Title: Spatiotemporal Changes of Winter Wheat Planted and Harvested Areas, Photosynthesis and Grain Production in the Contiguous United States from 2008–2018
Winter wheat is a main cereal crop grown in the United States of America (USA), and the USA is the third largest wheat exporter globally. Timely and reliable in-season forecast and year-end estimation of winter wheat grain production in the USA are needed for regional and global food security. In this study, we assessed the consistency between the agricultural statistical reports and satellite-based data for winter wheat over the contiguous US (CONUS) at both the county and national scales. First, we compared the planted area estimates from the National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS) and the Cropland Data Layer (CDL) from 2008–2018. Second, we investigated the relationship between gross primary production (GPP) estimated by the vegetation photosynthesis model (VPM) and grain production from the NASS. Lastly, we explored the in-season utility of GPPVPM in monitoring seasonal production. Strong spatiotemporal consistency of planted areas was found between the NASS and CDL datasets. However, in the Southern Great Plains, both the CDL and NASS planted acreage were noticeable larger (>20%) than the NASS harvested area, where some winter wheat fields were used as forage for cattle grazing. County-level GPPVPM was linearly related with grain production of winter wheat, with an R2 value of 0.68 across the CONUS. The relationships between grain production and GPPVPM in those counties without a substantial difference (<20%) between planted and harvested area were much stronger and their harvest index (HIGPP) values ranged from 0.2–0.3. GPPVPM in May could explain about 70–90% of the variance of winter wheat grain production. Our findings highlight the potential of GPPVPM in winter wheat monitoring, especially for those high harvested/planted ratio, which could provide useful data to guide planning and marketing for decision makers, stakeholders, and the public. more »« less
Abstract
The United States of America ranked first in maize export and second in soybean export in the world. Accurate and timely data and information on maize and soybean production in the Contiguous United States (CONUS) are important for food security at the regional and global scales. In this study, we firstly compare the maize and soybean planted area from cropland data layer (CDL) with NASS area statistics over the CONUS during 2008-2018, and evaluate the interannual changes of planted and harvested area based on the two datasets. Secondly, we investigate the relationship between grain production and gross primary production (GPP) simulated by Vegetation Photosynthesis Model (VPM) at national and county scales. Finally, we evaluate the linear regression models between grain production and cumulated GPPVPM over time at 8-day resolution. We found strong spatial-temporal consistency between CDL and NASS datasets in maize and soybean planted areas. Maize and soybean planted areas increased by mid-2010s, largely driven by markets and international trade. Severe summer drought in 2012 had little impact on soybean planted and harvested area and maize planted area, but substantially reduced maize harvested area. and grain production. Annual county-level GPPVPM had strong linear relationship with NASS grain production for maize and soybean. The Harvest Index, defined as the ratio between grain production and GPPVPM (HIGPP_VPM), ranged from 0.25 (2012) to 0.36 for maize and from 0.13 to 0.15 for soybean. The linear regression models between grain production and cumulated GPPVPM (GPPVPM_CUM) over time at 8-day resolution showed that by the end of July, GPPVPM_CUM accounted for ~90% of variance in maize and soybean grain production, which was approximately two months before farmers started to harvest. This study clearly shows that VPM and GPPVPM data are useful for monitoring and in-season forecasting of maize and soybean grain production in the CONUS.
