Abstract
Abstract. The AquaCrop model, calibrated for 2002 and validated for 2003, is used to simulate sugar beet root dry yield, dry biomass, water productivity based on irrigation (WP i ), and water productivity based on total water input (WP i+p ) in an experimental field of the Karaj Sugar Beet Seed Institute (Karaj, Iran). Three irrigation treatments including full irrigation, 75% deficit irrigation, and 50% deficit irrigation were carried out in the main plots. The results of statistical comparison between the model output and observed data in the calibration (2002) and validation (2003) years showed that the AquaCrop model reliably simulated sugar beet yield and the biomass under different genotypes and irrigation levels. AquaCrop did a better job of simulating dry biomass than root dry yield. The findings show that by decreasing water input, including irrigation and precipitation, WP i , and WP i+p will increase. In total, statistical indicators and scatter plots indicated that the AquaCrop model had enough fitness to predict yield, biomass, and water productivity for the future. Keywords: AquaCrop, Yield; Biomass, WPi, WPi+p.
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 6
Claim · model-written summary
AquaCrop reliably simulated sugar beet yield across genotypes and irrigation levels.
- Taxon
- sugar beet
Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgarise0 - Outcome
- yielde0
- Comparator
- different genotypes and irrigation levelse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the AquaCrop model reliably simulated sugar beet yield and the biomass under different genotypes and irrigation levels.”
Claim · model-written summary
AquaCrop reliably simulated sugar beet biomass across genotypes and irrigation levels.
- Taxon
- sugar beetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarise0
- Outcome
- biomasse0
- Comparator
- different genotypes and irrigation levelse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the AquaCrop model reliably simulated sugar beet yield and the biomass under different genotypes and irrigation levels.”
Claim · model-written summary
AquaCrop simulated dry biomass better than root dry yield.
Verbatim
e0“AquaCrop did a better job of simulating dry biomass than root dry yield.”
Claim · model-written summary
Irrigation-based water productivity increased as water input fell.
- Taxon
- Sugar BeetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarist0
- Treatment
- decreasing water inpute0
- Outcome
- WP ie0
- Direction
- increasee0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“by decreasing water input, including irrigation and precipitation, WP i , and WP i+p will increase.”
t0“Sugar Beet Production”
Claim · model-written summary
Total-input water productivity increased as water input fell.
- Taxon
- Sugar BeetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarist0
- Treatment
- decreasing water inpute0
- Outcome
- WP i+pe0
- Direction
- increasee0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“by decreasing water input, including irrigation and precipitation, WP i , and WP i+p will increase.”
t0“Sugar Beet Production”
Claim · model-written summary
The model showed adequate fit for future yield, biomass and water-productivity prediction.
Verbatim
e0“the AquaCrop model had enough fitness to predict yield, biomass, and water productivity for the future.”