical calibration. Calibrating crop models either through direct observation or statistical calibration would allow crop modellers to better test how new cultivars will perform in a range of production environments.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.eja.2015.11.009

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, 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

Research works printed but not linked: 34

  1. Aggarwal, 1997, Simulating genotypic strategies for increasing rice yield potential in irrigated, tropical environments, Field Crop. Res., 51, 5, 10.1016/S0378-4290(96)01044-1 · DOI · Paper page
  2. Boote, 2001, Physiology and modelling of traits in crop plants: implications for genetic improvement, Agr. Syst., 70, 395, 10.1016/S0308-521X(01)00053-1 · DOI
  3. Cheeroo-Nayamuth, 2000, Using a simulation model to assess potential and attainable sugar cane yield in Mauritius, Field Crop. Res., 66, 225, 10.1016/S0378-4290(00)00069-1 · DOI
  4. Confalonieri, 2010, Monte Carlo based sensitivity analysis of two crop simulators and considerations on model balance, Eur. J. Agron., 33, 89, 10.1016/j.eja.2010.03.004 · DOI
  5. Confalonieri, 2010, Comparison of sensitivity analysis techniques: a case study with the rice model WARM, Ecol. Model., 221, 1897, 10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2010.04.021 · DOI
  6. Cukier, 1973, Study of the sensitivity of coupled reaction systems to uncertainties in rate coefficients. I Theory, J. Chem. Phys., 59, 3873, 10.1063/1.1680571 · DOI · Paper page
  7. Cukier, 1975, Study of the sensitivity of coupled reaction systems to uncertainties in rate coefficients. III. Analysis of the approximations, J. Chem. Phys., 63, 1140, 10.1063/1.431440 · DOI
  8. Inman-Bamber, 2012, Sugarcane for water-limited environments: theoretical assessment of suitable traits, Field Crop. Res., 134, 95, 10.1016/j.fcr.2012.05.004 · DOI · Paper page
  9. Jackson, 2014, Selecting sugarcane varieties with higher transpiration efficiency, Proc. Aust. Soc. Sugar Cane Technol. Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia, 36, 72
  10. Keating, 1999, Modelling sugarcane production systems I. Development and performance of the sugarcane module, Field Crop. Res., 61, 253, 10.1016/S0378-4290(98)00167-1 · DOI · Paper page
  11. Keating, 2003, An overview of APSIM, a model designed for farming systems simulation, Eur. J. Agron., 18, 267, 10.1016/S1161-0301(02)00108-9 · DOI · Paper page
  12. Kennedy, 2001, Bayesian calibration of computer models, J. Roy. Stat. Soc. Ser. B. (Stat. Method., 63, 425, 10.1111/1467-9868.00294 · DOI · Paper page
  13. Laurila, 2012, A comparative ideotype, yield component and cultivation value analysis for spring wheat adaptation in Finland, Agr. Food Sci., 21, 384, 10.23986/afsci.5097 · DOI · Paper page
  14. Makowski, 2006, Global sensitivity analysis for calculating the contribution of genetic parameters to the variance of crop model prediction, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf., 91, 1142, 10.1016/j.ress.2005.11.015 · DOI
  15. Marin, 2011, Parameterization and evaluation of predictions of DSSAT/CANEGRO for Brazilian sugarcane, Agron. J., 103, 304, 10.2134/agronj2010.0302 · DOI · Paper page
  16. Marin, 2014, How can crop modeling and plant physiology help to understand the plant responses to climate change? A case study with sugarcane, Theor. Exp. Plant Physiol., 26, 49, 10.1007/s40626-014-0006-2 · DOI · Paper page
  17. McCown, 1996, APSIM: a novel software system for model development, model testing and simulation in agricultural systems research, Agric. Syst., 50, 255, 10.1016/0308-521X(94)00055-V · DOI
  18. Morris, 1991, Factorial sampling plans for preliminary computational experiments, Technometrics, 33, 161, 10.1080/00401706.1991.10484804 · DOI · Paper page
  19. O’Hagan, 2006, Bayesian analysis of computer code outputs: a tutorial, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf., 91, 1290, 10.1016/j.ress.2005.11.025 · DOI
  20. O’Leary, 2000, A review of three sugarcane simulation models with respect to their prediction of sucrose yield, Field Crop. Res., 68, 97, 10.1016/S0378-4290(00)00112-X · DOI
