WELCOME Expert Panel on Maize-Model Improvement:

Phenology - Results December 2012

Agenda•Introductions (new attendees only)

•Overview of thermal methods and data sets used for evaluation

•Objective 1•Presentation followed by discussion

•Objective 2•Presentation followed by discussion

•Next meeting on leaf area expansion•Request for leaf area expansion and senescence routines

Attendance Last Name First Name Institute/companyY* Andrade Fernando INTA, Balcarce, ArgentinaY Boote Ken Univ. of Florida, Gainesville, FLN Cairns Jill CIMMYT, Harare, ZimbabweY* Castiglioni Paolo Dow, Davis, CAN Edmeades Greg Cambridge, New ZealandY Hammer Graeme Univ. of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia

Y* Hatfield Jerry USDA-ARS, Ames, IAN Holland Jim USDA-ARS, NC State Univ., Raleigh, NCN Hoogenboom Gerrit Washington State Univ., Prosser, WAY Jones Jim Univ. of Florida, Gainesville, FLY Kemanian Armen Penn State, University Park, PA

Y* Kim Soo Univ. of Washington, Seattle, WAN Kiniry Jim USDA-ARS, Temple, TXY Kumudini Saratha Monsanto Co., RTP, NCY Lizaso Jon Univ. of Madrid, Madrid, SpainY Nendel Claas Leibniz, GermanyN Otegui Maria Univ. of Buenos Aires, Buenos Aires, Argentina.Y* Sala Rodrigo Monsanto, Jerseyville, ILN Singh Upendra IFDC, Muscle Shoals, ALN Stöckle Claudio Washington State Univ., Pullman, WAN Tardieu Francois INRA, Toulouse, FranceY Timlin Dennis USDA-ARS, Beltsville, MDY Tollenaar Thijs Monsanto Co., RTP, NCY Vyn Tony Purdue Univ., West Lafayette, IN

Y* Wallach Daniel INRA, Toulouse, FranceN Westgate Mark Iowa State Univ., Ames, IAY* Yang Haishun Univ. of Nebraska, Lincoln, NE

Objectives

1. Determine the thermal accumulator that is most consistent in predicting maize development: Compare thermal accumulators using large Monsanto and

public data sets. Does the precision of thermal accumulators vary across

different phases of development (i.e., planting to anthesis vs. silking to maturity) and/or different Relative Maturity (RM) groups?

2. Quantify response of RM groups in terms of thermal methods: Effect of photoperiod? Influence of RM group on proportion of pre-silking period

and GFP

Overview of Thermal Methods

Linear Thermal Methods

GDD10,30 Tbase = 10OC IF T < 10OC THEN T = 10OC IF T > 30OC THEN T = 30OC Tmean = (Tmax + Tmin)/2GDD = GDD + (Tmean – Tbase)

GDD8,34 If T < 8OC or if T > 34OC, 1-h T estimated from sine wave (CERES-Maize) Tbase = 8OC

IF T < 8OC THEN T = 8OC IF T > 34OC THEN T = 34OC Tmean = (Tmax + Tmin)/2GDD = GDD + (Tmean – Tbase)

GDD 3-h T estimated from sine wave between Tmax and Tmin(APSIM) 0OC =< T =< 44OC

IF 18OC > T > 0OC THEN GDDR = 10 * T/18IF 34OC > T > 18OC THEN GDDR = T – 8IF 44OC > T > 34 C THEN GDDR = 26 * (44 – T)/10GDD = GDD + GDDR/8

CERES-Maize, IXIM, and Hybrid-Maize[GDD(34,8)]

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 500

5

10

15

20

25

30

Mean daily temperature (oC)

Degr

ee d

ays

APSIM

Non-Linear Thermal Methods

β-Function 1-h T estimated from sine wave between Tmax and Tmin(MAIZSIM) 0OC = < T = < Tceil

Topt = 32.1OC ; Tceil = 43.7 OC; Rmax = 0.53HR = Rmax * (Tceil – T)/(Tceil –Topt) * (T/(Topt)Topt/(Tceil-Topt)