Hussain, Mir Zaman; Hamilton, Stephen; Robertson, G. Philip; Basso, Bruno(
, Dryad)
Excessive phosphorus (P) applications to croplands can contribute to eutrophication of surface waters through surface runoff and subsurface (leaching) losses. We analyzed leaching losses of total dissolved P (TDP) from no-till corn, hybrid poplar (Populus nigra X P. maximowiczii), switchgrass (Panicum virgatum), miscanthus (Miscanthus giganteus), native grasses, and restored prairie, all planted in 2008 on former cropland in Michigan, USA. All crops except corn (13 kg P ha−1 year−1) were grown without P fertilization. Biomass was harvested at the end of each growing season except for poplar. Soil water at 1.2 m depth was sampled weekly to biweekly for TDP determination during March–November 2009–2016 using tension lysimeters. Soil test P (0–25 cm depth) was measured every autumn. Soil water TDP concentrations were usually below levels where eutrophication of surface waters is frequently observed (> 0.02 mg L−1) but often higher than in deep groundwater or nearby streams and lakes. Rates of P leaching, estimated from measured concentrations and modeled drainage, did not differ statistically among cropping systems across years; 7-year cropping system means ranged from 0.035 to 0.072 kg P ha−1 year−1 with large interannual variation. Leached P was positively related to STP, which decreased over the 7 years in all systems. These results indicate that both P-fertilized and unfertilized cropping systems may leach legacy P from past cropland management. Experimental details The Biofuel Cropping System Experiment (BCSE) is located at the W.K. Kellogg Biological Station (KBS) (42.3956° N, 85.3749° W; elevation 288 m asl) in southwestern Michigan, USA. This site is a part of the Great Lakes Bioenergy Research Center (www.glbrc.org) and is a Long-term Ecological Research site (www.lter.kbs.msu.edu). Soils are mesic Typic Hapludalfs developed on glacial outwash54 with high sand content (76% in the upper 150 cm) intermixed with silt-rich loess in the upper 50 cm55. The water table lies approximately 12–14 m below the surface. The climate is humid temperate with a mean annual air temperature of 9.1 °C and annual precipitation of 1005 mm, 511 mm of which falls between May and September (1981–2010)56,57. The BCSE was established as a randomized complete block design in 2008 on preexisting farmland. Prior to BCSE establishment, the field was used for grain crop and alfalfa (Medicago sativa L.) production for several decades. Between 2003 and 2007, the field received a total of ~ 300 kg P ha−1 as manure, and the southern half, which contains one of four replicate plots, received an additional 206 kg P ha−1 as inorganic fertilizer. The experimental design consists of five randomized blocks each containing one replicate plot (28 by 40 m) of 10 cropping systems (treatments) (Supplementary Fig. S1; also see Sanford et al.58). Block 5 is not included in the present study. Details on experimental design and site history are provided in Robertson and Hamilton57 and Gelfand et al.59. Leaching of P is analyzed in six of the cropping systems: (i) continuous no-till corn, (ii) switchgrass, (iii) miscanthus, (iv) a mixture of five species of native grasses, (v) a restored native prairie containing 18 plant species (Supplementary Table S1), and (vi) hybrid poplar. Agronomic management Phenological cameras and field observations indicated that the perennial herbaceous crops emerged each year between mid-April and mid-May. Corn was planted each year in early May. Herbaceous crops were harvested at the end of each growing season with the timing depending on weather: between October and November for corn and between November and December for herbaceous perennial crops. Corn stover was harvested shortly after corn grain, leaving approximately 10 cm height of stubble above the ground. The poplar was harvested only once, as the culmination of a 6-year rotation, in the winter of 2013–2014. Leaf emergence and senescence based on daily phenological images indicated the beginning and end of the poplar growing season, respectively, in each year. Application of inorganic fertilizers to the different crops followed a management approach typical for the region (Table 1). Corn was fertilized with 13 kg P ha−1 year−1 as starter fertilizer (N-P-K of 19-17-0) at the time of planting and an additional 33 kg P ha−1 year−1 was added as superphosphate in spring 2015. Corn also received N fertilizer around the time of planting and in mid-June at typical rates for the region (Table 1). No P fertilizer was applied to the perennial grassland or poplar systems (Table 1). All perennial grasses (except restored prairie) were provided 56 kg N ha−1 year−1 of N fertilizer in early summer between 2010 and 2016; an additional 77 kg N ha−1 was applied to miscanthus in 2009. Poplar was fertilized once with 157 kg N ha−1 in 2010 after the canopy had closed. Sampling