ReviewFrontiers in plant science2020
Can Crop Models Identify Critical Gaps in Genetics, Environment, and Management Interactions?
Review in Frontiers in plant science, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 67 citations in OpenAlex.
- Multi-scale spatial-temporal remote sensing fusion for phenology identification in rice germplasm resources.Plant phenomics (Washington, D.C.) · 2026Article
- Evaluation of forage oat cultivars for alpine saline-alkaline environments: Trade-offs between yield, quality and stability.PloS one · 2026Article
- Integrating new fruit and vegetable growth parameters in SWAT models for improved simulations.Frontiers in plant science · 2026Article
- The causal arrows from genotype, environment, and management to plant phenotype are double headed.Journal of experimental botany · 2025Review
- APSIM-based modeling approach to understand sorghum production environments in Mali.Agronomy for sustainable development · 2024Article
- A conceptual framework for the dynamic modeling of time-resolved phenotypes for sets of genotype-environment-management combinations: a model library.Frontiers in plant science · 2023Article
- Simulating Root Growth as a Function of Soil Strength and Yield With a Field-Scale Crop Model Coupled With a 3D Architectural Root Model.Frontiers in plant science · 2022Article
- Tackling G × E × M interactions to close on-farm yield-gaps: creating novel pathways for crop improvement by predicting contributions of genetics and management to crop productivity.TAG. Theoretical and applied genetics. Theoretische und angewandte Genetik · 2021Review
- Genomics Armed With Diversity Leads the Way inFrontiers in genetics · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Increasing food demand under climate change constraints may challenge and strain agricultural systems. The use of crop models to assess genotypes performance across diverse target environments and management practices, i.e., the genetic × environment × management interaction (GEMI), can help understand suitability of genotype and agronomic practices, and possibly accelerate turnaround in plant breeding programs. However, the readiness of models to support these tasks can be debated. In this article, we point out modeling and data limitations and argue the need for evaluation and improvement of relevant process algorithms as well as model convergence. Under conditions suitable for plant growth, without meteorological extremes or soil limitation to root exploration, models can simulate resource capture, growth, and yield with relative ease. As stresses accumulate, the plant species- and genotype-specific attributes and their interactions with the soil and atmospheric environment generate a large range of responses, including conditions where resources become so limiting as to make yields very low. The space in between high and low yields is where most rainfed production occurs, and where the current model and user skill at representing GEMI varies. We also review studies comparing the performance of a large number of crop models and the lessons learned. The overall message is that improvement of models appears as a necessary condition for progress, and perhaps relevancy. Model ensembles help mitigate data input, model, and user-driven uncertainty for some but not all applications, sometimes at a very high cost. Successful model-based assessment of GEMI not only requires better crop models and knowledgeable users, but also a realistic representation of the environmental conditions of the landscape where crops are grown, which is not trivial given the 3D nature of water and nutrient transport. Models remain the best quantitative repository of our knowledge on crop functioning; they contain a narrative of plant, soil, and atmospheric functioning in computer language and train the mind to couple processes. But in our quest to tame GEMI, will they lead the way or just ride along history?
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.