BooteK-New Developments in DSSAT Modeling-Oct-2017

New Developments in DSSAT Crop
Modeling: Testing and Adding Crops

(and some history)
K.J. Boote, University of Florida
Presentation at STICS Workshop

La Rochelle, France, October 2017
Outline of Talk
 Origin of DSSAT crop models
 IBSNAT Project (1983-1993) – Mission, DSSAT V2.1
 Improved science in 1990s: Generic models, V3.5
 Improvements in 2000s: CSM, sequence-rotation
 Improvements in 2010s: temperature & CO2, V4.6
 New models added over the years. Future Plans.
 Perennial Forage Model (brachiaria, cynodon, annual
ryegrass, alfalfa) – now in V4.7 release
 Examples: testing model response to temperature
(dry bean, peanut, soybean, sorghum, millet).
 Next: Improve temperature response of maize
models (with J. Lizaso)

The IBSNAT Project (1983-1993)
Start of DSSAT
 Initial models were CERES-Maize & CERES-Wheat (1982-
84), SOYGRO (1983), & PNUTGRO (1985).
 USAID-funded: model development & software
 1983-86 - Minimum Data Set Concept (J. Jones)
 Initial models each had their own weather, soils,
management, & output. Not cross-compatible.
 Went to common I/O: weather, soils, management files,
common printed and graphical outputs (J. Jones, 1986)
 This led to creation of DSSAT V2.1, released in 1986 with
maize, wheat, soybean, peanut. By 1993, added dry
bean, rice, sorghum, aroid, cassava, and potato

Some Guiding Principles, IBSNAT
• Focus on experiments, data and understanding
performance
• Common, minimum data requirements
• Models and experiments are complementary
• Models must be evaluated and used judiciously
• Application of models to optimize management to
achieve desired goals
Data without models is chaos; but models

without data is fantasy! Source unknown

1990’s – Improved Science
 Creation of generic template model, CROPGRO
• SOYGRO, PNUTGRO, BEANGRO were initially as separate
coding. Programs were similar, but had some hard-wired
species parameterization. Minor code fixes had to be
repeated in each model (Hoogenboom et al., 1991, 1993)
• Solution: Use common generic FORTRAN code for all GRO
models, where species parameterization was moved into
external “read-in” files for each crop
• Facilitated development of new crop models (chickpea,
tomato, cowpea, macuna, faba bean, cotton)
 Created coupling points for pest damage effects
• Batchelor et al. (1993); Boote et al. (1993), Pinnschmidt
• For CROPGRO types, CERES-Rice, CERES-Maize

1990’s – Improved Science &
Parameterization, DSSAT V3.5 (1998)
 Leaf-level, hourly hedgerow canopy photosynthesis
included in CROPGRO (Boote and Pickering, 1994;
Pickering et al., 1995). Two options (L hourly version
and C daily version. L version default since V4.5
 Added hourly energy balance option in CROPGRO
(Pickering et al., 1995) in V3.5. Coupling lost (~2002)
 CO2 response functions parameterized (lookup
functions for CERES & CROPGRO C-versions).
Emergent outcome of rubisco kinetics in L-version.
 CO2 effect on transpiration, via canopy Rs (C-3, C-4)
 Mechanistic N2-fixation in CROPGRO legumes

Software Tool Development by 1998
released as V3.5 (very stable version)
 DSSAT V3.5 release & book (Tsuji et al. 1998.
Understanding Options for Agricultural Production)
 Documentation of software, models, data collection
 WEATHERMAN – weather entry, create weather files
 SBUILD – soil data entry, create soil profiles
XCREATE
 XCREATE – enter management-setup ~ File X Replaced
by XBUILD
 GBUILD – graphical output of state variables
 SEASONAL – shell & software to analyze weather
probability effects of treatments/choices + Econ
 SEQUENCE – crop rotation/carry-over (improved later)
 GENCALC – genetic coefficient calculator
Models added to DSSAT V3.5 by 1998
 BEANGRO, patterned after SOYGRO (Hoogenboom
et al., 1990, 1994)
 CERES-RICE created by U. Singh, at IRRI (~ 1993)
 CERES-Sorghum (Alagarswamy & Ritchie, 1991)
 CERES-Millet* (Ritchie & Alagarswamy, 1989)
 Cassava (Matthews & Hunt, 1994) * Indicates
major
 Aroids (Singh et al., 1992, 1995) improvements
in 2011-2017
 Chickpea* (Singh & Vermani, 1994)
 Potato (Griffin, Johnson, & Ritchie, 1993)
 Tomato*, adapted CROPGRO (Scholberg et al., 1996)