of subsurface soil water and soil for P determination Subsurface soil water samples were collected beneath the root zone (1.2 m depth) using samplers installed at approximately 20 cm into the unconsolidated sand of 2Bt2 and 2E/Bt horizons (soils at the site are described in Crum and Collins54). Soil water was collected from two kinds of samplers: Prenart samplers constructed of Teflon and silica (http://www.prenart.dk/soil-water-samplers/) in replicate blocks 1 and 2 and Eijkelkamp ceramic samplers (http://www.eijkelkamp.com) in blocks 3 and 4 (Supplementary Fig. S1). The samplers were installed in 2008 at an angle using a hydraulic corer, with the sampling tubes buried underground within the plots and the sampler located about 9 m from the plot edge. There were no consistent differences in TDP concentrations between the two sampler types. Beginning in the 2009 growing season, subsurface soil water was sampled at weekly to biweekly intervals during non-frozen periods (April–November) by applying 50 kPa of vacuum to each sampler for 24 h, during which the extracted water was collected in glass bottles. Samples were filtered using different filter types (all 0.45 µm pore size) depending on the volume of leachate collected: 33-mm dia. cellulose acetate membrane filters when volumes were less than 50 mL; and 47-mm dia. Supor 450 polyethersulfone membrane filters for larger volumes. Total dissolved phosphorus (TDP) in water samples was analyzed by persulfate digestion of filtered samples to convert all phosphorus forms to soluble reactive phosphorus, followed by colorimetric analysis by long-pathlength spectrophotometry (UV-1800 Shimadzu, Japan) using the molybdate blue method60, for which the method detection limit was ~ 0.005 mg P L−1. Between 2009 and 2016, soil samples (0–25 cm depth) were collected each autumn from all plots for determination of soil test P (STP) by the Bray-1 method61, using as an extractant a dilute hydrochloric acid and ammonium fluoride solution, as is recommended for neutral to slightly acidic soils. The measured STP concentration in mg P kg−1 was converted to kg P ha−1 based on soil sampling depth and soil bulk density (mean, 1.5 g cm−3). Sampling of water samples from lakes, streams and wells for P determination In addition to chemistry of soil and subsurface soil water in the BCSE, waters from lakes, streams, and residential water supply wells were also sampled during 2009–2016 for TDP analysis using Supor 450 membrane filters and the same analytical method as for soil water. These water bodies are within 15 km of the study site, within a landscape mosaic of row crops, grasslands, deciduous forest, and wetlands, with some residential development (Supplementary Fig. S2, Supplementary Table S2). Details of land use and cover change in the vicinity of KBS are given in Hamilton et al.48, and patterns in nutrient concentrations in local surface waters are further discussed in Hamilton62. Leaching estimates, modeled drainage, and data analysis Leaching was estimated at daily time steps and summarized as total leaching on a crop-year basis, defined from the date of planting or leaf emergence in a given year to the day prior to planting or emergence in the following year. TDP concentrations (mg L−1) of subsurface soil water were linearly interpolated between sampling dates during non-freezing periods (April–November) and over non-sampling periods (December–March) based on the preceding November and subsequent April samples. Daily rates of TDP leaching (kg ha−1) were calculated by multiplying concentration (mg L−1) by drainage rates (m3 ha−1 day−1) modeled by the Systems Approach for Land Use Sustainability (SALUS) model, a crop growth model that is well calibrated for KBS soil and environmental conditions. SALUS simulates yield and environmental outcomes in response to weather, soil, management (planting dates, plant population, irrigation, N fertilizer application, and tillage), and genetics63. The SALUS water balance sub-model simulates surface runoff, saturated and unsaturated water flow, drainage, root water uptake, and evapotranspiration during growing and non-growing seasons63. The SALUS model has been used in studies of evapotranspiration48,51,64 and nutrient leaching20,65,66,67 from KBS soils, and its predictions of growing-season evapotranspiration are consistent with independent measurements based on growing-season soil water drawdown53 and evapotranspiration measured by eddy covariance68. Phosphorus leaching was assumed insignificant on days when SALUS predicted no drainage. Volume-weighted mean TDP concentrations in leachate for each crop-year and for the entire 7-year study period were calculated as the total dissolved P leaching flux (kg ha−1) divided by the total drainage (m3 ha−1). One-way ANOVA with time (crop-year) as the fixed factor was conducted to compare total annual drainage rates, P leaching rates, volume-weighted mean TDP