Paper · 1999 · Agronomy Journal

Models of Yield, Grain Protein, and Residual Mineral Nitrogen Responses to Applied Nitrogen for Winter Wheat

David Makowski; Daniel Wallach; Jean‐Marc Meynard

3
claims
6
verbatim quotes
78
citations
2
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

Abstract The proper use of N fertilizer is fundamental for farm profitability and environmental protection. In France, fertilizer recommendations are generally based on the balance‐sheet method, which is not sensitive to the economic or regulatory context. A way to generalize the balance‐sheet method is to use models that describe crop response to applied N. The goal of this paper is to propose, in the case of winter wheat ( Triticum aestivum L.), functional forms for the response of yield, grain protein content, and residual mineral N left in the soil at harvest to applied N. The originality of our models is that all three responses (yield, protein, and residual mineral N) are modeled, using N uptake as an intermediate variable. Furthermore, these models have two clear links with the balance‐sheet method. First, the parameters of the balance‐sheet method appear explicitly in the models. Second, the N dose recommended by the balance‐sheet method appears in our models as the smallest N dose that maximizes yield. Within this general modeling framework, three variants of the yield model, three variants of the grain protein content model, and two variants of the residual mineral N model are considered. The different models are adjusted, site‐year by site‐year, to 28 site‐years of data. All models give satisfactory fits to the data. For example, the root mean square error varies between 0.21 and 0.23 Mg ha −1 for the yield models. Almost all the adjusted parameter values vary widely from site‐year to site‐year. This must be taken into account when calculating optimal N doses for new site‐years.

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. Read at the source ↗

The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.

Claims 3

Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

All N-response models gave satisfactory fits to the 28 site-year data sets.

Taxon
winter wheatTriticum aestivume2
Outcome
fits to the datae1
Qualifier
satisfactorye1

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e1

“All models give satisfactory fits to the data”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1303–1348 · show in text ↑
e2

“in the case of winter wheat ( Triticum aestivum L.), functional forms”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 399–468 · show in text ↑
Method / resourceobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The root mean square error of the yield models was 0.21 to 0.23 Mg per ha.

Taxon
winter wheatTriticum aestivume2
Outcome
root mean square errore3
Value
0.21 and 0.23 Mg ha −1e3
Qualifier
for the yield modelse3

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e3

“the root mean square error varies between 0.21 and 0.23 Mg ha −1 for the yield models”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1363–1448 · show in text ↑
e2

“in the case of winter wheat ( Triticum aestivum L.), functional forms”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 399–468 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Adjusted parameter values of the response models vary widely between site-years.

Taxon
winter wheatTriticum aestivume2
Outcome
adjusted parameter valuese4
Qualifier
vary widelye4

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e4

“Almost all the adjusted parameter values vary widely”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1450–1502 · show in text ↑
e2

“in the case of winter wheat ( Triticum aestivum L.), functional forms”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 399–468 · show in text ↑