Closed lpmorenoc closed 3 years ago
If WFP does not have any effect when the volumetric water content is above 0.5 of the difference between field capacity and wilting point:
Palmira
Quilichao
If we also reduce the effect of WFG as we did for WFP: Palmira
Quilichao
the LAI is not affected enough: Palmira
Quilichao
LAI when WFG is restricting from field capacity while WFP when the water content is half: Palmira
Quilichao
Nigeria (WFP=0.5, WFG=1):
Nigeria (WFP=0.5, WFG=0.5):
Quilichao (WFP=0.5, WFG=1):
Quilichao (WFP=0.5, WFG=0.5):
Thailand (WFP=0.5, WFG=1):
Thailand (WFP=0.5, WFG=0.5):
Quilichao (CCQU8201) (WFP: 0.75, WFG: 1):
Nigeria (IIIB8201) (WFP: 0.75, WFG: 1):
Thailand (AGKK1502) (WFP: 0.75, WFG: 1):
I think I will keep WFP limit as 0.75 while WFG will maintain as 1. However, I need to review the reduction in the storage weight in Nigeria.
If there is not reallocation of assimilates in the Nigerian trial:
It is mainly due to the high water stress values:
If WFP is 0.5 still without reallocation:
Nigeria Increasing RUE with WFG=1 and WFP=0.5 (no reallocation):
With 5% reallocation:
Using WFG: 0.75 and WFP 0.5 (no reallocation):
Quilichao Using WFG: 0.75 and WFP 0.5 (sensitivity to senescence 0.3):
Increasing sensitivity to senescence due to water stress (0.5):
If we use WFG: 0.5 and WFP: 0.5 and we increase the sensitivity to senescence more (0.7):
Other experiments with WFP= 0.5 and WFG=0.75: Palmira (Colombia)
Thailand:
Quilichao (Colombia)
Quilichao (Colombia)
James suggested to bring back the effect of water stress on photosynthesis. Here some simulations before and after the change: Before Thailand
Now Thailand
Before Palmira:
Now Palmira
Before Quilichao
Now Quilichao