On Systems Thinking, Systems Biology, and the in Silico Plant

The recent summary report of a Department of Energy Workshop on Plant Systems Biology (P.V. Minorsky [2003] Plant Physiol 132: 404-409) offered a welcomed advocacy for systems analysis as essential in understanding plant development, growth, and production. The goal of the Workshop was to consider methods for relating the results of molecular research to real-world challenges in plant production for increased food supplies, alternative energy sources, and environmental improvement. The rather surprising feature of this report, however, was that the Workshop largely overlooked the rich history of plant systems analysis extending over nearly 40 years (Sinclair and Seligman, 1996) that has considered exactly those challenges targeted by the Workshop. Past systems research has explored and incorporated biochemical and physiological knowledge into plant simulation models from a number of perspectives. The research has resulted in considerable understanding and insight about how to simulate plant systems and the relative contribution of various factors in influencing plant production. These past activities have contributed directly to research focused on solving the problems of increasing biomass production and crop yields. These modeling approaches are also now providing an avenue to enhance integration of molecular genetic technologies in plant improvement (Hammer et al., 2002).

Short-term responses of leaf growth rate to water deficit scale up to whole-plant and crop levels: An integrated modelling approach in maize.

Physiological and genetic studies of leaf growth often focus on short-term responses, leaving a gap to whole-plant models that predict biomass accumulation, transpiration and yield at crop scale. To bridge this gap, we developed a model that combines an existing model of leaf 6 expansion in response to short-term environmental variations with a model coordinating the development of all leaves of a plant. The latter was based on: (1) rates of leaf initiation, appearance and end of elongation measured in field experiments; and (2) the hypothesis of an independence of the growth between leaves. The resulting whole-plant leaf model was integrated into the generic crop model APSIM which provided dynamic feedback of environmental conditions to the leaf model and allowed simulation of crop growth at canopy level. The model was tested in 12 field situations with contrasting temperature, evaporative demand and soil water status. In observed and simulated data, high evaporative demand reduced leaf area at the whole-plant level, and short water deficits affected only leaves developing during the stress, either visible or still hidden in the whorl. The model adequately simulated whole-plant profiles of leaf area with a single set of parameters that applied to the same hybrid in all experiments. It was also suitable to predict biomass accumulation and yield of a similar hybrid grown in different conditions. This model extends to field conditions existing knowledge of the environmental controls of leaf elongation, and can be used to simulate how their genetic controls flow through to yield.

Effect of timing of a deficit-irrigation allocation on corn evapotranspiration, yield, water use efficiency and dry mass

Water regulations have decreased irrigation water supplies in Nebraska and some other areas of the USA Great Plains. When available water is not enough to meet crop water requirements during the entire growing cycle, it becomes critical to know the proper irrigation timing that would maximize yields and profits. This study evaluated the effect of timing of a deficit-irrigation allocation (150 mm) on crop evapotranspiration (ETc), yield, water use efficiency (WUE = yield/ETc), irrigation water use efficiency (IWUE = yield/irrigation), and dry mass (DM) of corn (Zea mays L.) irrigated with subsurface drip irrigation in the semiarid climate of North Platte, NE. During 2005 and 2006, a total of sixteen irrigation treatments (eight each year) were evaluated, which received different percentages of the water allocation during July, August, and September. During both years, all treatments resulted in no crop stress during the vegetative period and stress during the reproductive stages, which affected ETc, DM, yield, WUE and IWUE. Among treatments, ETc varied by 7.2 and 18.8%; yield by 17 and 33%; WUE by 12 and 22%, and IWUE by 18 and 33% in 2005 and 2006, respectively. Yield and WUE both increased linearly with ETc and with ETc/ETp (ETp = seasonal ETc with no water stress), and WUE increased linearly with yield. The yield response factor (ky) averaged 1.50 over the two seasons. Irrigation timing affected the DM of the plant, grain, and cob, but not that of the stover. It also affected the percent of DM partitioned to the grain (harvest index), which increased linearly with ETc and averaged 56.2% over the two seasons, but did not affect the percent allocated to the cob or stover. Irrigation applied in July had the highest positive coefficient of determination (R2) with yield. This high positive correlation decreased considerably for irrigation applied in August, and became negative for irrigation applied in September. The best positive correlation between the soil water deficit factor (Ks) and yield occurred during weeks 12-14 from crop emergence, during the "milk" and "dough" growth stages. Yield was poorly correlated to stress during weeks 15 and 16, and the correlation became negative after week 17. Dividing the 150 mm allocation about evenly among July, August and September was a good strategy resulting in the highest yields in 2005, but not in 2006. Applying a larger proportion of the allocation in July was a good strategy during both years, and the opposite resulted when applying a large proportion of the allocation in September. The different results obtained between years indicate that flexible irrigation scheduling techniques should be adopted, rather than relying on fixed timing strategies.