TLU = TLU + HR/24

β-Function β-Function (MAIZSIM), but: Topt = 31OC(TLU) Tceil = 44OC

Rmax = 0.58

GTI Tmean = (Tmax +Tmin)/2GTIRV = 0.043177 * Tmean2 – 0.000894 *

Tmean3

GTIRR = 5.3581 + 0.011178 * Tmean2

IF DATE < SILK THEN GTIR = GTIRV ELSE GTIR =GTIRV

GTI = GTI + GTIR

CHU CHU (Day) = 3.33 * (Tmax – 10 ) - 0.084*(Tmax – 10)2

CHU (Night) = 1.85 * (Tmin – 4.4)CHU = [CHU(Day) + CHU(Night)]/2

β Function

Yan and Hunt, 1991Yan and Hunt, 1991

MAIZSIM, (Kim et al., 2012)

TLU β 44

Rmax 0.58 0.53 0.58

Topt 31.0 32.1 31.0

Tceil 41.0 43.7 44.0

GTI vs. GDD(30,10) [Pre-silking phase]

GDD(30,10)

GTI

(Stewart et al., 1998)

GTI

GDD(30,10)

GTI vs. GDD(30,10) [Post-silking phase](Stew

art et al., 1998)

Crop Heat Units (CHU)

Data sets usedMonsanto – 2 data sets

1. 118 Commercial hybrids grown 2007-2011 in 45 locations throughout the NA Corn Belt

2. >3,000 hybrids grown 2007-2012 at a single location (~RM 100-zone) in the NA Corn Belt

Nielsen and Thomison, 2002

3 hybrids grown at 3 planting dates in four locations (IN and OH) from 1991 to 1994

Andrade (various publications)

Various hybrids grown from 1989 to 2012 at Balcarce, Argentina

Kiniry, 1982

3 hybrids grown at 2 planting dates at two location in 1978 and 1979 in MO

Weather for all except Andrade studies :http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/cdo-web/

OBJECTIVE 1

RM Obs. Days GDD10,30 CERES APSIM MAIZSIM TLU β 44 GTI CHU

(no.) ------------ CV (% ) for duration from planting to anthesis (silking) ------------------------------

76-85 121 10.3(9.9)

9.5(9.8)

9.3(9.7)

7.8 (7.9)

9.0(9.2)

7.8(7.9)

7.6(7.7)

7.0(7.0)

86-95 205 10.0(9.5)

9.7(10.4)

9.5 (10.2)

7.6(8.1)

9.2(9.8)

7.8(8.3)

7.6(8.0)

6.8(7.1)

96-105 346 9.4

(9.1)6.4

(7.0)6.5

(7.2)6.0

(6.4)6.2

(6.8)5.7(6.2)

5.7(6.2)

5.7(5.9)

106-115 578 10.4

(10.2)6.3

(6.6)6.9

(7.3)5.4

(5.7)6.0

(6.3)4.7

(5.0)4.7

(5.1)4.6

(4.7)

116-119 152 10.2

(10.0)6.3

(6.5)6.8

(7.4)5.2

(5.7)5.8

(6.2)4.6

(4.8)4.5(5.1)

4.7(4.4)

Coefficient of variation for duration from planting to anthesis (silking) of commercial hybrids within each of five RM (Relative Maturity) groups grown in the Corn Belt from 2007 to 2011.

RM Obs. DaysGDD10,3

0

CERES APSIM

MAIZSIM

TLU β 44 GTI CHU

No. ----- CV duration from silking to black layer (%) ------

76-85 183 9.0 8.2 8.0 7.1 7.6 6.5 6.2 6.0

86-95 417 9.4 9.3 9.1 8.3 8.6 7.4 7.4 6.8

96-105 777 8.5 9.4 9.3 8.3 8.7 7.1 7.1 6.0

106-115 1481 9.9 9.6 9.3 8.1 8.9 7.2 7.1 5.8

116-122 288 9.6 11.8 11.5 9.6 10.9 9.0 7.7 7.3

Coefficient of variation for duration from silking to black layer of maize hybrids within each of five RM (Relative Maturity) groups grown at a single location in the Corn Belt from 2007 to 2012.

