Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37840838›Full record

ArticleField crops research2023

Big data, small explanatory and predictive power: Lessons from random forest modeling of on-farm yield variability and implications for data-driven agronomy.

João Vasco Silva, Joost van Heerwaarden, Pytrik Reidsma, Alice G Laborte, Kindie Tesfaye, Martin K van Ittersum

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Field crops research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
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

6 authors.

João Vasco SilvaSustainable Agrifood Systems, CIMMYT, Harare, Zimbabwe.
Joost van HeerwaardenPlant Production Systems, Wageningen University, Wageningen, the Netherlands.
Pytrik ReidsmaPlant Production Systems, Wageningen University, Wageningen, the Netherlands.
Alice G LaborteSustainable Impact Department, IRRI, Los Baños, the Philippines.
Kindie TesfayeSustainable Agrifood Systems, CIMMYT, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
Martin K van IttersumPlant Production Systems, Wageningen University, Wageningen, the Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Context: Collection and analysis of large volumes of on-farm production data are widely seen as key to understanding yield variability among farmers and improving resource-use efficiency. Objective: The aim of this study was to assess the performance of statistical and machine learning methods to explain and predict crop yield across thousands of farmers' fields in contrasting farming systems worldwide. Methods: A large database of 10,940 field-year combinations from three countries in different stages of agricultural intensification was analyzed. Random effects models were used to partition crop yield variability and random forest models were used to explain and predict crop yield within a cross-validation scheme with data re-sampling over space and time. Results: Yield variability in relative terms was smallest for wheat and barley in the Netherlands and for wheat in Ethiopia, intermediate for rice in the Philippines, and greatest for maize in Ethiopia. Random forest models comprising a total of 87 variables explained a maximum of 65 % of cereal yield variability in the Netherlands and less than 45 % of cereal yield variability in Ethiopia and in the Philippines. Crop management related variables were important to explain and predict cereal yields in Ethiopia, while predictive (i.e., known before the growing season) climatic variables and explanatory (i.e., known during or after the growing season) climatic variables were most important to explain and predict cereal yield variability in the Philippines and in the Netherlands, respectively. Finally, model cross-validation for regions or years not seen during model training reduced the R Conclusion: Big data from farmers' fields is useful to explain on-farm yield variability to some extent, but not to predict it across time and space. Significance: The results call for moderate expectations towards big data and machine learning in agronomic studies, particularly for smallholder farms in the tropics where model performance was poorest independently of the variables considered and the cross-validation scheme used.

Indexed as

Linear mixed modelsMachine learningModel accuracyModel precisionSustainable intensification

Identifiers

PMID37840838
PMCPMC10565834

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.