Agronomy looking forward, thinking broadly.

Global trends in human population and agriculture dictate that future calls made on the resources (physical, human, financial) and systems involved in producing food will be increasingly more demanding and complex. Both plant breeding and improved agronomy lift the potential yield of crops, a key component in progressing farm yield, so society can reasonably expect both agronomy as a science and agronomists as practitioners to contribute to the successful delivery of necessary change. By reflecting on current trends in agricultural production (diversification, intensification, integration, industrialisation, automation) and deconstructing a futuristic scenario of attempting agricultural production on Mars, it seems the skills agronomists will require involve not only the mandatory elements of their discipline but also additional skills that enable engagement with, even leadership of, teams who integrate (in sum or part) engineering, (agri-)business, economics and operational management, and build the social capital required to create and maintain a diverse array of enhanced and new ethical production systems and achieve increasing efficiencies within them.

Environment characterization as an aid to wheat improvement: interpreting genotype-environment interactions by modelling water-deficit patterns in North-Eastern Australia.

Genotype-environment interactions (GEI) limit genetic gain for complex traits such as tolerance to drought. Characterization of the crop environment is an important step in understanding GEI. A modelling approach is proposed here to characterize broadly (large geographic area, long-term period) and locally (field experiment) drought-related environmental stresses, which enables breeders to analyse their experimental trials with regard to the broad population of environments that they target. Water-deficit patterns experienced by wheat crops were determined for drought-prone north-eastern Australia, using the APSIM crop model to account for the interactions of crops with their environment (e.g. feedback of plant growth on water depletion). Simulations based on more than 100 years of historical climate data were conducted for representative locations, soils, and management systems, for a check cultivar, Hartog. The three main environment types identified differed in their patterns of simulated water stress around flowering and during grain-filling. Over the entire region, the terminal drought-stress pattern was most common (50% of production environments) followed by a flowering stress (24%), although the frequencies of occurrence of the three types varied greatly across regions, years, and management. This environment classification was applied to 16 trials relevant to late stages testing of a breeding programme. The incorporation of the independently-determined environment types in a statistical analysis assisted interpretation of the GEI for yield among the 18 representative genotypes by reducing the relative effect of GEI compared with genotypic variance, and helped to identify opportunities to improve breeding and germplasm-testing strategies for this region.

Re-thinking mango disease management in Australia; the rationale and approach

The shelf life of mangoes is limited by two main postharvest diseases when not consistently managed. These are anthracnose ( Colletotrichum gloeosporioides) and stem end rots (SER) ( Fusicoccum parvum). The management of these diseases has often relied mainly on the use of fungicides either as field spray treatments or as postharvest dips. These have done a fairly good job at serving the industry and allowing fruits to be transported, stored and sold at markets distant from the areas of production. There are however concerns on the continuous use of these fungicides as the main or only tool for the management of these diseases. This has necessitated a re-think of how these diseases could be sustainably managed into the future using a systems approach that focuses on integrated crop management. It is a holistic approach that considers all the crop protection management strategies including the genetics of the plant and its ability to naturally defend itself from infection with plant activators and growth regulators. It also considers other cultural or agronomic management tools such as the use of crop nutrition, timely application of irrigation water and the pruning of trees on a regular basis as a means of reducing inoculum levels in the orchards. The ultimate aim of this approach is to increase yields and obtain long term sustainable production. It is guided by the sustainable crop production principle which states that producers should apply as little inputs as possible but as much as needed.