Planting date Phase Days GDD10,30 CERES APSIM MAIZ

SIM TLU β 44 GTI CHU

--------------------------- CV (% ) ----------------------------------

Early Pre-silk

5.6 5.7 6.4 7.2 6.1 5.5 5.7 4.7

GFP 8.6 11.3 12.8 14.0 12.6 12.0 8.6 10.5

Mid Pre-silk

8.9 4.7 5.5 6.2 5.0 4.3 4.5 3.8

GFP 11.1 9.1 10.3 11.2 10.1 9.7 7.6 8.9

Late Pre-Silk

11.3 4.5 5.3 6.0 4.8 4.1 4.4 3.5

GFP 9.3 8.5 9.3 10.2 9.1 8.6 6.9 8.1

CV for duration from planting to silking (first row) and from silking to black layer (second row) of three maize hybrids planted at four locations (n = 36) in Indiana and Ohio at three planting dates from mid April to mid June from 1991 to 1994 (Nielsen et al., 2002).

Planting date Phase No.

Obs Days GDD10,30 CERES APSIM MAIZSIM TLU β 44 GTI CHU

-------------------------------------- CV (% ) ----------------------------------

May Pre-silk 12 11.3 11.4 11.7 11.2 11.3 10.7 10.6 10.3

GFP 11 13.1 6.1 5.5 6.5 6.1 7.1 7.6 8.4

June Pre-Silk 12 7.5 8.7 9.3 8.9 8.7 8.1 8.2 7.7

GFP 12 22.7 11.2 10.9 11.5 11.2 11.9 13.2 13.4

CV for duration from planting to silking (first row) and from silking to black layer (second row) of three maize hybrids planted at two locations in Missouri during May and June in 1978 and 1979(Kiniry and Keener, 1982).

Planting month Phase Obs. Days GDD10,30 CERES APSIM MAIZ

SIM TLU β 44 GTI CHU

(no.) -------------------------------------- CV (% ) ----------------------------------

Sept. Pre-silk 6 5.4 8.2 7.7 6.7 7.6 7.0 6.9 6.8

GFP 6.7 5.5 4.6 4.8 4.9 4.9 5.1 5.1

Oct. Pre-silk 41 6.7 6.1 6.5 6.4 6.2 5.9 6.3 5.4

GFP 12.5 12.4 12.8 12.6 12.4 12.1 12.7 11.6

Nov. Pre-silk 12 9.0 8.4 8.6 8.5 8.4 8.2 8.3 8.0

GFP 18.7 10.8 10.0 11.6 10.6 11.6 13.4 13.1

Dec-Jan Pre-silk 16 12.5 9.7 9.8 10.0 9.7 9.9 10.0 10.5

GFP 11.0 8.4 8.3 7.5 8.2 8.0 8.1 8.6

CV for duration from planting to anthesis (first row) and from silking to black layer (second row) of maize hybrids planted at different dates near Balcarce (Argentina ) from 1989 to 2012 (Andrade et al.).

Conclusion

• For the Monsanto data sets, non-linear methods were better than the linear methods and APSIM is close to the non-linear methods. In general, CHU was the best.

• It also appeared that those functions that have a greater response at lower temperatures are generally more consistently predictive of development (e.g. APSIM, and CHU), especially during the post-silking phase.

• Results were more variable for the public data sets. CHU and GTI were best in the Indiana/Ohio data set that consisted of 36 observations (means). Variability was large among data sets with less than 20 observations.

Quantification of RM in terms of heat units.

