Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dzt6s Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T08:01:38.515Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Agronōmics: transforming crop science through digital technologies

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 June 2017

R. Sylvester-Bradley ,
D. R. Kindred ,
B. Marchant ,
S. Rudolph ,
S. Roques ,
A. Calatayud ,
S. Clarke  and
V. Gillingham
R. Sylvester-Bradley*
Affiliation:
ADAS Boxworth, Cambridge CB23 4NN, UK
D. R. Kindred
Affiliation:
ADAS Boxworth, Cambridge CB23 4NN, UK
B. Marchant
Affiliation:
British Geological Survey, Keyworth, Nottinghamshire NG12 5GG, UK
S. Rudolph
Affiliation:
British Geological Survey, Keyworth, Nottinghamshire NG12 5GG, UK
S. Roques
Affiliation:
ADAS Boxworth, Cambridge CB23 4NN, UK
A. Calatayud
Affiliation:
ADAS Wolverhampton, Pendeford Business Park, Wolverhampton WV9 5AP, UK
S. Clarke
Affiliation:
ADAS Gleadthorpe, Nottingham NG20 9PD, UK
V. Gillingham
Affiliation:
AgSpace, Dorcan Business Village, Swindon SN3 5HY, UK
*
†E-mail: [email protected]
Get access

Abstract

Good progress in crop husbandry and science requires that impacts of field-scale interventions can be measured, analysed and interpreted easily and with confidence. The term ‘agronōmics’ describes the arena for research created by field-scale digital technologies where these technologies can enable effective commercially relevant experimentation. Ongoing trials with ‘precision-farm research networks’, along with new statistical methods (and associated software), show that robust conclusions can be drawn from digital field-scale comparisons, but they also show significant scope for improvement in the validity, accuracy and precision of digital measurements, especially those determining crop yields.

Keywords

AgronōmicsStrip trialSpatial Discontinuity AnalysisParticipatory Farm Research Networks
Type
PA in practice
Information
Advances in Animal Biosciences , Volume 8 , Special Issue 2: Papers presented at the 11th European Conference on Precision Agriculture (ECPA 2017), John McIntyre Centre, Edinburgh, UK, July 16–20 2017 , July 2017 , pp. 728 - 733
Copyright
© The Animal Consortium 2017 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

References:

