AQUAMAN: a web-based decision support system for irrigation scheduling in peanuts

Peanut (Arachis hypogaea L.) is an economically important legume crop in irrigated production areas of northern Australia. Although the potential pod yield of the crop in these areas is about 8 t ha(-1), most growers generally obtain around 5 t ha(-1), partly due to poor irrigation management. Better information and tools that are easy to use, accurate, and cost-effective are therefore needed to help local peanut growers improve irrigation management. This paper introduces a new web-based decision support system called AQUAMAN that was developed to assist Australian peanut growers schedule irrigations. It simulates the timing and depth of future irrigations by combining procedures from the food and agriculture organization (FAO) guidelines for irrigation scheduling (FAO-56) with those of the agricultural production systems simulator (APSIM) modeling framework. Here, we present a description of AQUAMAN and results of a series of activities (i.e., extension activities, case studies, and a survey) that were conducted to assess its level of acceptance among Australian peanut growers, obtain feedback for future improvements, and evaluate its performance. Application of the tool for scheduling irrigations of commercial peanut farms since its release in 2004-2005 has shown good acceptance by local peanuts growers and potential for significantly improving yield. Limited comparison with the farmer practice of matching the pan evaporation demand during rain-free periods in 2006-2007 and 2008-2009 suggested that AQUAMAN enabled irrigation water savings of up to 50% and the realization of enhanced water and irrigation use efficiencies.

Assessment of functional forms of crop yield loss models of invasive plant species applied in decision support tools and bioeconomic modelling

AbstractObjectives Decision support tools (DSTs) for invasive species management have had limited success in producing convincing results and meeting users' expectations. The problems could be linked to the functional form of model which represents the dynamic relationship between the invasive species and crop yield loss in the DSTs. The objectives of this study were: a) to compile and review the models tested on field experiments and applied to DSTs; and b) to do an empirical evaluation of some popular models and alternatives. Design and methods This study surveyed the literature and documented strengths and weaknesses of the functional forms of yield loss models. Some widely used models (linear, relative yield and hyperbolic models) and two potentially useful models (the double-scaled and density-scaled models) were evaluated for a wide range of weed densities, maximum potential yield loss and maximum yield loss per weed. Results Popular functional forms include hyperbolic, sigmoid, linear, quadratic and inverse models. Many basic models were modified to account for the effect of important factors (weather, tillage and growth stage of crop at weed emergence) influencing weed–crop interaction and to improve prediction accuracy. This limited their applicability for use in DSTs as they became less generalized in nature and often were applicable to a much narrower range of conditions than would be encountered in the use of DSTs. These factors' effects could be better accounted by using other techniques. Among the model empirically assessed, the linear model is a very simple model which appears to work well at sparse weed densities, but it produces unrealistic behaviour at high densities. The relative-yield model exhibits expected behaviour at high densities and high levels of maximum yield loss per weed but probably underestimates yield loss at low to intermediate densities. The hyperbolic model demonstrated reasonable behaviour at lower weed densities, but produced biologically unreasonable behaviour at low rates of loss per weed and high yield loss at the maximum weed density. The density-scaled model is not sensitive to the yield loss at maximum weed density in terms of the number of weeds that will produce a certain proportion of that maximum yield loss. The double-scaled model appeared to produce more robust estimates of the impact of weeds under a wide range of conditions. Conclusions Previously tested functional forms exhibit problems for use in DSTs for crop yield loss modelling. Of the models evaluated, the double-scaled model exhibits desirable qualitative behaviour under most circumstances.