Evaluation of alternative methods to calculate evapotranspiration and their impact on soybean yield estimation

Agrometeoros ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 28 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rodrigo Cornacini Ferreira ◽  
Otávio Jorge Grigoli Abi-Saab ◽  
Marcelo Augusto de Aguiar e Silva ◽  
Rubson Natal Ribeiro Sibaldellib ◽  
José Renato Bouças Farias
Agriculture ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (8) ◽  
pp. 348
Author(s):  
Marcelo Chan Fu Wei ◽  
José Paulo Molin

Soybean yield estimation is either based on yield monitors or agro-meteorological and satellite imagery data, but they present several limiting factors regarding on-farm decision level. Aware that machine learning approaches have been largely applied to estimate soybean yield and the availability of data regarding soybean yield and its components (number of grains (NG) and thousand grains weight (TGW)), there is an opportunity to study their relationships. The objective was to explore the relationships between soybean yield and its components, generate equations to estimate yield and evaluate its prediction accuracy. The training dataset was composed of soybean yield and its components’ data from 2010 to 2019. Linear regression models based on NG, TGW and yield were fitted on the training dataset and applied to a validation dataset composed of 58 on-field collected samples. It was found that globally TGW and NG presented weak (r = 0.50) and strong (r = 0.92) linear relationships with yield, respectively. In addition to that, applying the fitted models to the validation dataset, model based on NG presented the highest accuracy, coefficient of determination (R2) of 0.70, mean absolute error (MAE) of 639.99 kg ha−1 and root mean squared error (RMSE) of 726.67 kg ha−1.


2018 ◽  
Vol 12 (02) ◽  
pp. 1 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jonathan Richetti ◽  
Jasmeet Judge ◽  
Kenneth Jay Boote ◽  
Jerry Adriani Johann ◽  
Miguel Angel Uribe-Opazo ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Xin Du ◽  
Fangni Song ◽  
Hongyan Wang ◽  
Huanxuezhang ◽  
Jihua Meng ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Vol 41 (2) ◽  
pp. 196-203
Author(s):  
Jonathan Richetti ◽  
Jerry Adriani Johann ◽  
Miguel Angel Uribe-Opazo

2016 ◽  
Vol 187 ◽  
pp. 91-101 ◽  
Author(s):  
Neil Yu ◽  
Liujun Li ◽  
Nathan Schmitz ◽  
Lei F. Tian ◽  
Jonathan A. Greenberg ◽  
...  

2014 ◽  
Author(s):  
Susannah R. Kondrath ◽  
Nicholas Noviello

2015 ◽  
pp. 30-61 ◽  
Author(s):  
I. Voskoboynikov ◽  
V. Gimpelson

This study considers the influence of structural change on aggregate labour productivity growth of the Russian economy. The term "structural change" refers to labour reallocation both between industries and between formal and informal segments within an industry. Using Russia KLEMS and official Rosstat data we decompose aggregate labour productivity growth into intra-industry (within) and between industry effects with four alternative methods of the shift-share analysis. All methods provide consistent results and demonstrate that total labour reallocation has been growth enhancing though the informality expansion has had a negative effect. As our study suggests, it is caused by growing variation in productivity levels across industries.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document