About Us | Help Videos | Contact Us | Subscriptions
 

Abstract

 

This article in AJ

  1. Vol. 100 No. 3, p. 801-807
     
    Received: Aug 4, 2007
    Published: May, 2008


    * Corresponding author(s): howard.skinner@ars.usda.gov
 View
 Download
 Alerts
 Permissions
 Share

doi:10.2134/agronj2007.0264

Simulating Gross Primary Productivity of Humid-Temperate Pastures

  1. R. Howard Skinner *a,
  2. Michael S. Corsonb and
  3. Tagir G. Gilmanovc
  1. a USDA-ARS, Pasture Systems and Watershed Management Research Lab., Bldg. 3702 Curtin Rd., University Park, PA 16802
    b INRA, Agrocampus Rennes, UMR 1069, Sol, Agro- et hydro-systèmes, Spatialisation, F-35000 Rennes, France
    c Dep. of Biology and Microbiology, AgH 310, P.O. Box 2207B, South Dakota State Univ., Brookings, SD 57007

Abstract

Although most pasture growth models simulate many above- and belowground components of the plant community, calibration and validation are usually based only on periodic measurements of aboveground forage yield. This research used daily measurements of gross primary productivity (GPP) to validate the photosynthesis subroutine of the Integrated Farm System Model (IFSM). The model was calibrated for a pasture grazed by beef cattle (Bos taurus) in 2003, then validated with data from 2004 through 2006. Predicted and observed annual yield differed by 14 ± 9%, whereas predicted GPP differed from observed GPP by only 7 ± 3%. Seasonal trends in GPP were also adequately simulated, although a slight overestimation in the spring and early-summer and underestimation in the later half of the year occurred. Overestimation occurred when wintertime temperatures were above freezing or when N availability was high following fertilizer application. Late-season underestimation was related to low soil N availability which resulted from excessive N uptake by plants earlier in the year. Only minor adjustments in model structure were needed to improve simulation of GPP. Most adjustments involved changes in parameter values, many of which are often difficult to find or lacking in the literature. Refinement of models to accurately simulate the seasonal distribution of physiological parameters such as GPP will help ensure that model structures correctly represent the true dynamics of C assimilation and pasture growth.

  Please view the pdf by using the Full Text (PDF) link under 'View' to the left.

Copyright © 2008. American Society of AgronomyCopyright © 2008 by the American Society of Agronomy