Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 170

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

Lobell, David B., Ortiz‐Monasterio, J. Ivan, Asner, Gregory P., Naylor, Rosamond L., Falcon, Walter P.·2005·Agronomy Journal

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2134/agronj2005.0241a

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Cited by

See all 170

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.