2000s – Improved Science &
Parameterization
 CSM (Cropping System Model): all DSSAT crops share
same soil-land unit, where soil water, N, and SOC carry-
over to next crop if using sequence/rotation (DSSAT V4,
Jones et al., 2003; Hoogenboom et al., 2004).
 Included daily version of CENTURY SOC model option
(Gijsman et al., 2002) vs Godwin’s SOC module.
 Modularity introduced (initiate, state, rate, integrate),
works well for some modules (phenology, leaf Ps,
canopy Ps, SPAM, ET, N-fixation, SOC). Others “not”.
 Added additional crops: faba bean (2002), macuna
(2002), cotton (2005), CANEGRO (2008), CASUPRO,
sweet corn (2007), green bean (2007)
2010s – Improved Science &
Parameterization
 Re-evaluated parameterization for response to CO2
(Boote et al., 2010), temperature (several models)
 Phosphorus module & response for some crops
(maize-2006, peanut-2014, soybean, rice, sorghum)
 IXIM-Maize (Lizaso’s model) incorporated in DSSAT
 Additional models (pigeonpea, canola)
 Developed standalone CROPGRO-Perennial Forage
model (brachiaria, cynodon, panicum, alfalfa). Now
in V4.7 release planned for fall 2017.
 Optimizer (GLUE in V4.6)

DSSAT – Future Needs/Plans
 Rigorous testing against ET data/drought trials (AgMIP)
 Re-link hourly energy balance in CROPGRO
 Improve soil temperature simulation
 Mechanistic rooting function (replace fixed SRGF)
 Add module for K fertility – calibrate for crops
 Next release (V4.7) planned for Nov 2017, will include
NWHEAT, safflower, sunflower & CROPGRO-Perennial
Forage model (brachiaria, cynodon, alfalfa)
 Working on new crops (strawberry, teff)
 Link to QTLs – Gene-based modeling

DSSAT Foundation Initiatives
DSSAT Foundation (2012 – Present)
 Web site (www.DSSAT.net)

 Free DSSAT access, downloadable
 Registration still required
 Open-source policy: Source code available
upon request (GitHub).
 DSSAT Sprints (new modelers help code)
 Workshops and Training – Annually
 Standards, Protocols, Modularity
 Publications and Dissemination
 Distributed to ~10,000 users in 90 countries
 DSSAT Listserver (8,500+ members)

DSSAT Development Sprint
July 25-29, 2016 @ University of Florida
Next Sprint: January 8-12, 2018 at University of Florida
DSSAT 2016 @ University of Georgia
Training
Courses
Next course
May 14-19,
2018
DSSAT 2016 @ Arusha, Tanzania
CROPGRO-Perennial
Forage Model Now in
DSSAT V4.7
Status and New Code for “Storage”

Organ, C and N Reserves, Re-growth, &
Dormancy
K. J. Boote, S. Rymph, P. Alderman
assisted by B. Pedreira, M. Lara,

D. Pequeno, C. Pedreira, W. Malik
ADSA Discover Conference, Integrated Solutions to Fiber Challenges

Sep 19-22,2017, Chicago, IL
CROPGRO-Perennial Forage Model
 Derived from CROPGRO model (1992-2004)
 Coded for perennial and storage organ dynamics by
Stuart Rymph, UF, 2004, & adapted for Paspalum notatum.
(Rymph Ph.D. dissertation, UF, 2004)
 Adapted for Cynodon dactylon by K. Boote and P.
Alderman (M.S. thesis, UF, 2007)
 Adapted for Brachiaria brizantha (B. Pedreira, 2011 paper)
 Adapted for Panicum maximum by M. Lara (2012 Agron. J.)
 Contrasted traits for Marandu, Mullato, & Tifton-85 at a
single site, by D. Pequeno (2013-2014)
 New: alfalfa* (W. Malik)
 In process: annual ryegrass (L. Moreno)

How are Perennial Forages Different
 Often do not flower or set seed. Therefore typical GC for
phenology, life cycle, and seed-setting are useless.
 Must be able to harvest part of the shoot mass and
continue simulations.
 Must be able to re-grow after 100% defoliation or after
total winter dormancy. Need a storage reserve & memory
of poor management or poor weather conditions.
 Need re-growth cycle re-staging and also annual effects
 Need rules for partitioning to and re-filling storage tissue
as f(daylength, LAI, Ps, etc.)
 Need rules for mobilization of C and N reserves from
storage for re-growth as f(daylength, LAI, Ps, etc.)

