شبیه سازی عملکرد برنج در مقیاس منطقه ای با استفاده از مدل‌ آکواکراپ در منطقه صومعه‌سرا

نوع مقاله : کاربردی

نویسندگان

1 دانشجوی دکتری خاک‌شناسی، دانشکدۀ کشاورزی، دانشگاه گیلان، رشت، ایران

2 دانشیار گروه خاک‌شناسی، دانشکدۀ کشاورزی، دانشگاه گیلان، رشت، ایران

3 دانشیار گروه مهندسی آب، دانشکدۀ کشاورزی، دانشگاه گیلان، رشت، ایران

4 دانشیار، موسسه تحقیقات آب و خاک، سازمان تحقیقات، آموزش و ترویج کشاورزی، کرج، ایران

چکیده
امروزه استفاده از مدل‌های شبیه‌ساز در مدیریت بهینه فرآیند تولید و دستیابی به عملکرد مطلوب در مقیاس مزرعه‌ای از اهمیت ویژه‌ای برخوردار است. مدل آکواکراپ یکی از مدل‌های کاربردوست برای شبیه‌سازی رشد گیاهان است که توسط فائو معرفی شده است و به‌ویژه در تحلیل اثرات مختلف خاک، گیاه و عوامل اقلیمی بر عملکرد محصولات کشاورزی مورد استفاده قرار می‌گیرد. این مدل به‌ویژه برای ارزیابی عملکرد سیستم‌های کشاورزی دیم و آبی مناسب است. آکواکراپ به‌طور مؤثر برای شبیه‌سازی رشد و تولید محصولات مختلف از جمله برنج در شرایط مدیریتی مختلف و در مکان‌های مختلف کاربرد دارد. پژوهش حاضر با هدف ارزیابی دقت مدل‌ آکواکراپ در شبیه‌سازی عملکرد زیست توده و دانه برنج رقم هاشمی در مقیاس منطقه‌ای (92 شالیزار در شهرستان صومعه‌سرا) پس از واسنجی و صحت‌سنجی نقطه‌ای انجام شد. نتایج نشان داد که مدل آکواکراپ از دقت بسیار خوبی در برآورد عملکرد دانه شلتوک (70/0R2= و%10nRMSE=) و میزان عملکرد زیست‌توده (66/0R2= و %20nRMSE= ) برخوردار می‌باشد. همچنین با توجه به مقادیر کارایی مدل در شبیه‌سازی عملکرد دانه شلتوک (70/0 = EF) و زیست توده ( 97/0 = EF)، می‌توان نتیجه گرفت که مدل قادر به شبیه‌سازی دقیق رشد و عملکرد گیاه برنج در شرایط واقعی مزرعه است. نتایج این پژوهش حاکی از آن است که مدل آکواکراپ، با ساده‌سازی فرآیندهای پیچیده زیستی و استفاده از ورودی‌های محدود، نه تنها ابزار مفیدی برای شبیه‌سازی عملکرد در شرایط مدیریتی مختلف است (92 مدیریت مختلف)، بلکه می‌تواند نقش مؤثری در بهبود تصمیم‌گیری‌های راهبردی به‌منظور مدیریت منابع آب و بهینه‌سازی سایر نهاده‌های تولید در شرایط محدودیت منابع ایفا کند. به‌کارگیری این مدل در مناطق مختلف جغرافیایی و شرایط مدیریتی گوناگون، امکان ارائه راهکارهایی برای افزایش تولید و بهره‌وری نهاده‌های تولید و کاهش اثرات منفی زیست‌محیطی حاصل از مدیریت نادرست منابع تولید را فراهم خواهد کرد.

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات

عنوان مقاله English

Regional-scale rice performance simulation using the AquaCrop model in the Sowme’eh Sara region

نویسندگان English

Adineh Abdi Tabalvandani 1
Mahmoud Shabanpour 2
Safoora Asadi Kapourchal 2
Mohammadreza Khaledian 3
Naser Davatgar 4
1 Ph.D. Department of Soil Science, Faculty of Agricultural Sciences, University of Guilan, Rasht, Iran
2 Associate Professor, Department of Soil Science, Faculty of Agricultural Sciences, University of Guilan, Rasht, Iran
3 Associate Professor, Dept of Water Engineering, Faculty of Agricultural Sciences, University of Guilan Rasht Iran
4 Associate Professor, Soil and water research institute, Agricultural Research, Education and Extension Organization (AREEO), Karaj, Iran
چکیده English

