The Robertson phenology was used to provide growth stage information to a wheat stress indicator mode. A stress indicator model demands two acurate predictions from a crop calendar: date of spring growth initiation; and crop calendar stage at growth initiation. Several approaches for restarting the Robertson phenology model at spring growth initiation were studied. Although best results were obtained with a solar thermal unit method, an alternate approach which indicates soil temperature as the controlling parameter for spring growth initiation was selected and tested. The modified model (Doraiswamy-Thompson) is compared to LACIE-Robertson model predictions

Ravet, F. W.

Smika, D.

Taylor, T. W.

English

NASA Technical Reports Server

  
 
 
N O T I C E 
 
THIS DOCUMENT HAS BEEN REPRODUCED FROM 
MICROFICHE. ALTHOUGH IT IS RECOGNIZED THAT 
CERTAIN PORTIONS ARE ILLEGIBLE, IT IS BEING RELEASED 
IN THE INTEREST OF MAKING AVAILABLE AS MUCH 
INFORMATION AS POSSIBLE 
https://ntrs.nasa.gov/search.jsp?R=19820015706 2020-03-21T09:25:13+00:00Z
AsPr-cR- ifp ^4
E82'1020?
e4-ui-o4u2
JSC-17801
Early Warning and Crop
Condition Assessment
A Joint Program for
Agriculture and
Resources Inventory
Surveys Through
Aerospace
Remote Sensing
fNONEMER .1981
EVALUATION OF THE DORAISWAMY-THOMPSON LINTER WHEAT CROP CALENDAR
IODEL INCORPORATING A MODIFIED SPRING RESTART SEQUENCE
T. 9'. TAYLOR, F. W. RAVET, AND D. SMIKA
(Ed 2-1027) EYALUAIlCh 6f TiiE 	 N# 2— y3580
D©RAISWAbY — TdCdkSCN WIRIkk kEFAI CACr
CALEADAA AUDEL iNC0BPCRA I NG A nODIFI O
SPRING RESIAhA SE0ERCL tLepdLtaent bt	 UUci.as
.• agriculture) 1 1 r bC A02 /21F A01	 C-'CL 01C G3/4; i 00207fines ^a.p/f4 Ywu •.,.v.. ^r^
in tk	 of early and wi'e
semination of Earth Resou. US Sn MY
Program information and W i ltisoui. Nai►uu►y
for any do mr& thwwt:'
U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
1050 BAY AREA BOULEVARD
Hous on. TEXAS 77058
X00 aF CO
AidAN 	 t^P	 M4,E`
S	
P^
U.S.t► f	 sr,rES Of
r
l	
•L #
Lyndon B. Johnson Space Center
Houston. Texas 77058
kTF
EW- U1-04212
JSC17801
EVALUATION OF THE DORAISWAMY-THOMPSON
WINTER WHEAT CROP CALENDAR MODEL
INCORPORATING A MODIFIED SPRING RESTART SEQUENCE
PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATORS
T.W. Taylor, F. W. Ravet and D. Smika
APPROVED BY
Glennis 0. Boatwright, Manager
Early Warning/Crop Condition Assessment Project
AgRISTARS Program
1
Houston, Texas
November 1981
r1. Report No.	 EW—U1-04212 2. Govern s rent Accession No. 3. Recipient 's Catalog No.
JSC-1780''
4. ATiu` g^itle S. Report Date
E-
x
a
l
luation of the Doraiswamy-Thompson Winter Wheat Crop -	 November 1981
Calendar Model Incorporating a Modified Spring Restart 6. Performing Organization Code
Sequence
7. Author(s) 8. Performing Organization Report No.
T. W. Taylor (USDA), F. W. Ravet (NASA) and D. Smika (USDA)
10. Work unit No.
9. Performing Organization Name and Address
EW/CCA
11. Contract or Grant No.1050 Bay Area Blvd.
Houston, TX	 77058
13. Type of Report and Period Covered
12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address
AgRISTARS
USDA/NASA	 JSC (SK)Houston, TX	 77058
14. Sponsoring Agency Code
15. Supplementary Notes
AgRISTARS, Program
16. Abstrect
The Robertson phenology model is used by both EW/CCA and FAS to provide growth stage
information to a wheat stress indicator model.
	 The resistance of wheat to a given stress
varies with crop phenology.
A stress indicator model demands two accurate predictions from a crop calendar: 	 (1) the
date of spring growth initiation and (2) the crop calendar stage at growth initiation.
During the LACIE various approaches were studied to predict these two variables.
The EW/CCA project has studied several appraoches for restarting the Robertson Phenology
model at spring growth initiation. 	 An approach suggested by D. Smika in 1977 was selected
and tested in conjunction with the Doraiswamy-Thompson crop calendar.
17. Key Words (Suggested by Authorls))tress Moae.1
Winter wheat crop calendar
Winter wheat growth restart
18. Distribution Statement
19. Security Clanif. (of this report) 20. Security Classif (of this page) 21. No. of Pages 22.	 Price'
Unclassified Unclassified 12
rginia 22161
''	 NASA - JSC
EVALUATION OF THE DORAISWAMY-THOMPSON WINTER WHEAT
CROP CALENDAR MODEL INCORPORATING A MODIFIED
SPRING P7START SEQUENCE
The Early Warning/Crop Condition Assessment project of AgRISTARS and
the Crop Condition Assessment Division of the Foreign Agriculture Service
have employed a version of the Robertson phenology model. The model was
improved during the Large Area Crop Inventory Experiment (LACIE) to predict
winter wheat growth stages. Model implementation requires an accurate
estimation of planting date, the historical normal date are not adequate.