Re-growth depends on residual LAI, storage
reserves (mass, TNC & N status), time of year
 Residual LAI and

Canopy Ps of
Tifton 85 are low
after defoliation .
Initial re-growth
depends on TNC
and N reserves,
but Ps recovers
well by 14 days
(Alderman et al.,
2011)
 Data, 4 N levels

 Rhizome TNC
(CH2O) reserves
of Tifton 85: cyclic
behavior to
minimum at 7-14
days, recovery
during re-growth
after defoliation
(Alderman et al.,
2011).
 5-15% TNC, and 5-
6 mt rhizome
 Strong N effects

 Residual stem
TNC reserves of
Tifton 85: cyclic
behavior to
minimum at 7-14
days and recovery
during re-growth
after defoliation
(Alderman et al.,
2011).
 Modest residual
stem mass &
modest TNC 4-8%.

 Leaf N conc of
Tifton 85: cyclic
behavior during
re-growth, with
new leaf adding to
existing old leaf,
then leaves aging
with N conc.
decline after 7-14
days (Alderman
et al., 2011)
 Strong N effects

Code Changes for Perennial
 Added: ability to re-grow based on reserves
despite zero LAI. Gives memory of poor prior
management (low reserves). Winter dormancy.
 Added new state variable (stolon-rhizome-
storage tissue) with TNC and N concentration
 Rules for partitioning DM, N, and TNC to storage
tissue as f(daylength, LAI, Ps, etc.)
 Rules for mobilization of C and N reserves from
storage for re-growth as f(daylength, LAI, Ps,
etc.)

Additional input needed: “MOW” file
 Dates of harvest events:
 MOW: mass of residual aboveground stubble
(kg/ha) after each harvest event. If “missing”,
interpolate between dates to set stubble mass
 RSPLF, % leaf of remaining “living” stubble.
 MVS: leaf # “re-stage” after each harvest

Additional Forage-Related Outputs
In addition to typical LAI, leaf, stem, storage,

root, and % N of these organs
 Herbage = (shoot – stubble)

 Herbage N = (shoot N – stubble N)
 Herbage N conc (~CP) = herbage N / herbage mass
 Herbage %leaf
 Output herbage, herbage N, CP, and herbage % leaf
in PLANTGRO.OUT and in a FORAGE.OUT file
 Output abscised dead shoot, leaf, and stem since
last harvest in PLANTGRO.OUT

Stubble & Herbage, Panicum maximum
(Lara et al., 2012)
Herbage
Mow=stubble

Simulated Dynamics: Veg N % and Biomass
during Re-growth, P maximum (Lara, 2012)
9-10 d lag to peak N. Why? Add

new leaf to existing old leaf pool.
Simulated vs. observed biomass in 2 seasons at Piracicaba,
Brazil. Brachiaria brizantha Xaraes (Pedreira et al., 2011)
Use time-series
Bayesian
optimizer to
solve for Tb &
Winter Topt of leaf
photosynthesis
& other
processes.
Works because
of sampling in
winter

Simulated vs. observed LAI in 2 seasons at Piracicaba,
Brazil. Brachiaria brizantha Xaraes (Pedreira et al., 2011)

Simulation of irrigated Marandu (Brachiaria) at
Piracicaba, Brazil. (Pequeno et al., 2013)
• Harvest frequencies of 28 and 42 days, over 2 years

• 400 kg ha-1 yr-1 of N split-applied after each harvest
STUBBLE CHARACTERIZATION
Simulated leaf, stem, shoot of irrigated Marandu
(Brachiaria) at Piracicaba, Brazil. (Pequeno et al., 2013)
Winter
Shoot
Stem
Leaf
International Conference on Forages in Warm Climates

Simulated leaf mass, storage mass, and storage TNC
for irrigated Marandu (Brachiaria) at Piracicaba, Brazil.
(Pequeno et al., 2013)
Storage & root started
from seed. Stable
dynamics yr 2 & 3 Storage
Root
Leaf
TNC %, SR

Simulated storage TNC for irrigated Marandu
(Brachiaria) at Piracicaba, Brazil. (Pequeno et al., 2013)
TNC of 28-d and 42-day cycle, shows

mobilization and re-fill dynamics per re-
growth cycle and lower TNC in winter
with recovery in summer. Lower with
more frequent harvest.