concentrations, and maximum aboveground biomass among the cropping systems over all seven crop-years as well as with TDP concentrations from local lakes, streams, and groundwater wells. When a significant (α = 0.05) difference was detected among the groups, we used the Tukey honest significant difference (HSD) post-hoc test to make pairwise comparisons among the groups. In the case of maximum aboveground biomass, we used the Tukey–Kramer method to make pairwise comparisons among the groups because the absence of poplar data after the 2013 harvest resulted in unequal sample sizes. We also used the Tukey–Kramer method to compare the frequency distributions of TDP concentrations in all of the soil leachate samples with concentrations in lakes, streams, and groundwater wells, since each sample category had very different numbers of measurements. Individual spreadsheets in “data table_leaching_dissolved organic carbon and nitrogen.xls” 1. annual precip_drainage 2. biomass_corn, perennial grasses 3. biomass_poplar 4. annual N leaching _vol-wtd conc 5. Summary_N leached 6. annual DOC leachin_vol-wtd conc 7. growing season length 8. correlation_nh4 VS no3 9. correlations_don VS no3_doc VS don Each spreadsheet is described below along with an explanation of variates. Note that ‘nan’ indicate data are missing or not available. First row indicates header; second row indicates units 1. Spreadsheet: annual precip_drainage Description: Precipitation measured from nearby Kellogg Biological Station (KBS) Long Term Ecological Research (LTER) Weather station, over 2009-2016 study period. Data shown in Figure 1; original data source for precipitation (https://lter.kbs.msu.edu/datatables/7). Drainage estimated from SALUS crop model. Note that drainage is percolation out of the root zone (0-125 cm). Annual precipitation and drainage values shown here are calculated for growing and non-growing crop periods. Variate Description year year of the observation crop “corn” “switchgrass” “miscanthus” “nativegrass” “restored prairie” “poplar” precip_G precipitation during growing period (milliMeter) precip_NG precipitation during non-growing period (milliMeter) drainage_G drainage during growing period (milliMeter) drainage_NG drainage during non-growing period (milliMeter) 2. Spreadsheet: biomass_corn, perennial grasses Description: Maximum aboveground biomass measurements from corn, switchgrass, miscanthus, native grass and restored prairie plots in Great Lakes Bioenergy Research Center (GLBRC) Biomass Cropping System Experiment (BCSE) during 2009-2015. Data shown in Figure 2. Variate Description year year of the observation date day of the observation (mm/dd/yyyy) crop “corn” “switchgrass” “miscanthus” “nativegrass” “restored prairie” “poplar” replicate each crop has four replicated plots, R1, R2, R3 and R4 station stations (S1, S2 and S3) of samplings within the plot. For more details, refer to link (https://data.sustainability.glbrc.org/protocols/156) species plant species that are rooted within the quadrat during the time of maximum biomass harvest. See protocol for more information, refer to link (http://lter.kbs.msu.edu/datatables/36) For maize biomass, grain and whole biomass reported in the paper (weed biomass or surface litter are excluded). Surface litter biomass not included in any crops; weed biomass not included in switchgrass and miscanthus, but included in grass mixture and prairie. fraction Fraction of biomass biomass_plot biomass per plot on dry-weight basis (Grams_Per_SquareMeter) biomass_ha biomass (megaGrams_Per_Hectare) by multiplying column biomass per plot with 0.01 3. Spreadsheet: biomass_poplar Description: Maximum aboveground biomass measurements from poplar plots in Great Lakes Bioenergy Research Center (GLBRC) Biomass Cropping System Experiment (BCSE) during 2009-2015. Data shown in Figure 2. Note that poplar biomass was estimated from crop growth curves until the poplar was harvested in the winter of 2013-14. Variate Description year year of the observation method methods of poplar biomass sampling date day of the observation (mm/dd/yyyy) replicate each crop has four replicated plots, R1, R2, R3 and R4 diameter_at_ground poplar diameter (milliMeter) at the ground diameter_at_15cm poplar diameter (milliMeter) at 15 cm height biomass_tree biomass per plot (Grams_Per_Tree) biomass_ha biomass (megaGrams_Per_Hectare) by multiplying biomass per tree with 0.01 4. Spreadsheet: annual N leaching_vol-wtd conc Description: Annual leaching rate (kiloGrams_N_Per_Hectare) and volume-weighted mean N concentrations (milliGrams_N_Per_Liter) of nitrate (no3) and dissolved organic nitrogen (don) in the leachate samples collected from corn, switchgrass, miscanthus, native grass, restored prairie and poplar plots in Great Lakes Bioenergy Research Center (GLBRC) Biomass Cropping System Experiment (BCSE) during 2009-2016. Data for nitrogen leached and volume-wtd mean N concentration shown in Figure 3a