The Robertson phenology model is used by both EW/CCA and FAS to provide
growth stage information to a wheat stress indicator model. The resistance
of wheat to a given stress varies with crop phenology.
Stress that affects winter wheat prior to growth reduction ("dormancy")
are not stage related, therefore accurate phenological data is unnecessary.
Following spring growth initiation, phenology information is mandatory.
A stress indicator model demands two accurate predictions from a crop
calendar: (1) the date of spring growth initiation and (2) the crop
calendar stage at growth initiation. During the LACIE various approaches
were studied to predict these two variables.
Baskett, et.al (1976) determined a start and step dormancy criterion
based on many years of Kansas and South Dakota Crop Reporting District
data. A stage development rate criterion was incorporated based on daily
maximum and minimum temperatures and day length. Their analyses indicated
that the Robertson Biometeorological Time Scale (BMT) at spring growth
initiation zould vary between stages 1.0 and 2.0. This range, while
unacceptable, was the best that could be acquired from their data source.
The Feyerherm Yield Model used a version of the Robertson Crop Calendar
that was reset to BHT 1.85 on Julian day 270. This procedure was use3 for
the LACIE.
The EW/CCA project has studied several approaches for restarting the
Robertson Phenology model at spring growth initiation. Best results were
obtained with a solar thermal unit method (Caprio, 1971). Solar radiation
is, however, not readily available on a global basis. Therefore, an alter-
nate approach suggested by Smika (1977) was selected and tested. Smika in-
dicated soil temperature as the controlling parameter for spring growth
initiation; he found that summing the mean soil temperature above -4°F to a
total of 25 degree days would predict spring growth initiation as long as
the mean daily soil temperature was greater than -4°F for the period.
Should the mean soil temperature fall below -4°F, the summation is reset to
zero and started over. Heuer, et.al (1978) stated that this is the best
method to predict spring growth initiation.
Smika's method has soil temperature as the central parameter and it is
also not readily available. EW/CCA is evaluating methods to predict soil
temperature at the root node (ca. 3cm) for use in the winterkill model. No
technique tested thus far has improved the present soil temperature algo-
rithm used in the winterkill model. That algorithm is from a report by
1
Moiseichik (1966) stating that a 4°C mean temperature differential exists
between the ambient and root node temperatures. This approximation was
selected for use in the wheat crop calendar restart model.
Analyses of ground truth data taken under Smika's direction for 2 years
from 7 ARS sites indicate that a BMT of 1.4 rather than 1.85 is a more
accurate approximation of the phenology of spring growth initiation.
Model Configuration
The restart model was designed to use the minimum and maximum tempera-
tures provided by either World Meteorological Organization station data or
Air Force gridded meteorological data. Coefficients in the Robertson model
were modified by Doraiswamy (1981) and the restart model was added. Model
structure was configured to accept solar radiation information should it
become generally available and f",'C .alucs can replace the growing
degree-day calculations.
Model logic includes:
SOILT: s ((Turin + Tmax/2) + 4 where SOILT is mean 'soil temperature
Tmin is the minimum daily temperature, °C
Tmax is the maximum dialy temperature, °C
The sum of the degree-days (SDD) is: 	 o
SDD + (SOILT -4 C) + SDD If the quantity (SDD-4 0C) is less than
zero, then SDD is reset equal to zero, when SCC equals 25°, the
phenology model is started with a BHT of 1.4.
Testing
The modified model (Doraiswamy-Thompson) was compared to the LACIE
version using Agricultural Research Service (ARS) meteorological and ground
truth data. Results are summarized in Table 1.
Conclusion:
An analysis of variance procedure was applied to the data in Table 1.
A two-factor ANOV A model with interactions was used with ground truth
growth stage information and both D-T and LACIE-Robertson model predictions
as factors. Conclusions were:
(1) Neither model tracks phenology perfectly although greater
inaccuracies occur with the LACIE-Robertson model (fig. 1).
(2) Overall the D-T model more closely estimates ground-truth than
does the LACIE-Robertson (fig. 2).
(3) When compared to ground-truth:
a. Both models performed equally well in growth stages 1
(emergence), 3 (heading), 4.5 (waxy ripe) and 5.0 (harvest).
b. the D-T model is superior at stages 2 (jointing) and 4 (milky
ripe).	 2
n
	
