Evaluation and comparison of AquaCrop model and intelligent models to predict wheat yield (Case study: Miandoab and Mahabad cities)

Authors

1 Urmia University

2 Tabriz University

Abstract

Abstract
Background and Objectives: Due to population growth and Iran's location in arid and semi-arid regions of the world, the need for water and food has increased and as a result, the pressure on water and soil resources will be more than before. On the other hand, the risk of drying up Lake Urmia, which causes environmental problems in the region, requires macro-water planning for the region and the use of optimal cultivation pattern to deal with water scarcity. Therefore, optimal use of water preserves water resources and increases the quality of products. Today more than ever, increasing the production of strategic crops such as wheat requires the proper use of water resources. The main source of food for the Iranian people is wheat and related products, and any action that increases the yield of wheat due to limited soil resources, especially water resources, is important and necessary at the same time. In recent years, significant advances have been made in modeling product growth and development using mechanical models. Plant growth models are increasingly used in the analysis of agricultural systems and simulate the plant's response to growth factors using mathematical equations. The AquaCrop model is one of the dynamic and user-friendly models developed by the FAO. The AquaCrop model receives information about farm, plant, soil, irrigation and climate, and ultimately predicts important parameters such as crop. Wheat yield simulation allows efficient management and better planning under various environmental inputs such as soil and water. To achieve higher accuracy and less model error, field parameters must be properly calibrated by the model to achieve proper performance. Also, calibration of the model, if not done correctly, causes a high error prediction by the model, which leads to incorrect management, water loss, plant drought and other cases. Therefore, using a model that has accurate and close prediction to the AquaCrop model and requires fewer input parameters is essential, which saves time, reduces costs and eliminates calibration errors. However, this model requires relatively large input parameters and is a time-consuming model in the presence of multiple scenarios.3
Methodology: In recent years, smart models have been able to show high accuracy and become reliable models. Therefore, in the present study, to solve this problem and develop a model with less input data, using the ANN, SVR and SVR-FFA intelligent models and creating 440 scenarios in 2 farms, the performance of the AquaCrop model was compared.99WestW2 farm is located in Miandoab city and has a yield of 6.588 (ton ha-1) and WestW10 farm is located in Mahabad city and has a yield of 5.05 (ton ha-1).
Findings: The results of the model are performed using 5 evaluation criteria of Correlation coefficient, Root mean square error, Nash-Sutcliffe coefficient, Wilmot’s index of agreement and, Mean absolute percentage error. The results of this study showed that for both 99WestW2 and WestW10 farms, the SVR-FFA3 model could have the lowest error rate, so that for the yield index, the RMSE value for the mentioned farms was 0.033 and 0.069 (ton ha-1), respectively. The use of three models SVR, SVR-FFA, and ANN and their comparison with the AquaCrop model to predict wheat yield has been done for the first time in this study. The SVR model was able to show the highest accuracy after the SVR-FFA model. For 99WestW2 farm, it can reduce the error rate to 0.043 (ton ha-1) and for WestW10 farm to 0.077 (ton ha-1) and show good performance. The ANN model, after the SVR model, was able to show acceptable accuracy. The ANN model for 99WestW2 farm was able to reduce the error rate to 0.123 (ton ha-1) and for WestW10 farm to 0.094 (ton ha-1). Finally, the ANN model had a relatively higher error than the SVR-FFA and SVR models, respectively, and showed a relatively lower performance than the two models.
Conclusion: Finally, the intelligent SVR-FFA, SVR and ANN models, despite having the least number of inputs, were able to predict yield values in the shortest time and with the highest accuracy. However, the results showed that the lower the model inputs, the weaker the model prediction. For further studies, it is suggested that the ANN model be combined using the firefly algorithm (MLP-FFA) to increase the accuracy of the ANN model and make more accurate predictions of wheat yield.

