Evaluation of Federal Crop Insurance Corporation methods to estimate soft winter wheat grain yield in the Eastern United States

IF 0.8 Q3 AGRONOMY
Laura E. Lindsey, Maninder P. Singh, Carrie A. Knott, Matthew W. Hankinson, Prabath Senanayaka Mudiyanselage, James H. Houx III, Mark Zarnstorff
{"title":"Evaluation of Federal Crop Insurance Corporation methods to estimate soft winter wheat grain yield in the Eastern United States","authors":"Laura E. Lindsey,&nbsp;Maninder P. Singh,&nbsp;Carrie A. Knott,&nbsp;Matthew W. Hankinson,&nbsp;Prabath Senanayaka Mudiyanselage,&nbsp;James H. Houx III,&nbsp;Mark Zarnstorff","doi":"10.1002/cft2.70003","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Soft winter wheat (SWW) (<i>Triticum aestivum</i> L.) is vulnerable to environmental stressors throughout winter and early spring. To assess yield potential of SWW, crop insurance adjustors estimate grain yield by multiplying the number of stems ft<sup>−2</sup> by a yield factor of 0.50. However, crop insurance adjustors believe the yield factor of 0.50 is too low. A 3-year experiment was conducted in Michigan, Ohio, and Kentucky to compare predicted SWW yield to harvested yield. The existing yield factor underestimated SWW yield in 243 out of 246 comparisons. Average predicted yield was 40 bu acre<sup>−1</sup> (range of 6 to 122 bu acre<sup>−1</sup>) while actual yield averaged 93 bu acre<sup>−1</sup> (range of 51 to 124 bu acre<sup>−1</sup>). Due to the discrepancy in predicted and actual yield, data from a planting date and seeding rate experiment conducted at four site-years in Ohio was used to establish a new yield factor based on the number of stems ft<sup>−2</sup> and fractional green canopy cover (FGCC) measured with the Canopeo app at Feekes 5 growth stage. The new methods were applied to the original multi-state dataset. Using a logarithmic function based on the number of stems ft<sup>−2</sup>, 50% of the predicted yield values were within −8 to 18 bu acre<sup>−1</sup> of the actual yield values. A logarithmic function based on FGCC resulted in 50% of the predicted yield values within 3 to 18 bu acre<sup>−1</sup> of the actual yield values. Overall, our results showed that new models performed better than the current method used by crop insurance adjustors.</p>","PeriodicalId":10931,"journal":{"name":"Crop, Forage and Turfgrass Management","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/cft2.70003","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Crop, Forage and Turfgrass Management","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/cft2.70003","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"AGRONOMY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Soft winter wheat (SWW) (Triticum aestivum L.) is vulnerable to environmental stressors throughout winter and early spring. To assess yield potential of SWW, crop insurance adjustors estimate grain yield by multiplying the number of stems ft−2 by a yield factor of 0.50. However, crop insurance adjustors believe the yield factor of 0.50 is too low. A 3-year experiment was conducted in Michigan, Ohio, and Kentucky to compare predicted SWW yield to harvested yield. The existing yield factor underestimated SWW yield in 243 out of 246 comparisons. Average predicted yield was 40 bu acre−1 (range of 6 to 122 bu acre−1) while actual yield averaged 93 bu acre−1 (range of 51 to 124 bu acre−1). Due to the discrepancy in predicted and actual yield, data from a planting date and seeding rate experiment conducted at four site-years in Ohio was used to establish a new yield factor based on the number of stems ft−2 and fractional green canopy cover (FGCC) measured with the Canopeo app at Feekes 5 growth stage. The new methods were applied to the original multi-state dataset. Using a logarithmic function based on the number of stems ft−2, 50% of the predicted yield values were within −8 to 18 bu acre−1 of the actual yield values. A logarithmic function based on FGCC resulted in 50% of the predicted yield values within 3 to 18 bu acre−1 of the actual yield values. Overall, our results showed that new models performed better than the current method used by crop insurance adjustors.

Abstract Image

评估联邦作物保险公司估算美国东部软冬小麦谷物产量的方法
软冬小麦(SWW)(Triticum aestivum L.)在整个冬季和早春很容易受到环境压力的影响。为评估软冬小麦的产量潜力,农作物保险理算师通过将茎杆数英尺-2 乘以 0.50 的产量系数来估算谷物产量。然而,农作物保险理算师认为 0.50 的产量系数太低。在密歇根州、俄亥俄州和肯塔基州进行了一项为期 3 年的实验,将预测的 SWW 产量与收获产量进行比较。在 246 次比较中,现有产量系数有 243 次低估了西南风作物的产量。平均预测产量为 40 英布/英亩-1(范围在 6 到 122 英布/英亩-1 之间),而实际产量平均为 93 英布/英亩-1(范围在 51 到 124 英布/英亩-1 之间)。由于预测产量和实际产量之间存在差异,我们利用在俄亥俄州四个地点年进行的播种日期和播种率实验数据,根据茎杆数英尺-2 和在费克斯 5 号生长阶段使用 Canopeo 应用程序测量的绿色冠层覆盖率分数 (FGCC) 建立了新的产量系数。新方法适用于原始的多州数据集。使用基于茎杆数英尺-2 的对数函数,50% 的预测产量值与实际产量值的误差在 -8 至 18 蒲式耳英亩-1 之间。使用基于 FGCC 的对数函数,50% 的预测产量值与实际产量值的误差在 3 到 18 英布/英亩-1 之间。总体而言,我们的研究结果表明,新模型比农作物保险理算员目前使用的方法效果更好。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Crop, Forage and Turfgrass Management
Crop, Forage and Turfgrass Management Agricultural and Biological Sciences-Agronomy and Crop Science
CiteScore
1.30
自引率
16.70%
发文量
49
期刊介绍: Crop, Forage & Turfgrass Management is a peer-reviewed, international, electronic journal covering all aspects of applied crop, forage and grazinglands, and turfgrass management. The journal serves the professions related to the management of crops, forages and grazinglands, and turfgrass by publishing research, briefs, reviews, perspectives, and diagnostic and management guides that are beneficial to researchers, practitioners, educators, and industry representatives.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信