`
^
co
^
U1
m
c
o
t
—
N
m
 
m
co
rn
ti
O
 O
r
r
r
A
 A
 G
DL
U1
0%
c
o
4
r L
 •N
c
o
00
ti
N
 
S
I
	
I
	
i
c oo
coo
%0
A
 A
M
M
N
c
o
I
%0
N
c
o
rO
?
U1
c
o
r
c
o
r
^Dr
O
^
D^
t
-
r
U1r
ull
co
%0
^
Dr
^
Or
^
o
o
.
-
(D
N
c
o
%0
0
 
W
r
r
c c 
ap
N
 •r
+
 c
O
N
M
L
 c
 D
lf1
^O
,7
w
	
•
.4
	
tt1
r
-
E
 O
 C)
W
	
S
^
^D
Q`
1
	
I
	
1
rr
W
 "'7 S
%0
t
-
U*$
to
M
M
N
r
r
r
O
O
O
Nr
Nr
O.
-
W0
N
O
O
O
N
N
N
Fa
M
d
%0
H
N
%
 
W
M
L
	
I
N
D
	
LH
O0 C
 
3to v
W
 H c
U
	
O
^
°
a
S
^
c
cc
0+
t,
1
	
I
	
1
x
1
	
x
•p
m
c
o
 m
0
a
 to F
CL.
t
—
 a
Z:
,
.] A
 V
co
H
%0
a
o
N
t—
C7
t
—
U1
J
O
d t!)
to
t—
co
O
t—
H
 
1
A
^D
ti
^D
O 
N
F
N
a
co
%0
M
O^
S
L
c
o
t
-
H
ti
co
ON
co
O
%0
_
-r
O
to
[-
N
O`
c
o
q
vi
0
c
o
%0
t
-
a
0o
N-
r
n
c
o
J
r
r
r
r
da
e
o
ti
^
H
H
^
t—
aD
ti
s
V
^
NJ
	