Keywords

References

 Ahmadi F, Radmanesh F and Mirabbasi N, 2015. Comparison between genetic programming and support vector machine methods for daily river flow forecasting (Case study: Barandoozchay River). Journal of Water and Soil, Volume 28 , Pages 1162 to 1171??. (in Persian with English abstract).
Araya A, Vara Prasad P, Ciampitti IA, Rice CW and Gowda PH, 2022. Using crop simulation models as tools to quantify effects of crop management practices and climate change scenarios on wheat yields in northern Ethiopia. Enhancing agricultural research and precision management for subsistence farming by integrating system models with experiments(too long title? Journal? book chapter???? 29-47.???
Benimam H, Si-Moussa C, Laidi M and Hanini S, 2020. Modeling the activity coefficient at infinite dilution of water in ionic liquids using artificial neural networks and support vector machines. Neural Computing and Applications 32(12): 8635-8653.
Change, 2007. Intergovernmental panel on climate. "Climate change: the physical science basis: summary for policymakers. Geneva: IPCC: 104-116??
Dibike YB, Velickov S, Solomatine D and Abbott MB, 2001. Model induction with support vector machines: introduction and applications. Journal of Computing in Civil Engineering 15(3): 208-216.
Doorenbos J and Kassam A, 1979. Yield response to water. Irrigation and drainage paper???, 33, 257??.
Eskandari A, Nouri R, Meraji H and Kiaghadi A, 2012. Developing a proper model for online estimation of the 5-day biochemical oxygen demand based on artificial neural network and support vector machine. Journal of Invironmental Studies , Volume 38 , Number 61; Page(s) 22 To 24?? (In Persian…..??)
Fan L and Zhang L, 2022. Multi-system fusion based on deep neural network and cloud edge computing and its application in intelligent manufacturing. Neural Computing and Applications 34(5): 3411-3420.
Fatih M, 2009. Investigation of the effect of different irrigation levels and seed density on grain yield of Shiraz cultivar by surface irrigation method in Bajgah climatic conditions (Fars province). Master Thesis, Department of Irrigation and Drainage, Shiraz University. (In Persian with English abstract).
Fister I, Fister Jr I?, Yang XS and Brest J, 2013. A comprehensive review of firefly algorithms. Swarm and Evolutionary Computation 13: 34-46.
Ghorbani MA, Shamshirband S, Haghi DZ, Azani A, Bonakdari H and Ebtehaj I, 2017. Application of firefly algorithm-based support vector machines for prediction of field capacity and permanent wilting point. Soil and Tillage Research 172: 32-38.
Gu N, Zhang J, Wang G, Liu C, Wang Z and Lü H, 2022. An atmospheric and soil thermal-based wheat crop coefficient method using additive crop growth models. Agricultural Water Management, 269, 107691?.
Guarin JR and Asseng S, 2022. Improving Wheat Production and Breeding Strategies Using Crop Models. In؟ Wheat Improvement, Springer journal, (pp. 573-591).؟؟؟
Gupta S, 2021. Artificial neural network modeling and exposure assessments: a new scaling approach. Human and Ecological Risk Assessment 27(1): 30-49.
Hagan MT and Menhaj MB, 1994. Training feedforward networks with the Marquardt algorithm. IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks, 5(6): 989-993.
Hamel LH, 2011. Knowledge Discovery with Support Vector Machines (Vol. 3). John Wiley & Sons.
Han J, Zhang Z, Cao J, Luo Y, Zhang L, Li Z and Zhang J, 2020. Prediction of winter wheat yield based on multi-source data and machine learning in China. Remote Sensing 12(2): 236.??
Holzworth DP, Snow V, Janssen S, Athanasiadis IN, Donatelli M, Hoogenboom G, White JW and Thorburn P, 2015. Agricultural production systems modelling and software: current status and future prospects. Environmental Modelling & Software 72: 276-286.
Kamari A, Gharagheizi F, Shokrollahi A, Arabloo M and Mohammadi AH, 2016. Integrating a robust model for predicting surfactant–polymer flooding performance. Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 137: 87-96.
Kareem FA, Shariff AM, Ullah S, Keong LK and Mellon N, 2018. Total and partial uptakes of multicomponent vapor-gas mixtures on 13X zeolite at 343K: Experimental and modeling study. Microporous and Mesoporous Materials 258: 95-113.
Kargar K, Samadianfard S, Parsa J, Nabipour N, Shamshirband S, Mosavi A and Chau K, 2020. Estimating longitudinal dispersion coefficient in natural streams using empirical models and machine learning algorithms. Engineering Applications of Computational Fluid Mechanics, 14(1): 311-322.(In persian….?)