Simulation of Marandu (Brachiaria) response to N
and irrigation, Jaboticabal, Brazil. (Miqueias Gomes
dos Santos, “Ph.D. Sandwich visitor to UF”, 2017)
• Harvested frequently, nearly monthly over 2 years
• Trts: 7.5, 15, or 30 kg N ha-1 per Mg herbage harvested
• High production, but here is example of predicted CP
ESALQ - Univ. of Sao Paulo (Brazil) and
Univ. of Florida
Simulating Annual Ryegrass (Lolium multiflorum Lam.)

Growth under Defoliation Regimes using the CROPGRO
PFM Model (L. Moreno, C. Pedreira, D. Pequeno, K. Boote)
Works for seed-established annual

that has repeated harvests
+ Results: CROPGRO-PFM – Annual Ryegrass
28d. harvest interval - 2004
4500
4000
3500
3000
kg DM /ha
2500
2000 SIM 28d. harvest interval - 2008
1500
OBS 4500
1000
500 4000
0 3500
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 3000
kg DM/ha
Days a er plan ng 2500
2000 OBS
1500
SIM
1000
500
95% LI - 2004 0
4000 0 50 100 150 200 250
3500 Days a er plan ng

3000
kg DM/ha
2500
2000
1500
SIM Overall stats:
1000 OBS
D = 0.438
500
0
RMSE = 612.98
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 Avg OBS:SIM ratio = 1.048
Days a er plan ng
Adapting CROPGRO-PFM for Alfalfa
Location: Aragon Spain Collected data (6 farmer
Wafa Malik, PhD sandwich fields):
student during visit to UF • Leaf area index (LICOR-LAI-
2000) weekly
MOW input file • Herbage DM
 DATES: Harvest dates, • Crude protein (harvested
 MOW = stubble mass: the amount of live herbage)
forage mass remaining 1000 kg/ha,
 RSPLF: percentage leaf of the stubble  20% • Crop management (tillage,
 MVS: a “re-staged” leaf number  2 fertilization and irrigation
management.
Simulation methods used Adaption Process
 The Penman-Monteith FAO 56  Set lower Cardinal Temperatures: V & R dev,
Ps, LAI expansion, nodule growth, N-fix rate
 The CENTURY SOC model
 Set tissue composition
 Leaf photosynthesis mode  Set Critical N conc for Ps like soybean
 Set partitioning: seedling phase, establ phase
www.themegallery.com
209-A case (1 of 6 fields)
4500
Herbage (kg ha-1)
Tops (kg ha-1) Herb.

Tops 3000
kg/ha
kg/ha
Obs. 4281 Obs. 3281
Sim. 3948 1500 Sim. 3040
RMSE 642 RMSE 594
d-Stat. 0.82
d-Stat. 0.8
0
Jul-15 Jan-16 Aug-16 Mar-17 Sep-17
30
Herbage Crude Protein (%)
25
LAI LAI
Obs. 2.83 20 Herb.
Mean
Sim. 2.49 15 CP %
RMSE 2.13 Obs. 22
10 Sim. 18
d-Stat. 0.73
5
RMSE 5
d-Stat. 0.28
0
Sep-15 Apr-16 Oct-16 May-17 Nov-17
Date (m-yy)
www.themegallery.com
Crop Response to Elevated
Temperature Stress:
Improving Crop Models Against Data
 K. J. Boote1, Vara Prasad2, L. H. Allen,

Jr.3, J. W. Jones1, and P. Singh4

1Univ.
of Florida, 2Kansas State Univ.,
3USDA-ARS, Gainesville, FL, 4ICRISAT

Objectives
 To test various DSSAT crop models for accurate
response to elevated temperature against data
collected in sunlit, controlled-environment
chambers or fields.
 To document accuracy, or suggest changes to
temperature functions for vegetative,
photosynthetic, and reproductive processes.
 DSSAT models, especially CROPGRO, have
external read-in files describing temperature
sensitivities of processes. Change these without
changing source code.

Testing Simulated Temperature Effects on
Life Cycle, Seed Yield, Biomass, and Seed HI
of Peanut, Dry Bean, Soybean, & Sorghum
 Season-long experiments in sunlit, controlled-
environment chambers, at 350 or 700 ppm CO2,
and at fixed diurnal temperature cycles under
natural diurnal irradiance cycles. Short day
length. Field soil profile.
 Peanut, Soybean & Sorghum: treatments at
32/22, 36/26, 40/30, and 44/34oC (max/min
diurnal cycles).
 Dry bean: treatments at 28/18, 31/21, 34/24,
37/27, and 40/30oC.

CROPGRO (and chambers) compute hourly temperature (based
on Tmax/Tmin), with sinusoidal shape from sunset to sunrise,
plus a decay
45
function at night. Based on Parton and Logan.
Setpoint temperature
Measured 35oC
40
Air Temperature (oC)
35 29oC
30
23oC
25
20
15
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24
Time EST
6000
Mod Sim
Crop or Pod, kg / ha
Obs - Crop
Default Sim
Biomass at harvest of 4000
Dry Bean Montcalm
vs. Temperature
2000
Upper: at 700 ppm
Lower: at 350 ppm
0
Several modifications. 20 25 30 35 40
Mean Temperature, °C
1) Modified temp
function for leaf Ps: 6000
Topt2, from 31 to 34C, Mod Sim
Obs - Crop
Tfail, from 36 to 42C Default Sim
4000
3) Modified Topt2 &
Tmax of time to anth.
2000
3) Increased crop life
cycle: SDPM
0
20 25 30 35 40
Modified Phenology: Anthesis and Maturity for Dry Bean Montcalm
vs. Temperature
Pre-R5: Topt2 from 37 to 31°C, Tmax from 45 to 44°C, & longer SDPM
50 50
Default Simulation: Modified
Days to Anthesis
40
Days to Anthesis
40
30 30
20 20
Sim Sim
10 Obs 10 Obs
0 0
20 25 30 35 40 20 25 30 35 40
Mean Temperature, °C Mean Temperature, °C
80 80
Days to Maturity
Days to Maturity
60 60
40 40
Sim to Normal Maturity Sim to Normal Maturity

20 20 Observed Harvest (PM?)
Observed Harvest (PM?)
0 0
20 25 30 35 40 20 25 30 35 40
Mean Temperature, °C Mean Temperature, °C
4000
Mod Sim - 700
Seed Yield, kg / ha
Observed - 700
3000 Default Sim
2000
Seed Yield of Dry
Bean Montcalm
1000
vs. Temperature
Upper: at 700 ppm 0
20 25 30 35 40
Lower: at 350 ppm
Changes caused 4000
by Ps function, Mod Sim - 350
Observed - 350
Seed Yield, kg / ha
longer cycle, phen. 3000 Default Sim
No change to temp
2000
on seed-set or
seed growth rate
1000
0
20 25 30 35 40
What Modifications Were Needed in
Temperature Functions for Dry Bean?
• Life cycle (moderate importance) – Linear lookup
– Vstg, no changes, no data
– Pre-Seedfill, Topt2 37 to 31°C, Tmax 45 to 44°C
– Seedfill phase, No changes, but SD-PM was longer
• Podset and Seed Growth Rate (no change)
• Photosynthesis (major importance)
– Topt2, from 31 to 34°C (point of 0.8 max)
– Tmax, from 36 to 42°C (point of 0.0 failure)
Temperature response of default model was good for

podset and seed growth, but was poor for leaf
photosynthesis (L).
Testing Simulated Temperature Effects
on Life Cycle, Seed Yield, Biomass,
and Seed HI of Soybean & Peanut
• Experiments in sunlit, controlled-environment
chambers, with controlled temperature and CO2,
under natural diurnal irradiance cycles. Short day
length.
• Season-long temperature treatments at 700 vpm
CO2: 28/18, 32/22, 36/26, 40/30, 44/34, 48/38 oC
(max/min diurnal cycles). Field soil profile.
• Compare observed growth to simulations of
CROPGRO-soybean and peanut models.
Temperature response of default models
was good enough. No Changes Made!
Tested CROPGRO-Soybean response to temperature.
Close mimic of observed. Above 30C (mean), soybean
seed yield was reduced, until total failure at 39C.
3500
3000 Obs - 700 vpm

Seed Yield, kg/ha
Obs - 350 vpm

2500
Sim - 700 vpm Model-modif
2000 Sim - 350 vpm
1500 Sim - Orig. Model-Orig
1000 Minor change to phenology
500
0
20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Mean Temperature, C
Default CROPGRO-Peanut model response to temperature.
Crop grown at 350 ppm CO2. Model mimics observed pattern of
biomass & pod mass vs. temperature with pod failure at 39C.
12000 Possibly increase
Tfailure point for podset
10000 and seed growth rate.
8000
6000
4000 Sim - Pod

Obs - Pod
Sim - Crop
2000 Obs - Crop
0
25 30 35 40 45
Default Simulation: Peanut grown at 350 or 700 ppm
CO2, Seed Harvest Index vs. Temperature
0.5
Seed Harvest Index, fraction
Sim - 350
0.4 Obs - 350
Sim - 700
Obs - 700
0.3
Need 4C increase in
0.2 Tfailure point for podset
and seed growth rate.
0.1
0
25 30 35 40 45
What Modifications May Be Needed in
Temperature Functions for Peanut and
Soybean?
• Life cycle (minor importance):
– Pre-R1, Increase Topt1 28 to 30°C, Topt2 30 to 34°C,
Tmax to 60°C (Nearly same for peanut & soybean!!!)
– Post-R1: Decrease Topt1 to 18C Topt2 to 26C
(Soybean only, very different from peanut)
• Podset & Seed Growth Rate (important) - Peanut
– Rate of Pod-set, Tmax from 40 to 44°C
– Rate of Seed Growth, Tmax from 41 to 45°C
• Podset & Seed Growth Rate - Soybean (make
slightly less temp-sensitive. Similar change as peanut)
• Photosynthesis (No change at high end, for either
crop).
Temperature response of peanut and soybean
were good enough. No Changes Made!
Sorghum Yield Response to CO2 and Temperature
-1
700 mol CO 2 mol
Seed yield (g plant )

-1
30 350 mol CO 2 mol
-1 CERES-Sorghum V4.6
24
model re-calibrated
18 with these data
12 Sorghum, temperature
sensitivity like rice, fails
6
at 35C mean.
0 Contrast to
32/22 36/26 40/30 44/34
soybean &
Air temperature (°C) peanut, fail
(daytime maximum/nighttime minimum) at 40C
Elevated temperatures decreased seed yield. Zero yield and

HI at 35 C, like rice. Elevated temperature delays anthesis,
reduces pollen viability, ISGR, and Grain-Fill Duration
Calibration of CERES-Sorghum against data from sunlit,
controlled-environment chambers (Prasad et al., 2006)
Current version lacks temperature effect on grain-set, but has
temperature effect on relative grain filling rate (RGFIL).
RGFIL Tb, Top1 Top2 Tfail
New 7.0 22.0 27.0 35.0

Old 7.0 22.0 48.0 50.0
Change to V4.6 made by

Singh et al. 2014. Agr. &
Forest Met. 185:37-48.
Re-calibration of temperature parameterization of the CERES-
Millet model (Singh et al., 2017). Boote modified temperature
functions & added RGSET (acts in 9-d period prior to grain-set).
Function Tb, Top1 Top2 Tfail
PRFTC 11.0 22.0 35.0 48.0
RGFIL 7.0 22.0 27.0 60.0
Will create RGSET
RGSET -10.0 12.0 33.0 39.0
for CERES-Maize &
RGLAI 8.0 23.0 32.0 42.0
CERES-Sorghum!!!
Gupta et al. 2015.