Thermal time from planting to anthesis for 118 commercial hybrids grown 2007-2011 either at a single location or in multi-

locations in their area of adaptation

70 80 90 100 110 120 1301200

1300

1400

1500

1600

1700

1800

1900

R² = 0.989100778621955

R² = 0.978901963739168

multilocation CHU Polynomial (multilocation CHU )

Relative Maturity

Crop

Hea

t Uni

ts

CHU pre-anthesis vs. days between 21 June and silking (Nielsen et al., 2002)

Days between 21 June and silking

Crop

Hea

t Uni

ts

10 20 30 40 50 60 701200

1300

1400

1500

1600

1700

1800

1900

2000

f(x) = − 0.119351402341148 x² + 6.19291080267079 x + 1617.05066952841R² = 0.204344996096993

CHU pre-anthesis vs. days from 21 Dec. to silking (Andrade et al., 1989-2012)

-10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1800

2000

2200

f(x) = − 0.14993095908188 x² + 4.5390240872223 x + 1749.00719178406R² = 0.430828638505999

Days between 21 Dec. and silking

Crop

Hea

t Uni

ts

70 80 90 100 110 1201300

1350

1400

1450

1500

1550

1600

1650

1700

1750

f(x) = − 0.00468648221109037 x³ + 1.45956246562653 x² − 142.806953036395 x + 5940.07387668984R² = 0.991414686343958f(x) = 6.93424009232761 x + 885.291631006559

R² = 0.969855732510966

Relative Maturity

Cro

p H

ea

t U

nit

s

Thermal time from silking to physiological maturity (black layer) of >3,000 maize hybrids grown between 2007-2012 at a

single location in the NA Corn Belt

CHU GFP vs. Photoperiod at Silking(data from Nielsen et al., 2002)

Crop

Hea

t Uni

ts

13.4 13.6 13.8 14 14.2 14.4 14.6 14.8 15 15.2600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1800

2000

f(x) = 282.648400279861 x − 2634.77195775369R² = 0.506088570061192

Photoperiod (civil twilight h)

GFP CHU vs. days from 21 Dec. to silking (Andrade et al., 1989-2012)

-10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1800

2000

2200

f(x) = − 7.11522789121739 x + 1790.51364231458R² = 0.312644235520585

Days between 21 Dec and silking

Crop

Hea

t Uni

ts d

urin

g GF

P

Relationships between CHU and RM pre-anthesis and GFP(data from >3,000 hybrids grown during the 2007-2012 seasons

at a single RM100-zone in the Corn Belt)

70 80 90 100 110 1201200

1300

1400

1500

1600

1700

1800

1900

f(x) = 6.9342400923277 x + 885.291631006551R² = 0.969855732510961

f(x) = 8.68824367726517 x + 775.944141105079R² = 0.993204021467711

Pre-An-thesis

Relative Maturity

Cro

p H

ea

t U

nit

s

Relationships between GDD8,34 (CERES-Maize) and RM pre-anthesis and GFP

70 80 90 100 110 120500

550

600

650

700

750

800

850

900

950

f(x) = 2.70469278090231 x + 560.874576638246R² = 0.947848982929566

f(x) = 4.76559626319609 x + 352.408060133712R² = 0.994106906439171

Pre-An-thesis

Relative Maturity

GD

D (

8,3

4)

Relationships between GDD10,30 and RM pre-anthesis and GFP

70 80 90 100 110 120500

550

600

650

700

750

800

850

900

950

f(x) = 2.70469278090231 x + 560.874576638246R² = 0.947848982929566

f(x) = 4.76559626319609 x + 352.408060133712R² = 0.994106906439171

Pre-An-thesisLinear (Pre-Anthesis)GFP

Relative Maturity

GD

D (

8,3

4)

Conclusion

• When grown at one location, duration of developmental phases is linearly related to Relative Maturity (RM) classification.

• When compared across environments, duration of developmental phase is not linearly related with RM.

• Photoperiod was associated with the duration of phases of development, in particular, the grain-filling period.

• Quantification of the relative proportion of the pre-silking period and GFP is dependent on the thermal method used.

Next Expert Panel Meeting Leaf Area Expansion and Leaf Senescence

• François Tardieu will give presentation

• All maize modelers are invited to send us a one (or 2)-page summary of their routines for leaf area expansion and leaf senescence.

• Proposed time: Mid/late January 2013