Simulating potential growth and yield of oil palm (Elaeis guineensis) with PALMSIM: Model description, evaluation and application.

Reducing the gap between water-limited potential yield and actual yield in oil palm production systems through intensification is seen as an important option for sustainably increasing palm oil production. Simulation models can play an important role in quantifying water-limited potential yield, and therefore the scope for intensification, but no oil palm model exists that is both simple enough and at the same time incorporates sufficient plant physiological knowledge to be generally applicable across sites with different growing conditions. The objectives of this study therefore were to develop a model (PALMSIM) that simulates, on a monthly time step, the potential growth of oil palm as determined by solar radiation and to evaluate model performance against measured oil palm yields under optimal water and nutrient management for a range of sites across Indonesia and Malaysia. The maximum observed yield in the field matches the corresponding simulated yield for dry bunch weight with a RMSE of 1.7 Mg ha?1 year?1 against an observed yield of 18.8 Mg ha?1. Sensitivity analysis showed that PALMSIM is robust: simulated changes in yield caused by modifying the parameters by 10% are comparable to other tree crop model evaluations. While we acknowledge that, depending on the soils and climatic environment, yields may be often water limited, we suggest a relatively simple physiological approach to simulate potential yield, which can be usefully applied to high rainfall environments and is considered as a first step in developing an oil palm model that also simulates water-limited potential yield. To illustrate the application possibil- ities of the model, PALMSIM was used to create a potential yield map for Indonesia and Malaysia by sim- ulating the growth and yield at a resolution of 0.1?. This map of potential yield is considered as a first step towards a decision support tool that can identify potentially productive, but at the moment degraded sites in Indonesia and Malaysia. ?

Selecting crop models for decision making in wheat insurance

In crop insurance, the accuracy with which the insurer quantifies the actual risk is highly dependent on the availability on actual yield data. Crop models might be valuable tools to generate data on expected yields for risk assessment when no historical records are available. However, selecting a crop model for a specific objective, location and implementation scale is a difficult task. A look inside the different crop and soil modules to understand how outputs are obtained might facilitate model choice. The objectives of this paper were (i) to assess the usefulness of crop models to be used within a crop insurance analysis and design and (ii) to select the most suitable crop model for drought risk assessment in semi-arid regions in Spain. For that purpose first, a pre-selection of crop models simulating wheat yield under rainfed growing conditions at the field scale was made, and second, four selected models (Aquacrop, CERES- Wheat, CropSyst and WOFOST) were compared in terms of modelling approaches, process descriptions and model outputs. Outputs of the four models for the simulation of winter wheat growth are comparable when water is not limiting, but differences are larger when simulating yields under rainfed conditions. These differences in rainfed yields are mainly related to the dissimilar simulated soil water availability and the assumed linkages with dry matter formation. We concluded that for the simulation of winter wheat growth at field scale in such semi-arid conditions, CERES-Wheat and CropSyst are preferred. WOFOST is a satisfactory compromise between data availability and complexity when detail data on soil is limited. Aquacrop integrates physiological processes in some representative parameters, thus diminishing the number of input parameters, what is seen as an advantage when observed data is scarce. However, the high sensitivity of this model to low water availability limits its use in the region considered. Contrary to the use of ensembles of crop models, we endorse that efforts be concentrated on selecting or rebuilding a model that includes approaches that better describe the agronomic conditions of the regions in which they will be applied. The use of such complex methodologies as crop models is associated with numerous sources of uncertainty, although these models are the best tools available to get insight in these complex agronomic systems.