Introduction: Food security relies on access to safe, affordable food and meeting nutritional needs. Rice is a staple crop, feeding over a third of the global population. Simulation models are essential tools for optimizing agricultural systems and forecasting crop performance under various environmental conditionsDeveloped by the FAO, the AquaCrop model evaluates the interplay of soil, water, climate, and management practices, offering user-friendly and robust features for simulating irrigated and rainfed farming systems. Central to such models is simplifying complex biological dynamics to accurately predict yield and biomass while minimizing environmental degradation. By simplifying complex biological processes, AquaCrop enables the accurate prediction of crop yield and biomass. This study uses AquaCrop to simulate the growth and productivity of Hashemi rice across 92 paddy fields in Sowme’eh Sara County. By calibrating and validating the model with site-specific data, this research showcases AquaCrop’s effectiveness in addressing regional challenges and its potential to improve agricultural sustainability through enhanced resource management and informed decision-making.

Materials and Methods: This study was conducted in 92 paddy fields within Sowme’eh Sara County, aiming to assess the AquaCrop model’s reliability for simulating rice yield and biomass under real-world conditions. Soil samples were collected via stratified random sampling from depths of up to 60 cm across different soil layers (surface, compacted plow layer, and subsoil) and analyzed for parameters such as texture (loamy to clayey), organic carbon content, field capacity, wilting point, pH, and electrical conductivity. Meteorological data, including daily temperatures, solar radiation, precipitation, and wind speed, were gathered during the rice growth period to calibrate and validate the model. Farmer surveys documented management practices, including fertilization methods, irrigation strategies (alternate vs. continuous), and pest control techniques. The AquaCrop model was calibrated by adjusting region-specific parameters, such as initial canopy cover, harvest index, and water-use efficiency, using soil, crop, and meteorological data. Validation involved comparing observed yield and biomass data with AquaCrop-simulated results. The model’s performance was evaluated using statistical indices such as normalized root mean square error (nRMSE), root mean square error (RMSE), coefficient of determination (R²), and model efficiency (EF). Finally, sensitivity analysis identified key parameters influencing simulation accuracy, ensuring comprehensive applicability to diverse management scenarios.
Results and Discussion: The observed yield values for grain across the studied paddy fields ranged from 2.54 ton/ha to 5.97 ton/ha, with a mean yield of 3.92 ton/ha. Biomass production varied from 6.20 ton/ha to 12.62 ton/ha, averaging 8.46 ton/ha. The AquaCrop model successfully replicated these trends, achieving R² values of 0.70 for grain yield and 0.66 for biomass, with nRMSE values of 10% and 20%, respectively. Model efficiency indices further confirmed AquaCrop’s reliability, with EF = 0.70 for grain yield and EF = 0.97 for biomass yield. Sensitivity analysis identified several critical parameters influencing simulation accuracy, such as harvest index, initial canopy cover, and saturated hydraulic conductivity. Fine-tuning these inputs enhanced the model’s predictive capabilities. While minor discrepancies were noted in biomass accumulation under specific stress conditions, these results aligned with findings from previous research. The AquaCrop model demonstrated its adaptability for agricultural decision-making by evaluating outcomes under diverse management practices across 92 paddy fields. Simulated results also provided effective strategies for optimizing irrigation water usage, nutrient management, and reducing environmental impacts. The study highlights AquaCrop’s role as a robust decision-support tool capable of offering actionable insights into improving agricultural sustainability. It successfully accommodated variations in soil structure, agroecological settings, and crop rotation practices, underscoring its potential for large-scale applications in heterogeneous farming systems.
Conclusion: The AquaCrop model exhibits high potential for sustainable resource management in agriculture and serves as an advanced and effective tool for the agricultural community. This study demonstrated that AquaCrop is highly accurate and effective in simulating rice grain yield and biomass under real-world farming conditions. With simple input requirements and adaptable algorithms, AquaCrop offers robust solutions for sustainable agricultural resource management. The model proved capable of optimizing irrigation practices and resource inputs like water and nutrients, thereby reducing environmental impact while maintaining productivity. Its application across varied agroecosystems highlights its scalability and relevance to regions facing challenges like water scarcity and climate change. AquaCrop’s role as a proactive tool for agricultural sustainability strongly supports its utility in future farming research and policymaking. Extending this framework to additional crops and geographical areas could further enhance global food security and resource efficiency.