and Figure 3b, respectively. Note that ammonium (nh4) concentration were much lower and often undetectable (<0.07 milliGrams_N_Per_Liter). Also note that in 2009 and 2010 crop-years, data from some replicates are missing. Variate Description crop “corn” “switchgrass” “miscanthus” “nativegrass” “restored prairie” “poplar” crop-year year of the observation replicate each crop has four replicated plots, R1, R2, R3 and R4 no3 leached annual leaching rates of nitrate (kiloGrams_N_Per_Hectare) don leached annual leaching rates of don (kiloGrams_N_Per_Hectare) vol-wtd no3 conc. Volume-weighted mean no3 concentration (milliGrams_N_Per_Liter) vol-wtd don conc. Volume-weighted mean don concentration (milliGrams_N_Per_Liter) 5. Spreadsheet: summary_N leached Description: Summary of total amount and forms of N leached (kiloGrams_N_Per_Hectare) and the percent of applied N lost to leaching over the seven years for corn, switchgrass, miscanthus, native grass, restored prairie and poplar plots in Great Lakes Bioenergy Research Center (GLBRC) Biomass Cropping System Experiment (BCSE) during 2009-2016. Data for nitrogen amount leached shown in Figure 4a and percent of applied N lost shown in Figure 4b. Note the fraction of unleached N includes in harvest, accumulation in root biomass, soil organic matter or gaseous N emissions were not measured in the study. Variate Description crop “corn” “switchgrass” “miscanthus” “nativegrass” “restored prairie” “poplar” no3 leached annual leaching rates of nitrate (kiloGrams_N_Per_Hectare) don leached annual leaching rates of don (kiloGrams_N_Per_Hectare) N unleached N unleached (kiloGrams_N_Per_Hectare) in other sources are not studied % of N applied N lost to leaching % of N applied N lost to leaching 6. Spreadsheet: annual DOC leachin_vol-wtd conc Description: Annual leaching rate (kiloGrams_Per_Hectare) and volume-weighted mean N concentrations (milliGrams_Per_Liter) of dissolved organic carbon (DOC) in the leachate samples collected from corn, switchgrass, miscanthus, native grass, restored prairie and poplar plots in Great Lakes Bioenergy Research Center (GLBRC) Biomass Cropping System Experiment (BCSE) during 2009-2016. Data for DOC leached and volume-wtd mean DOC concentration shown in Figure 5a and Figure 5b, respectively. Note that in 2009 and 2010 crop-years, water samples were not available for DOC measurements. Variate Description crop “corn” “switchgrass” “miscanthus” “nativegrass” “restored prairie” “poplar” crop-year year of the observation replicate each crop has four replicated plots, R1, R2, R3 and R4 doc leached annual leaching rates of nitrate (kiloGrams_Per_Hectare) vol-wtd doc conc. volume-weighted mean doc concentration (milliGrams_Per_Liter) 7. Spreadsheet: growing season length Description: Growing season length (days) of corn, switchgrass, miscanthus, native grass, restored prairie and poplar plots in the Great Lakes Bioenergy Research Center (GLBRC) Biomass Cropping System Experiment (BCSE) during 2009-2015. Date shown in Figure S2. Note that growing season is from the date of planting or emergence to the date of harvest (or leaf senescence in case of poplar). Variate Description crop “corn” “switchgrass” “miscanthus” “nativegrass” “restored prairie” “poplar” year year of the observation growing season length growing season length (days) 8. Spreadsheet: correlation_nh4 VS no3 Description: Correlation of ammonium (nh4+) and nitrate (no3-) concentrations (milliGrams_N_Per_Liter) in the leachate samples from corn, switchgrass, miscanthus, native grass, restored prairie and poplar plots in Great Lakes Bioenergy Research Center (GLBRC) Biomass Cropping System Experiment (BCSE) during 2013-2015. Data shown in Figure S3. Note that nh4+ concentration in the leachates was very low compared to no3- and don concentration and often undetectable in three crop-years (2013-2015) when measurements are available. Variate Description crop “corn” “switchgrass” “miscanthus” “nativegrass” “restored prairie” “poplar” date date of the observation (mm/dd/yyyy) replicate each crop has four replicated plots, R1, R2, R3 and R4 nh4 conc nh4 concentration (milliGrams_N_Per_Liter) no3 conc no3 concentration (milliGrams_N_Per_Liter) 9. Spreadsheet: correlations_don VS no3_doc VS don Description: Correlations of don and nitrate concentrations (milliGrams_N_Per_Liter); and doc (milliGrams_Per_Liter) and don concentrations (milliGrams_N_Per_Liter) in the leachate samples of corn, switchgrass, miscanthus, native grass, restored prairie and poplar plots in Great Lakes Bioenergy Research Center (GLBRC) Biomass Cropping System Experiment (BCSE) during 2013-2015. Data of correlation of don and nitrate concentrations shown in Figure S4 a and doc and don concentrations shown in Figure S4 b. Variate Description crop “corn” “switchgrass” “miscanthus” “nativegrass” “restored prairie” “poplar” year year of the observation don don concentration (milliGrams_N_Per_Liter) no3 no3 concentration (milliGrams_N_Per_Liter) doc doc concentration (milliGrams_Per_Liter)
Lauffenburger, Zachary H.; Maneta, Marco P.; Miller, Perry; Kimball, John S.(
, Environmental Research Letters)
Abstract
Increasing climate aridity and drought, exacerbated by global warming, are increasing risks for western United States of America (U.S.A.) rainfed farming, and challenging producers’ capacity to maintain production and profitability. With agricultural water demand in the region exceeding limited supplies and fewer opportunities to develop new water sources, rainfed agriculture is under increasing pressure to meet the nation’s growing food demands. This study examines three major western U.S.A. rainfed crops: barley, spring wheat, and winter wheat. We analyzed the relationship between crop repurposing (the ratio of acres harvested for grain to the total planted acres) to seasonal climatic water deficit (CWD). To isolate the climate signal from economic factors, our analysis accounted for the influence of crop prices on grain harvest. We used historical climate and agricultural data between 1958 and 2020 to model crop repurposing (e.g. forage) across the observed CWD record using a fixed effect model. Our methodology is applicable for any region and incorporates regional differences in farming and economic drivers. Our results indicate that farmers are less likely to harvest barley and spring wheat for grain when the spring CWD is above average. Of the major winter wheat growing regions, only the Northern High Plains in Texas showed a trend of decreasing grain harvest during high CWD. For the majority of major crop growing regions, grain prices increased with lower levels of grain harvest. Interestingly, winter wheat repurposing is significantly higher in the southern Great Plains (∼50% harvested for grain) compared to the rest of the West (∼90%). Our results highlight that the major barley and spring wheat regions’ grain harvests are vulnerable to high spring CWD and low summer CWD, while winter wheat grain harvest is unaffected by variable CWD in most of the West.
Zhang, Chen; Di, Liping; Lin, Li; Guo, Liying(
, 2019 8th International Conference on Agro-Geoinformatics (Agro-Geoinformatics))
It is still a challenge to generate the timely crop cover map at large geographic area due to the lack of reliable ground truths at early growing season. This paper introduces an efficient method to extract “trusted pixels” from the historical Cropland Data Layer (CDL) data using crop rotation patterns, which can be used to replace the actual ground truth in the crop mapping and other agricultural applications. A case study in the Nebraska state of USA is demonstrated. The common crop rotation patterns of four major crop types, corn, soybeans, winter wheat, and alfalfa, are compared and analyzed. The experiment results show a considerable number of pixels in CDL following the certain crop sequence during the past decade. Each observed crop type has at least one reliable crop rotation pattern. Based on the reliable crop rotation patterns, a great proportion of pixels can be correctly mapped a year ahead of the release of current-year CDL product. These trusted pixels can be potentially used to label training samples for crop type classification at early growing season.
The National Agricultural Statistics Service, the statistical arm of the US Department of Agriculture, and the Multi-Resolution Land Characteristics Consortium, a group of the US federal agencies, collect and publish several land-use and land-cover data sets. The aim of this study is to analyze the consistency of forestland estimates based on two widely used, publicly available products: the National Land-Cover Database (NLCD) and Cropland Data Layer (CDL). Both remote-sensing-based products provide raster-formatted land-cover categorization at a spatial resolution of 30 m. Although the processing of the yearly published CDL non-agricultural land-cover data is based on less frequently updated NLCD, the consistency of large-area forestland mapping between these two datasets has not been assessed. To assess the similarities and the differences between CDL- and NLCD-based forestland mappings for the state of North Carolina, we overlay the two data products for the years 2011 and 2016 in ArcMap 10.5.1 and analyze the location and attributes of the matched and mismatched forestland. We find that the mismatch is relatively smaller for the areas of the state where forests occupy larger shares of the total land, and that the relative mismatch is smaller in 2011 when compared to 2016. We also find that a large portion of the forestland mismatch is attributable to the dynamics of re-growth of periodically harvested and otherwise disturbed forests. Our results underscore the need for a holistic approach to data preparation, data attribution, and data accuracy when performing high-scale map-based analyses using each of these products.
Wu, Xiaocui, Xiao, Xiangming, Steiner, Jean, Yang, Zhengwei, Qin, Yuanwei, and Wang, Jie. Spatiotemporal Changes of Winter Wheat Planted and Harvested Areas, Photosynthesis and Grain Production in the Contiguous United States from 2008–2018. Retrieved from https://par.nsf.gov/biblio/10319120. Remote Sensing 13.9 Web. doi:10.3390/rs13091735.
Wu, Xiaocui, Xiao, Xiangming, Steiner, Jean, Yang, Zhengwei, Qin, Yuanwei, & Wang, Jie. Spatiotemporal Changes of Winter Wheat Planted and Harvested Areas, Photosynthesis and Grain Production in the Contiguous United States from 2008–2018. Remote Sensing, 13 (9). Retrieved from https://par.nsf.gov/biblio/10319120. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs13091735
Wu, Xiaocui, Xiao, Xiangming, Steiner, Jean, Yang, Zhengwei, Qin, Yuanwei, and Wang, Jie.
"Spatiotemporal Changes of Winter Wheat Planted and Harvested Areas, Photosynthesis and Grain Production in the Contiguous United States from 2008–2018". Remote Sensing 13 (9). Country unknown/Code not available. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs13091735.https://par.nsf.gov/biblio/10319120.
@article{osti_10319120,
place = {Country unknown/Code not available},
title = {Spatiotemporal Changes of Winter Wheat Planted and Harvested Areas, Photosynthesis and Grain Production in the Contiguous United States from 2008–2018},
url = {https://par.nsf.gov/biblio/10319120},
DOI = {10.3390/rs13091735},
abstractNote = {Winter wheat is a main cereal crop grown in the United States of America (USA), and the USA is the third largest wheat exporter globally. Timely and reliable in-season forecast and year-end estimation of winter wheat grain production in the USA are needed for regional and global food security. In this study, we assessed the consistency between the agricultural statistical reports and satellite-based data for winter wheat over the contiguous US (CONUS) at both the county and national scales. First, we compared the planted area estimates from the National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS) and the Cropland Data Layer (CDL) from 2008–2018. Second, we investigated the relationship between gross primary production (GPP) estimated by the vegetation photosynthesis model (VPM) and grain production from the NASS. Lastly, we explored the in-season utility of GPPVPM in monitoring seasonal production. Strong spatiotemporal consistency of planted areas was found between the NASS and CDL datasets. However, in the Southern Great Plains, both the CDL and NASS planted acreage were noticeable larger (>20%) than the NASS harvested area, where some winter wheat fields were used as forage for cattle grazing. County-level GPPVPM was linearly related with grain production of winter wheat, with an R2 value of 0.68 across the CONUS. The relationships between grain production and GPPVPM in those counties without a substantial difference (<20%) between planted and harvested area were much stronger and their harvest index (HIGPP) values ranged from 0.2–0.3. GPPVPM in May could explain about 70–90% of the variance of winter wheat grain production. Our findings highlight the potential of GPPVPM in winter wheat monitoring, especially for those high harvested/planted ratio, which could provide useful data to guide planning and marketing for decision makers, stakeholders, and the public.},
journal = {Remote Sensing},
volume = {13},
number = {9},
author = {Wu, Xiaocui and Xiao, Xiangming and Steiner, Jean and Yang, Zhengwei and Qin, Yuanwei and Wang, Jie},
}
Warning: Leaving National Science Foundation Website
You are now leaving the National Science Foundation website to go to a non-government website.
Website:
NSF takes no responsibility for and exercises no control over the views expressed or the accuracy of
the information contained on this site. Also be aware that NSF's privacy policy does not apply to this site.
