Cited by 289Irrigation Practices and Water ManagementClimate change impacts on agriculturePlant Water Relations and Carbon Dynamics

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Parameterization and Evaluation of the AquaCrop Model for Full and Deficit Irrigated Cotton

Abstract

Predicting yield is increasingly important to optimize irrigation under limited available water for enhanced sustainability and profitable production. Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) of the United Nations addresses this need by providing a yield response to water simulation model (AquaCrop) with limited sophistication. In this study, AquaCrop was parameterized and tested for cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) under full (100%) and deficit (40, 60, and 80% of full) irrigation regimes in the hot, dry, and windy Mediterranean environment of northern Syria. Model parameterization used the 2006 data and was straightforward within the designed user-interface, owing to the limited number of key parameters. Accurate simulation of canopy cover was central to sound prediction of evapotranspiration and biomass accumulation. Key user-input parameters for this purpose were identified as the coefficients defining canopy development and the threshold soil water depletion levels for the water stress indices. The parameterized model was tested using data from the 2004 and 2005 seasons, resulting in accurate prediction of evapotranspiration (<13% error). The predicted yield values were within 10% of measurements, except in the 60 and 80% irrigation regimes in 2004, with errors up to 32%. The model closely predicted the trend in total soil water, but deviation existed for individual soil layers. This study provides first estimate values for cotton parameters useful for future model testing…

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2134/agronj2008.0182s

Cites

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

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 30

  1. 10.1201/9781420032413 · DOI
  2. Allen R.G., 1998, Crop evapotranspiration
  3. Boote K.J. J.W.Jones andN.B.PickeringAgron. J.199688704716.https://doi.org/10.2134/agronj1996.00021962008800050005x · DOI
  4. 10.1016/j.agwat.2005.05.006 · DOI
  5. 10.1016/j.agwat.2007.08.009 · DOI
  6. Doorenbos J., 1979, Yield response to water
  7. Ertek A., 2003, Effects of different drip irrigation programs on boll number and shedding percentage and yield of cotton, Agric. Water Manage., 60, 1, 10.1016/S0378-3774(02)00156-7 · DOI
  8. Farahani H.J., 2008, Crop coefficient for drip‐irrigated cotton in a Mediterranean environment, Irrig. Sci., 26, 375, 10.1007/s00271-007-0101-0 · DOI
  9. 10.1016/S0378-3774(01)00174-3 · DOI
  10. 10.2134/agronj1974.00021962006600050017x · DOI
  11. Hsiao T.C., 1983, Limitations to efficient water use in crop production, 227
  12. 10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9437(2004)130:4(277) · DOI
  13. 10.1016/j.agwat.2007.01.016 · DOI
  14. 10.1081/CSS-120001106 · DOI
  15. 10.1079/9780851996691.0000 · DOI
  16. Mauney J.R., 1986, Cotton physiology, 11
  17. 10.2134/1990.nitrogennutritionofcotton.c1 · DOI
  18. Pachta C.J.Improving irrigated cropping systems on the high plains using crop simulation models. M.S. thesis. Kansas Sate Univ. Manhattan.2007
  19. 10.1016/S0168-1699(98)00015-5 · DOI
  20. Raes D., 1982, A summary simulation model of the water budget of a cropped soil
  21. 10.1016/j.agwat.2005.04.006 · DOI
  22. 10.2134/agronj2008.0140s · DOI · Paper page
  23. Ryan J., 1997, Soils of ICARDA's agricultural experiment stations and sites: Climate, classification, physical and chemical properties, and land use
  24. 10.2134/agronj1996.00021962008800050004x · DOI
  25. Smith M., 1990, CROPWAT—A computer program for irrigation planning and management
  26. 10.1007/s00271-007-0064-1 · DOI
  27. 10.2134/agronj2008.0139s · DOI · Paper page
  28. Uehara G., 1998, Systems approaches for sustainable agricultural development, 1
  29. 10.1016/S0378-3774(01)00175-5 · DOI
  30. Wright J.L., 1990, Irrigation and drainage, 202

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Farahani, H. J., Izzi, G., & Oweis, T. Y.
Affiliations
  • Clemson University (US)
  • Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (IT)
  • International Center for Agricultural Research in the Dry Areas (LB)
Corresponding author
Farahani, Hamid J.
Venue
Agronomy Journal
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2009-05
Volume
101
Issue
3
Pages
469-476
ISSN
  • 0002-1962 (ISSN-L)
  • 1435-0645
OpenAlex
W2145472361
Cited by
289
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 13 · 2025: 16 · 2024: 23 · 2023: 17 · 2022: 21 · 2021: 19 · 2020: 20 · 2019: 25 · 2018: 19 · 2017: 15 · 2016: 21 · 2015: 13 · 2014: 18 · 2013: 16 · 2012: 9
FWCI
18.39
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Agronomy Journal (publishedVersion)
  • MELSpace (ICARDA (The International Center for Agricultural Research in Dry Areas)) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Soil Science › Irrigation Practices and Water Management
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Agronomy and Crop Science › Climate change impacts on agriculture
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Plant Water Relations and Carbon Dynamics
Keywords
AquaCrop model, cotton, Gossypium hirsutum, deficit irrigation, model parameterization, yield prediction, evapotranspiration, canopy cover, soil water depletion, biomass accumulation, site-specific calibration, northern Syria

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