T
^D
N
c
o
a
c
n
I
A
t
r
dA
	
?
M
^
O
N
a
t-
t-
m
c
o
„•a
r
r
r
r
aA
r
?
N
00
%D
lLn
^W
	
A
-
-t
N
HZ
	
?
a
r
n
o
Ln
a
o
a
%0
t
-
a
o
ti
tL
J
r
-
^
^
r
dF
M
N
M
d
H
%D
tf )
U
1
?
A
U
^
r
^
.
-
rW
	
a
^D
N
^
d
	
S
Cn
M
M
s
a
m
A
r
r
r
r
4
	
O
H
	
Z
	
M
H
^
O
c
o
M
c
n
a
%0
t
o
J
r
r
r
r-
e
n
H
0`
%D
M
a
s
O
C.7
O
M
N
N
N
r
^-
r
r
Wa
	
-
^
Cn
%0
ID
O
t
`
S
A
O
O
N
r
N
r
.
-
r
r
'
aF
a
c
o
c
o
M
c
o
J
O%
M
r
O
q
r
zO
t
—
00
?
M
a
H
ko
Lr^
-7
U1
V
C7
N
N
N
N
AZ
m
%O
.D
d
to
t—
Ln
=T
U1
W
A
N
N
N
N
Jts]
o
	
r
a
i
^
^
^
S
J
N
N
N
N
U
4!
c
c
0
0
 4)
c
c
t-
 v
D
.+
O
1
	
L
•
.+
^
L
N
 ^
L
.•^^
^C
t
—
 
V
F
^
'
d
3
L
O
L1
+
Ld
I
' Qv
 /
TO
N
SrZOI
r
VOLL.LLJUzLLJcr-LLJLL_LLO7QWLitcr-U'LL
ZO1—coO
 
Q
, J,
^
V/
L
L
J
 
Q
Q
 
OQ
N
 
0
0
 
^
t
 
O
 
^
t
' 
G
p
 N
 
I
'D
 ON
4
z^}
	
z
Acknowledg::.:nt :
We wish Io thtnk I r. Glen Boatwright for his advice on the approach
used for testis;, analvz ,.ng results and structure of the restart model; and
Ed Miller for pro%iding the statistical analysis of the results.
r
6
REFERENCES
Baskett, R.L., W.W. Hildreth, D.D. Wilcox, and S.K. Woolley, 1976, Large
Area Crop Inventory Experiment (LACIE) Phase II Winter Wheat End-Of-
Dormancy Restart Model, NAS9-012200, LEMSCO, Houston, TX.
Caprio, Joseph M., 1971, The Solar-Thermal Unit Theory in Relation to
Plant Development and Potential Evapotranspiration, 1971, Montana
Agricultural Experiment Stai;ion, Montana State University, Bozeman,
MT.
Feyerherm, Arlin M., 1977, Response of Winter and Spring Wheat Grain
Yields to Meteorological Variation, NAS9-14282, Johnson Space Center,
Houston, TX.
Heuer, George R., Dale F. Heermann, Thomas B. McKee and John F. Benci,
Predicting Winter Wheat Phenology Using Temperature and Photoperiod,
Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO.
Kulik, M.S. and V.V. Sinelshchikov, 1966, Lectures on Agricultural Meteor-
ology, National Science Foundation, Washington, D.C.
Robertson, G.W., 1968, A Biometeorological Time Scale for a Cereal Crop
Involving Day and Night Temperatures and Photoperiod, Ontario, Canada.
7
NJu
amAZVJ) V!
CA
 0.+W.
Z n
tL9 4
0
 
7
ta] FA
Z
 
1
.
1
.
 T
.wl
w
a
o
v
JO
 
O
A
v7CSC S
r'a 
d
r
I"wasOu
I
N
.
OR
c
^tH
I^
 O
 (
I
	
,
^
	
I
	
^
	
I
iJ^O•G
J N
I Cy 1
r,a
O
d
00
(40  N
.
	
