Advertisement

Modeling yield sustainability for different rotations in long-term barley trials

  • Murari Singh
  • Michael J. Jones
Article

Abstract

In crop rotation trials, the errors arising over time on the same plot are correlated. Often-used analyses assume zero or constant correlation between the errors while the actual covariance structure for the plot errors might be very different. The objective of this study was to identify the most suitable covariance structure and incorporate the error structure in assessment of the crop rotations in terms of yield productivity and yield sustainability. A set of five covariance structures were examined for barley yield data from a 14-year, two-course barley rotation trial conducted at two locations in northern Syria. Selection of the covariance structures was based on the Akaike information criterion (AIC, Akaike 1974) (a function of penalized log-likelihood) obtained from fitting the structure. Covariance structure with heterogeneous variances and with constant correlation between errors over cycles within the same plot was found to account for most variability in grain and straw yields at both locations. Modeling data with this covariance structure, the legume rotations gave higher productivity as well as higher annual increases compared with the continuous barley system. This implies that an agricultural production system based on a legume following a cereal is likely to be more sustainable for cereal production compared to cereal followed by cereals.

Key words

Covariance Heterogeneity REML Rotation Sustainability 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Akaike, H. (1974), “A New Look at the Statistical Model Identification,” IEEE Transaction on Automatic Control, 19, 716–723.MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  2. Cady, F. B., and Mason, D. D. (1964), “Comparison of Fertility Treatments in a Crop Rotation Experiment,” Agronomy Journal, 81, 476–479.Google Scholar
  3. Christiansen, S., Bounejmate, M., Bahhady, F., Thomson, E., Mawlawi, B., and Singh, M. (2000), “On-Farm Trials with Forage Legume/Barley Compared to Fallow/Barley Rotations and Continuous Barley in Northwest Syria,” Experimental Agriculture, 36, 195–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Cochran, W. G. (1939), “Long-Term Agricultural Experiments” (with discussion), Journal of Royal Statistical Society, 6 [Suppl.], 104–148.Google Scholar
  5. Dyke, G. V. (1988), “Changes With Time of Crop Yield in a Long-Term Experiment,” Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge, 111, 317–332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Genstat 5 Committee of Statistics Department (1997), Genstat 5 Release 4.1: Reference Manual Supplement, Lawes Agricultural Trust (Rothamsted Experimental Station), Harpenden, UK.Google Scholar
  7. Jenkinson, D. S., Potts, J. M., Perry, J. N., Barnett, V., and Coleman, K. (1994), “Trends in Herbage Yields Over the Last Century on the Rothamsted Long-Term Continuous Hay Experiment,” Journal of Agricultural Science (Cambridge), 122, 365–374.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Jones, M. J., and Singh, M. (1995), “Yields of Crop Dry Matter and Nitrogen in Long-Term Barley Rotations Trials at Two Sites in Northern Syria,” Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge, 124, 389–402.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. — (2000), “Long-Term Yield Patterns in Barley-Based Cropping Systems in Northern Syria. 1. Comparison of Rotations,” Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 135, 223–236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Patterson, H. D. (1964), “The Theory of Cyclic Rotation Experiments” (with discussion), Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series B, 26, 1–45.MATHGoogle Scholar
  11. SAS Institute Inc. (1992), SAS Technical Report P-229, SAS/STAT Software: Changes and Enhancements, Release 6.07, Cary, NC: SAS Institute Inc.Google Scholar
  12. Singh, M., Christiansen, S., and Chakraborty, B. K. (1997), “An Assessment of the Effect of Covariances of Plot Errors Over Time on the Precision of Means of Rotations with Wheat,” Experimental Agriculture, 33, 469–475.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Singh, M., and Jones, M. (1997), “Estimating Time to Detect Time-Trends in Continuous Cropping,” Journal of Applied Statistics, 24, 651–661.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Yates, F. (1949), “The Design of Rotation Experiments,” in Technical Communication No 46, Proceedings of the First Commonwealth Conference on Tropical and Sub-Tropical Soils, 1948, Harpenden, England: Commonwealth Bureau of Soil Science, pp. 142–155.Google Scholar
  15. — (1954), “The Analysis of Experiments Containing Different Crop Rotations,” Biometrics, 10, 324–346.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Wolfinger, R. D. (1996), “Heterogeneous Variance-Covariance Structures for Repeated Measures,” Journal of Agricultural, Biological, and Environmental Statistics, 1, 205–230.CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© International Biometric Society 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.International Center for Agricultural Research in the Dry Areas (ICARDA)AleppoSyria

Personalised recommendations