AgGateway 2017. ADAPT. www.adaptframework.org (Retrieved 4/1/17).Google Scholar
Bloom, TM 1985. Bias in the measurement of crop performance. Aspects of applied Biology 10, Field trials methods and data handling 241–258.Google Scholar
Carlson, TN and Ripley, DA 1997. On the relation between NDVI, fractional vegetation cover, and Leaf Area Index. Remote Sensing and Environment 62, 241–252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
CLAAS 2016. Telematics. 28 pp. http://www.claas.co.uk/blueprint/servlet/blob/533340/985195f125fbd34f43aaa04b67b7267d/238637-dataRaw.pdf (Retrieved 4/1/17).Google Scholar
Deere, John 2016. Telematics. https://www.deere.co.uk/en_US/products/equipment/telematics/telematics.page (Retrieved 4/1/17).Google Scholar
Defra 2013. Farm Practices Survey 2012: https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/farm-practices-survey-october-2012-current-farming-issues Google Scholar
Fisher, RA and Wishart, J 1930. The arrangement of field experiments and the statistical reduction of the results. Imperial Bureau of Soil Science, Tech. Comm 10, 1–23.Google Scholar
Griffin, TW, Dobbins, CL, Vyn, TJ, Florax, RJGM and Lowenberg-Deboer, JM 2008. Spatial analysis of yield monitor data: Case studies of on-farm trials and farm management decision making. Precision Agriculture 9 (5), 269.Google Scholar
Hicks, D, Vanden Heuvel, R and Fore, Z 1997. Analysis and Practical Use of Information from On-Farm Strip Trials. Better Crops 81, 18–21.Google Scholar
Hoyles, D and Lamyman, T 2015. Yield Enhancement Network Videos. http://www.hlhltd.co.uk/yieldenhancementnetworkvideos.html (Retrieved 11/12/16).Google Scholar
Kindred, D and Sylvester-Bradley, R 2014. Using Precision Farming technologies to improve nitrogen management and empower on-farm learning. Aspects of Applied Biology 127, Precision Decisions for Profitable Cropping 173–180.Google Scholar
Kindred, D, Sylvester-Bradley, R, Clarke, S, Roques, S, Smillie, I and Berry, P 2016a. Agronōmics – an arena for synergy between the science and practice of crop production. Paper presented at the 12th European IFSA Symposium at Harper Adams University. Pp. 12.Google Scholar
Kindred, DR, Hatley, D, Ginsburg, D, Catalayud, A, Storer, K, Wilson, L, Hockridge, B, Milne, A, Marchant, B, Miller, P and Sylvester-Bradley, R 2016b. Automating fertiliser N for cereals (Auto-N). AHDB Report 561. Pp. 196.Google Scholar
Lark, RM, Stafford, JV and Bolam, HC 1997. Limitations on the spatial resolution of yield mapping for combinable crops. Journal of Agricultural Engineering Research 66, 183–193.Google Scholar
Lawes, RA and Bramley, RGV 2012. A simple method for the analysis of on-farm strip trials. Agronomy Journal 104 (2), 371.Google Scholar
Lewis, T 2014. How computer analysts took over at Britain’s top football clubs. The Observer, 9 March 2014.Google Scholar
Little, TM and Hills, FJ 1978. Agricultural Experimentation: Design and Analysis. John Wiley & Sons Ltd, West Sussex, England.Google Scholar
MacMillan, T and Benton, TG 2014. Engage farmers in research. Nature 509 (7498), 25–27.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Qi, A, Ober, ES and Jaggard, KW 2012. Benchmarking sugar beet yields and the growers’ performance. British Sugar Beet Review 80, 3–6.Google Scholar
Ross, KW, Morris, DK and Johannsen, CJ 2008. A review of intra-field yield estimation from yield monitor data. Applied Engineering in Agriculture 24 (3), 309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rudolph, S, Marchant, PB, Gillingham, V, Kindred, D and Sylvester-Bradley, R 2016. Spatial Discontinuity Analysis’ a novel geostatistical algorithm for on-farm experimentation. In Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Precision Agriculture Monticello, IL: USA International Society of Precision Agriculture.Google Scholar
Street, D 1990. Fisher’s contributions to agricultural statistics. Biometrics 46, 967–945.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sylvester-Bradley, R 1991. Modelling and mechanisms for the development of agriculture. Aspects of Applied Biology 26, The Art and Craft of Modelling in Applied Biology 55–67.Google Scholar
Sylvester-Bradley, R, Semenov, MA, Lawless, C, Jaggard, K and Qi, A 2005. Assessing predictive skill of models to optimise crop management and design. Final Report of Defra Project AR0909. Pp. 23.Google Scholar
Sylvester-Bradley, R and Kindred, D 2014. The Yield Enhancement Network: Philosophy and results from the first season. Aspects of Applied Biology 125, Agronomic Decision Making in an Uncertain Climate 125, 53–62.Google Scholar
Sylvester-Bradley, R, Kindred, D, Smillie, I and Berry, PM 2016. Enhancement of European crop yields without agronomic ‘intensification’. Proceedings of the European Society of Agronomy 14th Congress, Edinburgh, 5–9 September 2016.Google Scholar
The University of Reading 2000. Concepts Underlying the Design of Experiments. Statistical Services Centre.Google Scholar
Whelan, B, Taylor, J and McBratney, A 2012. A ‘small strip’ approach to empirically determining management class yield response functions and calculating the potential financial ‘net wastage’ associated with whole-field uniform-rate fertiliser application. Field Crops Research 139, 47–56.Google Scholar