کلیدواژه‌ها English

Agricultural Production
Resources
Calibration
Plant growth
model
  1. References

    1. Abdi, A., Asadi Kapourchal, S., Vazifehdoust, M. and Rezaei, M. The effect of satellite and ground-observed dry matter updates on the accuracy of Hashemi rice yield simulation using SWAP model. Water Management in Agriculture, 7(2):103-118 (In Persian). https://dorl.net/dor/20.1001.1.24764531.1399.7.2.8.7
    2. Abdul-Ganiyu, S., Kyei-Baffour, N., Agyare, W. A., and Dogbe, W. 2018. Evaluating the Effect of Irrigation on Paddy Rice Yield by Applying the AquaCrop Model in Northern Ghana. In Strategies for Building Resilience against Climate and Ecosystem Changes in Sub-Saharan Africa. Springer, Singapore. pp: 93-116.

    DOI 10.1007/978-981-10-4796-1_6

    1. Aggarwal, P. K., Kalra, N., Singh, A. K., and Sinha, S. K. Analyzing the limitations set by climatic factors, genotype, water and nitrogen availability on productivity of wheat I. The model description, parametrization and validation. Field Crops Research, 38(2): 73–91. https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-4290(94)90003-5
    2. Ahmadloo, F, Rezaei, A, Farahpour, M, Calagari, M and Mehrabi A. 2021. Investigating the area and production of poplar plantations in Sowmeeh Sara city using field data and GIS. Ecology of Iranian Forest, 918 (10):159-68 (In Persian). http://dx.doi.org/10.52547/ifej.9.18.159
    3. Alaee Bazkiaei, P., Kamkar, B., Amiri, E., Kazemi, H. and Rezaei, M. 2020. Evaluation of AquaCrop and ORYZA2000 models in simulating rice yield under crop managements in Rasht City. Iranian Journal of Field Crops Research, 21(184): 401-41. (In Persian). https://dor.isc.ac/dor/20.1001.1.20081472.1399.18.4.3.4
    4. Allen, R., G., Pereira, L. S., Raes, D. and Smith, M. 1998. Crop evapotranspiration – Guidelines for computing crop water requirements. FAO Irrigation and Drainage. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome, Italy. Pp:56. https://www.fao.org/3/x0490e/x0490e00.
    5. Amiri, E., Rezaeii, M. and Shirshahi, F. 2019. The Performance of the Aquacrop Model under Deficit and Saline Irrigation Management of Rice. Water Management in Agriculture, 6(1): 13-22 (In Persian). https://agris.fao.org (DOI not assigned).
    6. Booltink, H. W. G. and Buma, J. 2002. Steady flow soil column method. In: Dane, J. H., and G. C. Clake. eds. Methods of soil analysis. Part 4. Physical Methods. SSSA Book Series, No:5. Madison, Wisconsin, USA. Pp: 812- 814. https://doi.org/10.2136/sssabookser5.4.c35.
    7. Boote, K., Hoogenboom, G., Porter, C. H., Boote, K. J., Shelia, V. and Wilkens, P. W. 2019. The DSSAT crop modeling ecosystem. In K. Boote Ed., Burleigh Dodds Series in Agricultural Science. Pp: 173–216. https://doi.org/10.19103/AS.2019.0051.09.
    8. Bouman, B. A. M., Kropff, M. J., Tuong, T. P., Wopereis, M. C. S., Berge, H. F. M., and Van Laar, H. H. 2001. Modeling lowland rice. International Rice Research Institute (IRRI), Los Baños, Philippines. https://library.wur.nl/WebQuery/wurpubs/122286.
    9. Brisson, N., Gary, C., Justes, E., Roche, R., Mary, B., Ripoche, D., Zimmer, D., Sierra, J., Bertuzzi, P., Burger, P., and Bussiere, F. 2003. An overview of the crop model STICS. European Journal of Agronomy, 18(3): 309–332. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1161-0301(02)00110-7
    10. Cheenkachorn, K. 2007. Drying of rice paddy using a microwave-vacuum dryer. In Proceedings of the European Congress of Chemical Engineering Copenhagen, Denmark. pp: 16–20. https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:16410456
    11. Dane, J.H. and Hopmans, J.W. 2002. Methods of Soil Analysis. Part 4, Physical Methods. Soil Science Society of America. Madison, WI. PP: 684-688. doi:10.2136/vzj2016.09.0080
    12. De Wit, A. and Boogaard, H. 2021. A gentle introduction to WOFOST. Wageningen Environmental Research https://www.wur.nl/en/ show/A-gentl e-intro ducti on-to- WOFOST. (DOI not assigned)
    13. Ebrahimipak, N., Egdarnejad, A. and Khodadadi Dehkordi, D. Evaluation of AquaCrop Model to Simulate Corn Yield under Water deficit and Superabsorbent application. Irrigation and Water Engineering, 8(3):166-184. (In Persian). https://www.waterjournal.ir/article_74092_6b2564f3cb5a5d3c0a6266e8fb3805b2.pdf.