N
N
 O
 N
 
N
c
o
o
 
O
c
o
oo
 0
0
^O
 1 000
O
,
N
.p
N
^
N
M
.p
M
M
M
n
 M
 n
 G
 n
O O
 O O
 C
^80^30
0M
 
O
C
4
 
91%
N
 
Q
C
 
U
o
°
o
0
 
0
0
0
N
 
I- IN
 
V
,
,D
 r V
, N
Co 6 11 OS C^7
O
 
M
 00
 
O
 
0
0
0
0
000
O
 
1
n
s
6*', CO n
••, ,O n .-, V1
^7 M
 V
, v
.
*
C-4
	
^
7
 
1
O
i
0nO
,0
0
0
 i^
1
V
^ O
v
 
-
•
	
o
M
 
^
"
1
1
 Y G
101 OD 0 F_ T
O+
	
C,
muCOuWv0v'+7y0NaitA
—
 
N
 M
 d
 V
,
O
R
M
IN
A
L
 P
A
s 'E
 r
O
F PO
O
R Q
UAL"
w
I
h
•
 
N
.
D
 d
0 0
Oc'^
	
1
 :J
 V
 O
1
C
 1 O,
•C
•
 
^
,
 Q
 N
^
"IO
C
M
I r-C• 0
0
0
0
g
o
^
^
a
0(
^J
J
 
N
e►i
 
C
v
 
O
0
 
Oo
( ^J',11)
 
C
ID
 0
C14
 V
, U
*%
•
.1
 r\
20 V
, N
 t
	
,p
^
O
	
O
 O
 C
O
O O o 0 0
1
^clx
I
Gto
r
-
	
-
-t
L0!
{ F
 N
 .V
 h
.0
IJC
Id
^tM
04
W.^.
r
V
 
T
O O
P
O
 '•
J
O
L
f N
 L
r T
 O
o
-4
 =
t
•
^
 
M
 
^
7
 
u
0
O
• ^
 O
 O
 ^'
r^
+N
 !•, 
,y 41
i 11
1N
 ^
+O
	
u
I
	
w
r
V
•
 
^
	
^
 C
1
.
^
 
^
	
1 r+
	
cj 
e
 
n
	
e
o
:I O
 ; O
 n
 I r0
I
,r,
	
04 r"
	
M
ICp •O
	
-
.
 aC
C
ii7 u`i
	
t
•
	
co
1
 
0
0
0
 
c
C
4
 
:7j
L
•1
	
L
iPO
	
^
^
 
0
	
^
.
 C'
	
n.l
'
 1
	
i ^•• 1
	
1
	
^•J
w
	
1•] ' ^ '.• W
 W
	
^
V
 
S
 
1
 
O
^
 
^
i
C
 ^
 
n
 ^
,n
 iM
y
	
100c:
O
 N
 N
 N
 N
 N
 j•.!
a
 0
0
0
0
0
 1
.J
O
	
I rr 7 V, Go r
	
O
.+
 M
 N
 N
 n
^^
	
s
:
:
 
1
d
t
;
	
J
•
.
r
	
^1
^
^
	
^
	
N
 
N
	
I Y.
C
 
'
	
W 
47
	
^
u
	
!
	
al
1
.
V
<j
 
I G
 C,
^• M
.O
 C
+
O
 J 'C
 y
I
	
1
	
1
	
^
 fL
A
.
	
IleY
^ + O
. •r f
•,
 
.
 
,
 V,
	
,
^
 w
.+
 O
n
	
C
1
4
 ,D
	
11
.e
 s
.0
0
	
o
.
,
 v', tv C
,
 
N
I
 e
, .j
^
^
 Ic
 e
u
 
c
9
V
 
N
 
N
 
L
O
 
O
n
O
 C
. O
 ^
' C
.,t 
+
	
I..
(+ 4:
	
C:
	
u
	
f .
	
7„
NYl
.
-
-
 10
h
 •+
,
t ^
A
-1
•
	
A


Evaluation of the Doraiswamy-Thompson winter wheat crop calendar model incorporating a modified spring restart sequence

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

NASA Technical Reports Server