Agronomy Journal Journal of Natural Resources and Life Sciences Education
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


Published online 6 February 2007
Published in Agron J 99:419-427 (2007)
DOI: 10.2134/agronj2006.0100
© 2007 American Society of Agronomy
677 S. Segoe Rd., Madison, WI 53711 USA
This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text Free
Right arrow Full Text (PDF) Free
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by White, J. W.
Right arrow Articles by Jones, P. G.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by White, J. W.
Right arrow Articles by Jones, P. G.
Agricola
Right arrow Articles by White, J. W.
Right arrow Articles by Jones, P. G.
Related Collections
Right arrow Soybean
Right arrow Crop Models
Right arrow Statistics

Regression-Based Evaluation of Ecophysiological Models

Jeffrey W. Whitea,*, Kenneth J. Booteb, Gerrit Hoogenboomc and Peter G. Jonesd

a USDA-ARS, Arid Land Agricultural Research Center, 21881 N Cardon Ln., Maricopa, AZ 85239
b Agronomy Dep., P.O. Box 110500, Gainesville, FL 32611
c Dep. of Biological and Agricultural Engineering, Univ. of Georgia, Griffin, GA 30223-1797
d CIAT, Apartado Aéreo 6713, Cali, Colombia


Figure 1
View larger version (13K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

 
Fig. 1. Box-and-whisker plots for mean temperatures, daylength, solar radiation and total season precipitation for the 28 experiments from 11 locations considered in the simulations with the CSM-CROPGRO-Soybean model and the regressions. The lower and upper limits of the boxes indicate the first and third quartiles, and the T-bars indicate the minimum and maximum values.

 

Figure 2
View larger version (24K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

 
Fig. 2. Comparison of observed vs. simulated values for days to anthesis and final grain yield for the CSM-CROPGRO-Soybean model in 28 experiments from 11 locations.

 

Figure 3
View larger version (23K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

 
Fig. 3. Comparison of residuals from regressions of observed vs. simulated values for days to anthesis for the CSM-CROPGRO-Soybean model in 28 experiments from 11 locations. A, Relation with mean temperature during vegetative phase; B, Relation with mean daylength during vegetative phase.

 

Figure 4
View larger version (29K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

 
Fig. 4. Comparison of residuals from regressions of observed vs. simulated values for days to anthesis for the CSM-CROPGRO-Soybean model in 28 experiments from 11 locations. A, relation with mean temperature during vegetative phase; B, relation with mean daylength during vegetative phase; C, relation with mean water stress indicator during reproductive phase; D, Relation with simulated days to anthesis.

 





HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
The SCI Journals Crop Science Vadose Zone Journal
Journal of Natural Resources
and Life Sciences Education
Soil Science Society of America Journal
Journal of Plant Registrations Journal of
Environmental Quality
The Plant Genome
Copyright © 2007 by the American Society of Agronomy.