Kibue GW, Liu X, Zheng J, Pan G, Li L and Han X, 2016. Farmers’ perceptions of climate variability and factors influencing adaptation: Evidence from Anhui and Jiangsu, China. Environmental Management, 57(5): 976-986
Kim IS, Son JS, Park CE, Kim I and Kim H, 2005. An investigation into an intelligent system for predicting bead geometry in GMA welding process. Journal of Materials Processing Technology 159(1): 113-118.
Kumar Srivastava A and Singh H, 2016. An enhance firefly algorithm for flexible job shop scheduling. International Journal of Computer Applications 6(5): 1-17.
Ma C, Liu M, Ding F, Li C, Cui Y, Chen W and Wang Y, 2022. Wheat growth monitoring and yield estimation based on remote sensing data assimilation into the SAFY crop growth model. Scientific Reports 12(1): 1-16.
Mallikarjuna Rao G, Dangeti S and Amiripalli SS, 2022. An efficient modeling based on XGBoost and SVM algorithms to predict crop yield. Advances in Data Science and Management (pp. 565-574)??.
Marichelvam M and Geetha M, 2014. Solving tri-objective multistage hybrid flow shop scheduling problems using a discrete firefly algorithm. International Journal of Intelligent Engineering Informatics, 2(4): 284-303.
Moazenzadeh R, Mohammadi B, Shamshirband S and Chau K, 2018. Coupling a firefly algorithm with support vector regression to predict evaporation in northern Iran. Engineering Applications of Computational Fluid Mechanics, 12(1): 584-597.
Nait Amar M and Zeraibi N, 2019. A combined support vector regression with firefly algorithm for prediction of bottom hole pressure. SN Applied Sciences 2(1): 23.?
Nasiri M, Modarrs R and Dastoorani M, 2010. Validation of ANN model of rainfall-runoff relationship in Zaynderood Dam Watershed. Journal of Watershed Researches 88: 17-26. (In Persian with English abstract).
Nguyen VD, Nguyen HT, Vranova V, Nguyen LT, Bui QM and Khieu TT, 2021. Artificial neural network modeling for Congo red adsorption on microwave-synthesized akaganeite nanoparticles: optimization, kinetics, mechanism, and thermodynamics. Environmental Science and Pollution Research 28(8): 9133-9145.
Niedbała G, 2019. Simple model based on artificial neural network for early prediction and simulation winter rapeseed yield. Journal of Integrative Agriculture, 18(1): 54-61.
Osaba E, Yang XS, Dia, F, Onieva E, Masegosa AD and Perallos A, 2017. A discrete firefly algorithm to solve a rich vehicle routing problem modelling a newspaper distribution system with recycling policy. Soft Computing, 21(18): 5295-5308.
Raes D, Steduto P, Hsiao TC 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.
Sharafi M, Samadian Fard S and Hashemi S, 2021. Monthly rainfall Forecasting using genetic programming and support vector machine [Applicable]. Journal of Rainwater Catchment Systems, 8(4): 63-71. (In Persian with English abstract ).
Shifteh Some’e B, Ezani A and Tabari H, 2013. Spatiotemporal trends of aridity index in arid and semi-arid regions of Iran. Theoretical and Applied Climatology, 111(1): 149-160.
Steduto P, Hsiao TC, Raes D and Fereres E, 2009. AquaCrop—The FAO crop model to simulate yield response to water: I. Concepts and underlying principles. Agronomy Journal, 101(3): 426-437.
Swe LM, Shrestha RP, Ebbers T and Jourdain D, 2015. Farmers' perception of and adaptation to climate-change impacts in the dry zone of Myanmar. Climate and Development 7(5): 437-453.
Verma A, 2022. SVM, CNN and VGG16 Classifiers of artificial intelligence used for the detection of diseases of rice crop: A Review. Sentimental Analysis and Deep Learning, 917-931.??
Yang XS, 2009. Firefly algorithms for multimodal optimization. International Symposium on Stochastic Algorithms. Date? address?
Yang XS, 2010. Nature-Inspired Metaheuristic Algorithms. Luniver press.
Yang XS and He X, 2013. Firefly algorithm: recent advances and applications. International Journal of Swarm Intelligence 1(1): 36-50.
Yazdansepas A, Akbari A, Sanjari AG, Rezaie M, Chaichi M, Babaie T and Ashouri S, 2011. Mihan, a new bread wheat cultivar for irrigated and post-anthesis drought stress conditions in cold regions of Iran. Seed and Plant Improvement Journal, 27(4).?? (in Persian with English abstract).
Zhang, C, Xie Z, Wang Q, Tang M, Feng S and Cai H, 2022. AquaCrop modeling to explore optimal irrigation of winter wheat for improving grain yield and water productivity. Agricultural Water Management, 266: 107580.
Zhang T, Su J, Liu C and Chen WH, 2019. Bayesian calibration of AquaCrop model for winter wheat by assimilating UAV multi-spectral images. Computers and Electronics in Agriculture, 167: 105052.
Water and Soil Science
Volume 34, Issue 1
March 2024
Pages 1-18

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics