Yield Gap Analysis: quantifying the gap between actual yield and potential yields of wheat in Gorgan

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

Abstract

Background and Objectives: Food security is a main subject in the world. Many international and governmental organizations to ensure the nutritional needs of human are being explored. According to the restrictions on agricultural lands, an increase in production per area unit is a way to improve food security. Despite high yielding varieties, these varieties do not reach their potential yield due to lack of access to favorable environmental conditions. Therefore, yield gap will be created between potential yield and actual yield. Before any progress in the agronomic operations of crop, it is necessary to identify the crop’s potential yield and to calculate the gap between potential and actual yield. Therefore, the aim of this study was to evaluate the historical trend in different yield gaps and to calculate different mean yield gaps in the studied region.

Materials and Methods: Potential and conventional yields were simulated using CropSyst model over 1981-2008 period and researchers’ potential yields over 1994-2008 period, maximum achievable yield over 1989-2008 period and actual yield over 1981-2008 period were collected from Agricultural Research Center, and Agriculture Organization. In this study, four types of yield gap were calculated as the difference between simulated potential yield and actual yield (yield gap 1), the difference between researchers’ potential yield and actual yield (yield gap 2), the difference between maximum achievable yield and actual yield (yield gap 3) and the difference between the simulated conventional yield and actual yield (yield gap 4).

Results: The trend of changes in actual yield compared with both simulated potential and conventional yields over 1981-2008 period showed the gap between simulated potential and conventional yields with actual yield were decreasing. The decrease in the yield gaps was due to decrease in the trend of changes in simulated potential and conventional yields and increase in the trend of changes in actual yield over the studied period. According to the results, to increase the simulated potential yield, the varieties should be selected which have high radiation use efficiency. While for reducing the yield gap between simulated conventional yield and actual yield, the varieties with high radiation use efficiency should be cultivated under unlimited water and nitrogen condition. The trend of changes in yield gap between researchers’ potential yield and the actual yield was fixed yields over the period of 1994-2008 which was due to unchanged trend of both yields over this period. The trend of changes of the gap between actual yield and maximum achievable yield was increasing over 1989-2008. This was indicated the better management operations of prior farmers to achieve maximum yield, while other farmers did not work hardly to enhance the yield over the studied years. The simulated mean potential and conventional yield, the researchers’ potential yield, the maximum achievable yield and the actual yield were 6.35, 6.6, 6.0, 4.42 and 3.4 t ha-1, respectively, over 1994-2008 period. The differences between these yield levels with the actual yield were about 3.0, 1.0, 3.2 and 2.6 t ha-1.

Conclusion: It can be concluded that the difference between the management operations performed for achieving actual yield and the other yield levels can be created a yield gap and the more management differences, the higher yield gap.

Keywords

References

  1. Aggarwal, P.K., Hebbar, K.B., Venugopalan, M.V., Rani, S., Bala, A., Biswal, A., and Wani, S.P. 2008. Quantification of yield gaps in rain-fed rice, wheat, cotton and mustard in India. Global Theme on Agroecosystems Report No. 43. International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics (ICRISAT).

    1. Badawi, A.T. 1998. Sustainability of rice production in Egypt, IRC 98/7-2, Cairo, Egypt, 12p.
    2. Barker, R., Gomez, K.A., and Herdt, R.W. 1979. Farm-level constraints to high rice yields in Asia: 1974-77. IRRI, Los Banos, Philippines. 411 p.
    3. Bhatia, V.S., Singh, P., Wani, S.P., Chauhan, G.S., Kesava Rao, A.V.R., Mishra, A.K., and Srinivas, K. 2008. Analysis of potential yields and yield gaps of rainfed soybean in India using CROPGRO-Soybean model. Agric. Forest Meteorol. 148: 8-9. 1252-1265.
    4. Caldiz, D.O., Gaspari, F.J., Moreno K.A., and Struik, P.C. 2002a. Agro-ecological zoning at the level: spatio-temporal variation in potential yield of the potato crop in the Argentina Patagonia. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 88: 1. 3-10.
    5. Caldiz, D.O., Haverkort, A.J., and Struik, P.C. 2002b. Analysis of a complex crop production system in interdependent agro-ecological zones: a methodological approach for potatoes in Argentina. Agric. Syst. 73: 3. 297-311.
    6. Chaudhary, R.C. 1998. Indonesian coordinated rice testing network (ICRTN). World Bank -ARMPII, CRIFC, Bogor, Indonesia. 152 p.
    7. de Bie, C.A.J.M. 2000. Yield gap studies through comparative performance analysis of agro-ecosystems. International Institute for Aerospace and Earth Science (ITC), P.O. Box 6, 7500 AA, Enschede. The Netherlands.
    8. Dobermann, A., Arkebauer, T., Cassman, K.G., Drijber, R.A., Lindquist, J., Madhavan, S., Markwell, J., Nelson, L., Specht, J.E., Walters, D.T., Yang, H.S., Amos, B., Binder, D.L., Murphy, C., and Teichmeier, G. 2002. Corn yield potential and optimal soil productivity in irrigated corn/soybean systems. p. 65-85. In Murphy, L.S. (ed.) Proceedings of the 2002 Fluid Forum, Vol. 19. Fluid Fertilizer Foundation, Manhattan, KS.
    9. Fresco, L.O. 1984. Issues in farming systems research. Neth. J. Agri. Sci. 32: 4. 253-261.
    10. Kayiranga, D. 2006. The effects of land factors and management practices on rice yields. International Institute for Geo-Information Science and Earth Observation Enschede (ITC). The Netherlands.
    11. Le, H.N. 1998. Rice production in Vietnam and the policies to promote its development. 19th Session of International Rice Commission, Cairo, Egypt.
    12. Lobell, D.B., Cassman, K.G., and Field, C.B. 2009. Crop yield Ggaps: their importance, magnitudes, and causes. Annu. Rev. Environ. Res. 34: 1. 179-204.
    13. Naab, J.B., Singh, P., Boote, K.J., Jones, J.W., and Marfo, K.O. 2004. Using the CROPGRO-Peanut model to quantify yield gaps of peanut in the Guinean Savanna zone of Ghana. Agron. J. 96: 5. 1231-1242.
    14. Pradhan, R. 2004. The effect of land and management aspects on maize yield. International Institute for Geo-Information Science and Earth Observation Enschede (ITC). The Netherlands.
    15. Rajapakse, D.C. 2003. Biophysical factors defining rice yield gaps. International Institute for Geo-Information Science and Earth Observation Enschede (ITC). The Netherlands.
    16. Singh, P., Vijaya, D., Chinh, N.T., Pongkanjana, A., Prasad, K.S., Srinivas, K., and Wani, S.P. 2001. Potential productivity and yield gap of selected crops in the rainfed regions of India, Thailand, and Vietnam. Natural Resource Management Program Report No. 5. Patancheru 502 324, Andhra Pradesh, India: International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics. 50 p.
    17. Soltani, A., Ghassemi - Golezani, K., Rahimzadeh - Khooie, F., and Moghaddam, M. 1999. A simple model for chickpea growth and yield. Field Crops Res. 62: 2-3. 213-224.
    18. Soltani, A., Mahroo-Kashani, A.H., Dastmalchi, A., Maddah, V., Denial, E., and Kamkar, B. 2010. Simulating wheat growth and development using DSSAT, APSIM and CropSyst models under Gorgan and Gonbad conditions (Research Report). Gorgan University of Agricultural Sciences and Natural Resources. 66p.
    19. Stockle, C.O., Donatelli, M., and Nelson, R. 2003. CropSyst, a cropping systems simulation model. Eur. J. Agron. 18: 3-4. 289-307.
    20. Torabi, B., Soltani, A., Galeshi, S., and Zeinali E. 2011. Analyzing Wheat Yield Constraints in Gorgan. J. Crop Prod. 4: 4. 1-17.
    21. Van Ittersum, M.K., and Rabbinge, R. 1997. Concepts in production ecology for analysis and quantification of agricultural input-output combinations. Field Crops Res. 52: 3. 197-208.
    22. Zeinali, E. 2009. Wheat Nitrogen in Gorgan; Agronomical Physiological, and Environmental Aspects. Ph.D. Thesis. Gorgan University of Agricultural Science and Natural Resources. 201p.
Journal of Crop Production
Volume 13, Issue 1
May 2020
Pages 1-24

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics