The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Combining Field Surveys, Remote Sensing, and Regression Trees to Understand Yield Variations in an Irrigated Wheat Landscape
Abstract
Improved understanding of the factors that limit crop yields in farmers’ fields will play an important role in increasing regional food production while minimizing environmental impacts. However, causes of spatial variability in crop yields are poorly known in many regions because of limited data availability and analysis methods. In this study, we assessed sources of between‐field wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) yield variability for two growing seasons in the Yaqui Valley, Mexico. Field surveys conducted in 2001 and 2003 provided data on management practices for 68 and 80 wheat fields throughout the Valley, respectively, while yields on these fields were estimated using concurrent Landsat satellite imagery. Management–yield relationships were analyzed with t tests, linear regression, and regression trees, all of which revealed significant but year‐dependent impacts of management on yields. In 2001, an unusually cool year that favored high yields, N fertilizer was the most important source of between‐field variability. In 2003, a warmer year with reduced irrigation water allocations, the timing of the first postplanting irrigation was found to be the most important control. Management explained at least 50% of spatial yield variability in both years. Regression tree models, which were able to capture important nonlinearities and interactions, were more appropriate for analyzing yield controls than traditional linear models. The results of this study indicate that adjustments in management can significantly improve wheat production in the Yaqui Valley but that the relevant controls change from year to year.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Van Soest, P. J., Robertson, J. B., & Lewis, B. A. (1991) · Journal of Dairy Science · doi:10.3168/jds.s0022-0302(91)78551-2 · Cited by 28,658
Cited by
Landsat-8: Science and product vision for terrestrial global change research
Roy, D. P., Wulder, M. A., Loveland, T. R., C.E., W., Allen, R. G., Anderson, M. C., Helder, D., Irons, J. R., Johnson, D. M., Kennedy, R., et al. (2014) · Remote Sensing of Environment · doi:10.1016/j.rse.2014.02.001 · Cited by 2,659
Crop Yield Gaps: Their Importance, Magnitudes, and Causes
Lobell, D. B., Cassman, K. G., & Field, C. B. (2009) · Annual Review of Environment and Resources · doi:10.1146/annurev.environ.041008.093740 · Cited by 1,523
Self-citationHow to evaluate models: Observed vs. predicted or predicted vs. observed?
Piñeiro, G., Perelman, S., Guerschman, J. P., & Paruelo, J. M. (2008) · Ecological Modelling · doi:10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2008.05.006 · Cited by 891
Untangling genotype x management interactions in multi-environment on-farm experimentation
Rotili, D. H., de Voil, P., Eyre, J., Serafin, L., Aisthorpe, D., Maddonni, G. Á., & Rodríguez, D. (2020) · Field Crops Research · doi:10.1016/j.fcr.2020.107900 · Cited by 44
Metadata
- Authors
- Lobell, D. B., Ortiz‐Monasterio, J. I., Asner, G. P., Naylor, R. L., & Falcon, W. P.
- Venue
- Agronomy Journal
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2005-01
- Volume
- 97
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 241-249
- ISSN
- 0002-1962 (ISSN-L)
- 1435-0645
- OpenAlex
- W1607241334
- Cited by
- 170
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 6.12
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Combining Field Surveys, Remote Sensing, and Regression Trees to Understand Yield Variations in an Irrigated Wheat Landscape. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2134/agronj2005.0241a
- The paper
- Lobell, D. B., Ortiz‐Monasterio, J. I., Asner, G. P., Naylor, R. L., & Falcon, W. P. (2005). Combining Field Surveys, Remote Sensing, and Regression Trees to Understand Yield Variations in an Irrigated Wheat Landscape. Agronomy Journal. https://doi.org/10.2134/agronj2005.0241a
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.