Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28701816›Full record

ArticleAgricultural systems2017

Brief history of agricultural systems modeling.

James W Jones, John M Antle, Bruno Basso, Kenneth J Boote, Richard T Conant, Ian Foster, H Charles J Godfray, Mario Herrero, Richard E Howitt, Sander Janssen and 5 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Agricultural systems, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 51 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
51citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

51 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Breeding perspectives on tackling trait genome-to-phenome (G2P) dimensionality using ensemble-based genomic prediction.TAG. Theoretical and applied genetics. Theoretische und angewandte Genetik · 2025
    Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

15 authors.

James W JonesUniversity of Florida, Agricultural and Biological Engineering Department, Museum Road, Gainesville, FL 32611, USA.
John M AntleOregon State University, USA.
Bruno BassoMichigan State University, USA.
Kenneth J BooteUniversity of Florida, Agricultural and Biological Engineering Department, Museum Road, Gainesville, FL 32611, USA.
Richard T ConantColorado State University, USA.
Ian FosterUniversity of Chicago, USA.
H Charles J GodfrayOxford Martin Programme on the Future of Food, University of Oxford, Department of Zoology, South Parks Rd., Oxford OX1 3PS, UK.
Mario HerreroCSIRO, Australia.
Richard E HowittUniversity of California-Davis, USA.
Sander JanssenWageningen University, Netherlands.
Brian A KeatingCSIRO, Australia.
Rafael Munoz-CarpenaUniversity of Florida, Agricultural and Biological Engineering Department, Museum Road, Gainesville, FL 32611, USA.
Cheryl H PorterUniversity of Florida, Agricultural and Biological Engineering Department, Museum Road, Gainesville, FL 32611, USA.
Cynthia RosenzweigNASA, Columbia University, USA.
Tim R WheelerUniversity of Reading, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Agricultural systems science generates knowledge that allows researchers to consider complex problems or take informed agricultural decisions. The rich history of this science exemplifies the diversity of systems and scales over which they operate and have been studied. Modeling, an essential tool in agricultural systems science, has been accomplished by scientists from a wide range of disciplines, who have contributed concepts and tools over more than six decades. As agricultural scientists now consider the "next generation" models, data, and knowledge products needed to meet the increasingly complex systems problems faced by society, it is important to take stock of this history and its lessons to ensure that we avoid re-invention and strive to consider all dimensions of associated challenges. To this end, we summarize here the history of agricultural systems modeling and identify lessons learned that can help guide the design and development of next generation of agricultural system tools and methods. A number of past events combined with overall technological progress in other fields have strongly contributed to the evolution of agricultural system modeling, including development of process-based bio-physical models of crops and livestock, statistical models based on historical observations, and economic optimization and simulation models at household and regional to global scales. Characteristics of agricultural systems models have varied widely depending on the systems involved, their scales, and the wide range of purposes that motivated their development and use by researchers in different disciplines. Recent trends in broader collaboration across institutions, across disciplines, and between the public and private sectors suggest that the stage is set for the major advances in agricultural systems science that are needed for the next generation of models, databases, knowledge products and decision support systems. The lessons from history should be considered to help avoid roadblocks and pitfalls as the community develops this next generation of agricultural systems models.

Indexed as

Agricultural systemsDataHistoryModelsNext generation

Identifiers

PMID28701816
PMCPMC5485640

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.