  21. Oakley, 2004, Probabilistic sensitivity analysis of complex models: a Bayesian approach, J. Roy. Stat. Soc. Ser. B. (Stat. Method.), 66, 751, 10.1111/j.1467-9868.2004.05304.x · DOI
  22. Robertson, 1996, Growth of sugarcane under high input condtions in tropical Australia. I. Radiation use, biomass accumulation and partitioning, Field Crop. Res., 48, 11, 10.1016/0378-4290(96)00041-X · DOI
  23. Saltelli, 2010, How to avoid a perfunctory sensitivity analysis, Environ. Model. Softw., 25, 1508, 10.1016/j.envsoft.2010.04.012 · DOI
  24. Schaibly, 1973, Study of the sensitivity of coupled reaction systems to uncertainties in rate coefficients. II Applications, J. Chem. Phys., 59, 3879, 10.1063/1.1680572 · DOI
  25. Sexton, 2014, Detailed trait characterisation is needed for simulation of clutivar responses to water stress, Proc. Aust. Soc. Sugar Cane Technol., Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia
  26. Sexton J., Everingham Y. (2014). Global sensitivity analysis of key parameters in a process-based sugarcane growth model—A Bayesian approach. Proceedings of the 7th International Congress on Environmental Modelling and Software. D. P. Ames, N. W. T. Quinn and A. E. Rizzoli. San Diego, California, USA: 8.
  27. Sobol, 1993, Sensitivity analysis or nonlinear mathematical models, Math Model Comput. Exp., 1, 407
  28. Stewart, 2006, Estimating deep drainage and nitrate leaching from the root zone under sugarcane using APSIM-SWIM, Agric. Water Manage., 81, 315, 10.1016/j.agwat.2005.05.002 · DOI
  29. Thorburn, 2004, The impact of trash management on sugarcane production and nitrogen management, Proc. Aust. Soc. Sugar Cane Technol., 26, CD
  30. Thorburn, 2010, Using the APSIM model to estimate nitrous oxide emissions from diverse Australian sugarcane production systems, Agric., Ecosyst. Environ., 136, 343, 10.1016/j.agee.2009.12.014 · DOI
  31. Uusitalo, 2015, An overview of methods to evaluate uncertainty of deterministic models in decision support, Environ. Model. Softw., 63, 24, 10.1016/j.envsoft.2014.09.017 · DOI
  32. Vanuytrecht, 2014, Global sensitivity analysis of yield output from the water productivity model, Environ. Model. Softw., 51, 323, 10.1016/j.envsoft.2013.10.017 · DOI
  33. Webster, 2009, The expected impact of climate change on nitrogen losses from wet tropical sugarcane production in the Great Barrier Reef region, Mar. Freshwat. Res., 60, 1159, 10.1071/MF08348 · DOI
  34. Zhao, 2014, Sensitivity and uncertainty analysis of the APSIM-wheat model: interactions between cultivar, environmental, and management parameters, Ecol. Model., 279, 1, 10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2014.02.003 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 53

Metadata

Authors
Sexton, J., Everingham, Y. L., & Inman-Bamber, G.
Affiliations
James Cook University (AU)
Corresponding author
Sexton, J.
ORCID
Venue
European Journal of Agronomy
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2017-08
Volume
88
Pages
96-105
ISSN
1161-0301 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.eja.2015.11.009
OpenAlex
W2232021214
Cited by
53
References
3
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 2
FWCI
2.82
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/ (tdm)
Locations
  • European Journal of Agronomy (publishedVersion)
  • ResearchOnline - JCU (James Cook University) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Sugar Research Australia
  • James Cook University
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Sugarcane Cultivation and Processing
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Agronomy and Crop Science › Agriculture, Soil, Plant Science
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Genetics and Plant Breeding
Keywords
sugarcane, cultivar characteristics, crop growth simulation, global sensitivity analysis, parameter uncertainty, sucrose yield, biomass yield, radiation use efficiency, leaf conductance, transpiration efficiency, Queensland

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