    14. Geertz, S. and Raes, D. 2009. Deficit irrigation as on-farm strategy to maximize crop water productivity in dry areas. Agricultural Water Management, 9(6): 1275-1284. DOI:1016/j.agwat.2009.04.009.
    15. Grossman, R.B. and Reinsch, T.G. 2002. Bulk density and linear extensibility. P 201-228. In: J.H. Dane and G.C. Clake eds., Methods of soil analysis. Part 4. Physical Methods: Soil Science Society of America Book Series No:5. Madison, Wisconsin, USA. https://doi.org/10.2136/sssabookser5.4.c9
    16. Gee, G.W. and Or, D. 2002. Methods of Soil Analysis. Part 4. Physical Methods: Soil Science Society of America Book Series, Madison. Pp: 255-293. doi:10.2136/vzj2016.09.0080
    17. Holzworth, D.P., Huth, N.I., De Voil, P.G., Zurcher, E.J., Herrmann, N.I., McLean, G., Chenu, K., Van Oosterom, E.J., Snow, V. and Murphy, C., 2014. APSIM–evolution towards a new generation of agricultural systems simulation. Environmental Modelling and Software, 6(2): 327-350.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsoft.2014.07.009
    18. Hoogenboom G., Wilkens P.W., Thornton P.K., Jones J.W., Hunt L.A. and Imamura, D.T. 1999. Decision support system for agro technology transfer version 3.5. In: University of Hawaii. Honolulu. Pp: 1 -36. https://shop.bdspu blish ing.com/store/ bds/detai l/produ ct/3-190-97817 86765185.
    19. 2021. Agricultural water management for sustainable rural development Annual report. International Commission on Irrigation and Drainage. Pp: 96. (access may November 8, 2022) https://icid-ciid.org/icid_data_web/ar_2021.pdf
    20. Jagermeyr, J., Robock, A., Elliott, J., Muller, C., Xia, L., Khabarov, N., Folberth, C., Schmid, E., Liu, W., Zabel, F., Rabin, S. S., Puma, M. J., Heslin, A., Franke, J., Foster, I., Asseng, S., Bardeen, C. G., Toon, O. B., and Rosenzweig, C. 2020. A regional nuclear conflict would compromise global food security. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 117(13): 7071–7081. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.19190 49117
    21. Jin, Z., Zhuang, Q., Tan, Z., Dukes, J. S., Zheng, B., and Melillo, J. M. 2016. Do maize models capture the impacts of heat and drought stresses on yield? Using algorithm ensembles to identify successful approaches. Global Change Biology, 22(9): 3112–3126. https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.13376
    22. Kheir, A. M. S., Ammar, A., Attia, A., Elnashar, A., Ahmad, S., El-Gioushy, S. F. and Ahmed, M. 2022. Cereal crop modeling for food and nutrition security. In M. Ahmed Ed., Global agricultural production: resilience to climate change. Springer International Publishing. pp: 183–195. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-1497-3_6
    23. Kogan, F. 2019. Food security: The twenty-first century issue. In F. Kogan Ed., Remote sensing for food security. Springer International Publishing: 9–22. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-96256-6_2.
    24. Krause, P., Boyle, D.P. and Bäse, F. 2005. Comparison of different efficiency criteria for hydrological model assessment. Advances in Geosciences, 5 (1): 89-97. https://doi.org/10.5194/adgeo-5-89-2005, 2005
    25. Liliane, T.N. and Charles, M.S., 2020. Factors affecting yield of crops. Agronomy-Climate Change and Food Security. Pp: 9. https://doi.org/10.5772/intechopen78102.
    26. Maniruzzaman, M., Talukder, M. S. U., Khan, M. H., Biswas, J. C., and Nemes, A. 2015. Validation of the AquaCrop model for irrigated rice production under varied water regimes in Bangladesh. Agricultural Water Management, 15(9): 331–340. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2015.06.022
    27. Nelson, D. W. and Summers, L. E., 1996. Total carbon, organic carbon, and organic matter. Methods of soil analysis: Part 3 Chemical Methods, 10(5): 961-1010. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-018-0192-z
    28. Neupane, D., Adhikari, P., Bhattarai, D., Rana, B., Ahmed, Z., Sharma, U. and Adhikari, D. 2022. Does climate change affect the yield of the top three cereals and food security in the world? Earth, 3(1): 45–71. https://doi.org/10.3390/earth3010004