Field Crops Res.
171:41–53.
% Seed-set of 46
pearl millet lines vs.
moving average
mean temperature.
Threshold 34C
corresponds to
Tmax of 42C.
Cardinal upper temperatures (◦C) for seed-set and seed
growth rate in DSSAT models. Shapes are parabolic
for the legumes and linear lookups for the cereals.
Function Peanut Soybean Drybean Chickpea Sorghum Millet
& Maize
Seed-set - Topt 26.5 26.5 25.0 21.0 ---- 33.0
Seed-set - Tfail 40.0 40.0 36.0 33.0 ---- 39.0
Seed-GR- Topt 23.5 23.5 25.0 20.0 27.0 27.0
Seed-GR - Topt 41.0 41.0 38.0 35.0 35.0 60.0
Version Set? V3.5 V3.5 V4.5 V4.6 V4.6 V4.7

1998 1998 2006 2014 2014 2017
Conclusion: Prior to simulating climate change effects or

heat-tolerant virtual cultivars, one must set upper threshold
temperatures for seed-set and seed growth rate from
elevated temperature experiments.
Present & Future AgMIP Activities
• Crop Yield Loss Conference (Oct 16-18): AgMIP
team, will couple simple simulators of pest damage
with multiple wheat models to predict pest effects on
the crop without need for input of pest damage.
• AgMIP at ASA, Tampa, Oct 22, 2-4pm, Sunday:
AgMIP General Interest Session from 2-3pm, Crop-
Water-ET (Maize) from 3-4pm, same room
• SAVE THE DATE (Next AgMIP Global):
7th AgMIP Global Workshop
April 24-26, 2018
San Jose, Costa Rica

BooteK-New Developments in DSSAT Modeling-Oct-2017

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

BooteK-New Developments in DSSAT Modeling-Oct-2017

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

BooteK-New Developments in DSSAT Modeling-Oct-2017

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

New Developments in DSSAT Crop

Modeling: Testing and Adding Crops

K.J. Boote, University of Florida

Presentation at STICS Workshop

Presentation at STICS Workshop

Presentation at STICS Workshop

Data without models is chaos; but models

Presentation at STICS Workshop

Presentation at STICS Workshop

Presentation at STICS Workshop

Presentation at STICS Workshop

Presentation at STICS Workshop

Presentation at STICS Workshop

 Web site (www.DSSAT.net)

Presentation at STICS Workshop

Status and New Code for “Storage”

K. J. Boote, S. Rymph, P. Alderman

assisted by B. Pedreira, M. Lara,

ADSA Discover Conference, Integrated Solutions to Fiber Challenges

ADSA Discover Conference, Integrated Solutions to Fiber Challenges

ADSA Discover Conference, Integrated Solutions to Fiber Challenges

 Residual LAI and

ADSA Discover Conference, Integrated Solutions to Fiber Challenges

ADSA Discover Conference, Integrated Solutions to Fiber Challenges

ADSA Discover Conference, Integrated Solutions to Fiber Challenges

ADSA Discover Conference, Integrated Solutions to Fiber Challenges

ADSA Discover Conference, Integrated Solutions to Fiber Challenges

ADSA Discover Conference, Integrated Solutions to Fiber Challenges

In addition to typical LAI, leaf, stem, storage,

 Herbage = (shoot – stubble)

ADSA Discover Conference, Integrated Solutions to Fiber Challenges

ADSA Discover Conference, Integrated Solutions to Fiber Challenges

9-10 d lag to peak N. Why? Add

ADSA Discover Conference, Integrated Solutions to Fiber Challenges

ADSA Discover Conference, Integrated Solutions to Fiber Challenges

• Harvest frequencies of 28 and 42 days, over 2 years

International Conference on Forages in Warm Climates

International Conference on Forages in Warm Climates

TNC of 28-d and 42-day cycle, shows

International Conference on Forages in Warm Climates

Simulating Annual Ryegrass (Lolium multiflorum Lam.)

Works for seed-established annual

3500 Days a er plan ng

Tops (kg ha-1) Herb.

 K. J. Boote1, Vara Prasad2, L. H. Allen,

Presentation at STICS Workshop

Presentation at STICS Workshop

Presentation at STICS Workshop

Default Simulation: Modified

Mean Temperature, °C Mean Temperature, °C

Sim to Normal Maturity Sim to Normal Maturity

longer cycle, phen. 3000 Default Sim

Temperature response of default model was good for

3000 Obs - 700 vpm

Obs - 350 vpm

1000 Minor change to phenology

10000 and seed growth rate.