 |
Tropentag, September 11 - 13, 2024, Vienna
|
The ongoing journey of intercropping modelling: Key insights from the model developers and expert users on fundamental assumptions
Adam Muhammad Adam1, N. Falconnier Gatien2, Claas Nendel3, Marcos Lana4, Ken Giller5, Frank Ewert6, Carsten Marohn1, Georg Cadisch1, Rezai Ehsan Eyshi3, Jing Yu3, Mortis Laub7, Meine van Noordwijk8, Betha Lusiana2, Antoine Couëdel2, Vimbayi Chimonyo9, Michael Kermah10, Myriam Adam11, Marc Corbeels12, Amit Kumar Srivastava3, Sabine J. Seidel13, Thomas Gaiser13, Pacsu Simwaka4, Eric Koomson1, Johanna Volk1, Upendra Singh14, Jacques Fils Pierre14, Willington Pavan14, Alex C. Ruane15
1University of Hohenheim, Inst. of Agric. Sci. in the Tropics (Hans-Ruthenberg-Institute), Germany
2AIDA, Univ Montpellier, CIRAD, Montpellier, France
3Leibniz-Centre for Agric. Landscape Res. (ZALF), Germany
4Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Crop Production Ecology, Sweden
5Wageningen University & Research, Plant Production Systems, The Netherlands
6University of Bonn, Inst. Crop Sci. and Res. Conserv. (INRES), Germany
7ETH Zurich, Switzerland
8The Center for International Forestry Res. and World Agroforestry (CIFOR-ICRAF), Kenya
9CIMMYT, Sustainable Agrifood Systems, Zimbabwe
10International Institute of Tropical Agriculture (IITA), Ghana
11National University of Battambang, Fac. of Agriculture and Food Processing, Cambodia
12International Institute of Tropical Agriculture (IITA), Kenya
13University of Bonn, Inst. Crop Sci. and Res. Conserv. (INRES), Germany
14IFDC, United States
15NASA, Goddard Institute for Space Studies, United States
Abstract
Crop modelling and simulation have become increasingly important tools in predicting the future climate change on crop production and exploring new agronomic management strategies/cropping systems to enhance resilience to climate change. However, the reliability of these models critically depends on how well the fundamental assumptions and concepts of the model are represented. The significant variability in model results observed in previous multi-model comparisons of monoculture systems is mostly due to a strong mismatch between models in terms of their assumptions. This leads to discrepancies in model outputs, even when they are run under the same conditions of climate, soil, and management practices.
Additionally, the complexities of intercropping systems regarding light, water, and nutrient sharing concepts cannot be compared to monoculture systems. Since models have varying levels of accuracy in the representation of fundamental processes for resource sharing concepts, and intercropping is a very complex system, we aim to examine how the existing models represent intercropping systems in their entirety, including their assumptions, concepts, equations, and parameters. Most of these assumptions are rarely explicitly described in scientific publications, and sometimes they are not immediately apparent in the model documentation from model developers and experts users perspective.
This poster will provide detailed description of intercropping models routines, scale of application in time and space and unbiased insight into the key strengths and weaknesses of the existing models in terms of intercropping capabilities. In addition, the poster will highlight areas that may need further improvement regarding intercropping modelling for above-ground and below-ground resource sharing.
Keywords: Comparing models assumptions, intercropping routines, model structures
Contact Address: Adam Muhammad Adam, University of Hohenheim, Inst. of Agric. Sci. in the Tropics (Hans-Ruthenberg-Institute), Garbenstr. 13, 70599 Stuttgart, Germany, e-mail: am.adam
uni-hohenheim.de