    29. Newton, A. C., Johnson, S. N. and Gregory, P. J. 2011. Implications of climate change for diseases, crop yields and food security. Euphytica, 179(1): 3–18. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10681-011-0359-4.
    30. Ouda, S., Zohry, A.E., Ouda, S. and Zohry, A.E., 2022. Water-smart practices to manage water scarcity. Clim. -Smart Agric.: Reducing Food Insecurity, Pp: 3–26. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-93111-7_1
    31. Peng, B., Guan, K., Chen, M., Lawrence, D. M., Pokhrel, Y., Suyker, A., Arkebauer, T. and Lu, Y. 2018. Improving maize growth processes in the community land model: Implementation and evaluation. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology. Pp: 64–89. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agrfo rmet.2017.11.012
    32. Porras-Jorge, R., Ramos-Fernández, L., Ojeda-Bustamante, W. and Ontiveros-Capurata, R.E. 2020. Performance assessment of the AquaCrop model to estimate rice yields under alternate wetting and drying irrigation in the coast of Peru. Scientia Agropecuaria, 11(3): 309-21. http://dx.doi.org/10.17268/sci.agropecu.2020.03.03
    33. Pourgholam Amiji, M., Liaghat, A. and Khoshravesh, M. 2020. Evaluation of AquaCrop Model for Estimating Rice Yield under Alternative Irrigation. Research Journal of Water Engineering and Agriculture, 11(1): 305-320. (In persian). Doi: 10.22125/iwe.2020.114972
    34. Pourgholam Amiji, M., Liaghat, A., Nazi Ghameshlou, A. and Khoshravesh, M. Effect of Shallow and Saline groundwater on Rice Growth and Biomass. Journal of Water Research in Agriculture, 32 (4): 499-516 (In Persian). Doi: 10.22092/jwra.2019.118520
    35. Raes, D., Steduto, P., Hsiao, T. C. and Fereres, E. 2009. AquaCrop, The FAO crop model to simulate yield response to water: II. Main algorithms and software description. Agronomy Journal, 101(3): 438–447. https://doi.org/10.2134/agron j2008.0140s
    36. Raes, D., Steduto, P., Hsiao, T. C. and Fereres, E. 2022. Chapter 3, Calculation Procedures–AquaCrop, Version 7.0. In Reference Manual–AquaCrop, Version 7.0. https://www.fao.org/3/br248e/br248e.pdf
    37. Raes, D., Steduto, P. and Hsiao, A. 2018. AquaCrop Version 6.0 - 6.1 Reference Manual, FAO, Rome, Italy. https://www.fao.org/3/br248e/br248e.pdf
    38. Remesan, R., Shamim, M.A. and Han, D. 2008. Model data selection using gamma test for daily solar radiation estimation. Hydrological Processes, 22: 4301-4309.  https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.7044
    39. Rinaldi M, Losavio, N. and Flagella, Z. 2003. Evaluation and application of the OILCROP-SUN model for sunflower in southern Italy. Agricultural Systems, 78(1): 17-30. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0308-521X(03)00030-1
    40. Sparks, D.L. 1996. Methods of Soil Analysis Part 3 Chemical Methods." Soil Science Society of America, American Society of Agronomy, Madison. https://doi.org/10.1201/9780203739433
    41. Walkley, A. and Black, I.A., 1934. An examination of the Degtjareff method for determining soil organic matter, and a proposed modification of the chromic acid titration method. Soil Science, 37(1): 29-38. http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/00010694-193401000-00003
    42. Webber, H., Gaiser, T. and Ewert, F. 2014. What role can crop models play in supporting climate change adaptation decisions to enhance food security in Sub-Saharan Africa? Agricultural Systems, 12(7): 161–177. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. agsy.2013.12.006
    43. Yan, J., Wu, Q., Qi, D. and Zhu, J., 2022. Rice yield, water productivity, and nitrogen use efficiency responses to nitrogen management strategies under supplementary irrigation for rain-fed rice cultivation. Agricultural Water Management, 26(3): 107486. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2022.107486
    44. Zhai, B., Fu, Q., Li, T., Liu, D., Ji, Y., Li, M. and Cui, S. 2019. Rice irrigation schedule optimization based on the AquaCrop model: study of the Longtouqiao irrigation district. Water, 11(9): 1799. DOI: 3390/w11091799