A multi-model assessment of C cycling and soil C sequestration in grasslands and croplands

Renata Sandor , Fiona Ehrhardt , Bruno Basso , Gianni Bellocchi
6th International Symposium on Soil Organic Matter; Harpenden (Royaume Uni) 2 -2

2017
Short-term impacts of the summer 2019 heatwave on ecosystem functioning inferred from ICOS flux towers in France

Pauline Buysse , R Fléchard Chris , Nicolas Martin-StPaul , Sébastien Lafont
ICOS Science Conférence

2020
Quantification et modélisation de la production et des bilans C et N en systèmes de culture biologiques (AB)

Nicolas Beaudoin , Bénédicte Autret , Lucia Rakotovololona , Aïcha Ronceux

Modelling CO2 and N2O emissions from a tropical semi-arid parkland cultivated with groundnut and millet

Yélognissè Agbohessou , Seydina Ba , Fabien Ferchaud , Joël Léonard
EGU24 ( EGU24-7588)

2024
Modeling Denitrification: Can We Report What We Don't Know?

B Grosz , Amanda Matson , K Butterbach‐Bahl , Timothy Clough
AGU Advances 4 ( 6) e2023AV000990 -e2023AV000990

3
2023
Sources of uncertainty in simulating crop N2O emissions under contrasting environmental conditions

Sibylle Dueri , Joël Léonard , Florent Chlebowski , Pablo Rosso
Agricultural and Forest Meteorology 340 109619 -109619

2
2023
How modelers model: the overlooked social and human dimensions in model intercomparison studies

Fabrizio Albanito , David McBey , Matthew Harrison , Pete Smith
Environmental Science & Technology 56 ( 18) 13485 -13498

7
2022
There is a growing realization that the complexity of model ensemble studies depends not only on the models used but also on the experience and approach used by modelers to calibrate and validate results, which remain a source of uncertainty. Here, we applied a multi-criteria decision-making method to investigate the rationale applied by modelers in a model ensemble study where 12 process-based different biogeochemical model types were compared across five successive calibration stages. The modelers shared a common level of agreement about the importance of the variables used to initialize their models for calibration. However, we found inconsistency among modelers when judging the importance of input variables across different calibration stages. The level of subjective weighting attributed by modelers to calibration data decreased sequentially as the extent and number of variables provided increased. In this context, the perceived importance attributed to variables such as the fertilization rate, irrigation regime, soil texture, pH, and initial levels of soil organic carbon and nitrogen stocks was statistically different when classified according to model types. The importance attributed to input variables such as experimental duration, gross primary production, and netecosystem exchange varied significantly according to the length of the modeler’s experience. We argue that the gradual access to input data across the five calibration stages negatively influenced the consistency of the interpretations made by the modelers, with cognitive bias in “trial-and-error” calibration routines. Our study highlights that overlooking human and social attributes is critical in the outcomes of modeling and model intercomparison studies. While complexity of the processes captured in the model algorithms and parameterization is important, we contend that (1) the modeler’s assumptions on the extent to which parameters should be altered and (2) modeler perceptions of the importance of model parameters are just as critical in obtaining a quality model calibration as numerical or analytical details.

Fabrizio Albanito , David Mcbey , Matthew Harrison , Pete Smith

2022
Conceptual basis, formalisations and parameterization of the STICS crop model

Nicolas Beaudoin , Dominique Ripoche , L Strullu , Bruno Mary
iCROPM2020 Symposium-Crop Modelling for The Future 73 p. -73 p.

6
2020
Evaluation of mitigation practices to attenuate N2O emission and increase soil C stock: a multi-model assessment in five croplands worldwide

Marco Carozzi , Gianni Bellocchi , Fiona Ehrhardt , Lorenzo Brilli
International Crop Modelling Symposium (iCROPM2020)

2020
Pan‐European Soil Erodibility Assessment

Yves Le Bissonnais , Olivier Cerdan , Joël Léonard , Joël Daroussin
Soil erosion in Europe 685 -693

3
2006
Physical degradation of agricultural and forest soils due to compaction

Jean Roger-Estrade , Dominique Arrouays , Vincent Adamiade , Edouard Baranger

2011
Revealing trade-offs in cropping systems sustainability by piecing together pedo-climatic datasets and agronomic knowledge with fuzzy logic

Roberta Calone , Angela Fiore , Maria Luz Cayuela , Alessandra Lagomarsino
EGU General Assembly Conference Abstracts EGU -13636

2023
203
2015
Multicriteria evaluation of the stics soil-crop model and implementation of an automated evaluation system

Samuel Buis , Elsa Coucheney , Marie Launay , Patrice Lecharpentier
iCROPM 2016 International Crop Modelling Symposium" Crop Modelling for Agriculture and Food Security under Global Change" 441 p. -441 p.

2016
A Preliminary Approach of 3D Simulation of Soil Surface Degradation by Rainfall.

Gilles Valette , Michel Herbin , Laurent Lucas , Joël Léonard
NPH 41 -49

6
2005
A Non-Modular Cellular DEVS Model Of The Degradation Of A Cultivated Soil Surface By Rainfall

Gilles Valette , Stéphanie Prévost , Laurent Lucas , Joël Léonard
22nd Conference on Modelling and Simulation 285 -291

2
2008
Simulation of rain splash using a genetic fuzzy system

Gilles Valette , Stéphanie Prévost , Laurent Lucas , Joël Léonard
11th IPMU International Conference. Paris

1
2006
Review and analysis of strengths and weaknesses of agro-ecosystem models for simulating C and N fluxes

Lorenzo Brilli , Luca Bechini , Marco Bindi , Marco Carozzi
Science of The Total Environment 598 445 -470

210
2017