3 resultados para graphical factor models
em eResearch Archive - Queensland Department of Agriculture
Resumo:
Modeling of cultivar x trial effects for multienvironment trials (METs) within a mixed model framework is now common practice in many plant breeding programs. The factor analytic (FA) model is a parsimonious form used to approximate the fully unstructured form of the genetic variance-covariance matrix in the model for MET data. In this study, we demonstrate that the FA model is generally the model of best fit across a range of data sets taken from early generation trials in a breeding program. In addition, we demonstrate the superiority of the FA model in achieving the most common aim of METs, namely the selection of superior genotypes. Selection is achieved using best linear unbiased predictions (BLUPs) of cultivar effects at each environment, considered either individually or as a weighted average across environments. In practice, empirical BLUPs (E-BLUPs) of cultivar effects must be used instead of BLUPs since variance parameters in the model must be estimated rather than assumed known. While the optimal properties of minimum mean squared error of prediction (MSEP) and maximum correlation between true and predicted effects possessed by BLUPs do not hold for E-BLUPs, a simulation study shows that E-BLUPs perform well in terms of MSEP.
Resumo:
Laboratory-based relationships that model the phytotoxicity of metals using soil properties have been developed. This paper presents the first field-based phytotoxicity relationships. Wheat(Triticum aestivum L) was grown at 11 Australian field sites at which soil was spiked with copper (Cu) and zinc (Zn) salts. Toxicity was measured as inhibition of plant growth at 8 weeks and grain yield at harvest. The added Cu and Zn EC10 values for both endpoints ranged from approximately 3 to 4760 mg/kg. There were no relationships between field-based 8-week biomass and grain yield toxicity values for either metal. Cu toxicity was best modelled using pH and organic carbon content while Zn toxicity was best modelled using pH and the cation exchange capacity. The best relationships estimated toxicity within a factor of two of measured values. Laboratory-based phytotoxicity relationships could not accurately predict field-based phytotoxicity responses.
Resumo:
We compared daily net radiation (Rn) estimates from 19 methods with the ASCE-EWRI Rn estimates in two climates: Clay Center, Nebraska (sub-humid) and Davis, California (semi-arid) for the calendar year. The performances of all 20 methods, including the ASCE-EWRI Rn method, were then evaluated against Rn data measured over a non-stressed maize canopy during two growing seasons in 2005 and 2006 at Clay Center. Methods differ in terms of inputs, structure, and equation intricacy. Most methods differ in estimating the cloudiness factor, emissivity (e), and calculating net longwave radiation (Rnl). All methods use albedo (a) of 0.23 for a reference grass/alfalfa surface. When comparing the performance of all 20 Rn methods with measured Rn, we hypothesized that the a values for grass/alfalfa and non-stressed maize canopy were similar enough to only cause minor differences in Rn and grass- and alfalfa-reference evapotranspiration (ETo and ETr) estimates. The measured seasonal average a for the maize canopy was 0.19 in both years. Using a = 0.19 instead of a = 0.23 resulted in 6% overestimation of Rn. Using a = 0.19 instead of a = 0.23 for ETo and ETr estimations, the 6% difference in Rn translated to only 4% and 3% differences in ETo and ETr, respectively, supporting the validity of our hypothesis. Most methods had good correlations with the ASCE-EWRI Rn (r2 > 0.95). The root mean square difference (RMSD) was less than 2 MJ m-2 d-1 between 12 methods and the ASCE-EWRI Rn at Clay Center and between 14 methods and the ASCE-EWRI Rn at Davis. The performance of some methods showed variations between the two climates. In general, r2 values were higher for the semi-arid climate than for the sub-humid climate. Methods that use dynamic e as a function of mean air temperature performed better in both climates than those that calculate e using actual vapor pressure. The ASCE-EWRI-estimated Rn values had one of the best agreements with the measured Rn (r2 = 0.93, RMSD = 1.44 MJ m-2 d-1), and estimates were within 7% of the measured Rn. The Rn estimates from six methods, including the ASCE-EWRI, were not significantly different from measured Rn. Most methods underestimated measured Rn by 6% to 23%. Some of the differences between measured and estimated Rn were attributed to the poor estimation of Rnl. We conducted sensitivity analyses to evaluate the effect of Rnl on Rn, ETo, and ETr. The Rnl effect on Rn was linear and strong, but its effect on ETo and ETr was subsidiary. Results suggest that the Rn data measured over green vegetation (e.g., irrigated maize canopy) can be an alternative Rn data source for ET estimations when measured Rn data over the reference surface are not available. In the absence of measured Rn, another alternative would be using one of the Rn models that we analyzed when all the input variables are not available to solve the ASCE-EWRI Rn equation. Our results can be used to provide practical information on which method to select based on data availability for reliable estimates of daily Rn in climates similar to Clay Center and Davis.