IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jmathe/v8y2020i5p717-d353649.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Comparison of Three Computational Approaches for Tree Crop Irrigation Decision Support

Author

Listed:
  • Panagiotis Christias

    (Faculty of Automatic Control and Computers, University Politehnica of Bucharest, 060042 Bucharest, Romania)

  • Ioannis N. Daliakopoulos

    (Department of Agriculture, Hellenic Mediterranean University, 71410 Heraklion, Greece
    LANDCO S.A., 15122 Maroussi, Greece)

  • Thrassyvoulos Manios

    (Department of Agriculture, Hellenic Mediterranean University, 71410 Heraklion, Greece)

  • Mariana Mocanu

    (Faculty of Automatic Control and Computers, University Politehnica of Bucharest, 060042 Bucharest, Romania)

Abstract

This paper explores methodologies for developing intelligent automated decision systems for complex processes that contain uncertainties, thus requiring computational intelligence. Irrigation decision support systems (IDSS) promise to increase water efficiency while sustaining crop yields. Here, we explored methodologies for developing intelligent IDSS that exploit statistical, measured, and simulated data. A simple and a fuzzy multicriteria approach as well as a Decision Tree based system were analyzed. The methodologies were applied in a sample of olive tree farms of Heraklion in the island of Crete, Greece, where water resources are scarce and crop management is generally empirical. The objective is to support decision for optimal financial profit through high yield while conserving water resources through optimal irrigation schemes under various (or uncertain) intrinsic and extrinsic conditions. Crop irrigation requirements are modelled using the FAO-56 equation. The results demonstrate that the decision support based on probabilistic and fuzzy approaches point to strategies with low amounts and careful distributed water irrigation strategies. The decision tree shows that decision can be optimized by examining coexisting factors. We conclude that irrigation-based decisions can be highly assisted by methods such as decision trees given the right choice of attributes while keeping focus on the financial balance between cost and revenue.

Suggested Citation

  • Panagiotis Christias & Ioannis N. Daliakopoulos & Thrassyvoulos Manios & Mariana Mocanu, 2020. "Comparison of Three Computational Approaches for Tree Crop Irrigation Decision Support," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 8(5), pages 1-26, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jmathe:v:8:y:2020:i:5:p:717-:d:353649
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7390/8/5/717/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7390/8/5/717/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. R. E. Bellman & L. A. Zadeh, 1970. "Decision-Making in a Fuzzy Environment," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 17(4), pages 141-164, December.
    2. Ali, M.H. & Talukder, M.S.U., 2008. "Increasing water productivity in crop production--A synthesis," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 95(11), pages 1201-1213, November.
    3. Carmona-Torres, Carmen & Parra-López, Carlos & Hinojosa-Rodríguez, Ascensión & Sayadi, Samir, 2014. "Farm-level multifunctionality associated with farming techniques in olive growing: An integrated modeling approach," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 97-114.
    4. Lovelli, S. & Perniola, M. & Ferrara, A. & Di Tommaso, T., 2007. "Yield response factor to water (Ky) and water use efficiency of Carthamus tinctorius L. and Solanum melongena L," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 92(1-2), pages 73-80, August.
    5. Michael Stuart, 1988. "28. Introduction to Probability and Statistics for Engineers and Scientists," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 151(2), pages 381-382, March.
    6. Vladimir Chernov & Oleksandr Dorokhov & Liudmyla Dorokhova & Vladimir Chubuk, 2015. "Using fuzzy logic for solution of economic tasks - two examples of decision making under uncertainty," Montenegrin Journal of Economics, Economic Laboratory for Transition Research (ELIT), vol. 11(1), pages 85-100.
    7. Gravel, Nicolas & Marchant, Thierry & Sen, Arunava, 2018. "Conditional expected utility criteria for decision making under ignorance or objective ambiguity," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 79-95.
    8. Er-Raki, S. & Chehbouni, A. & Hoedjes, J. & Ezzahar, J. & Duchemin, B. & Jacob, F., 2008. "Improvement of FAO-56 method for olive orchards through sequential assimilation of thermal infrared-based estimates of ET," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 95(3), pages 309-321, March.
    9. Günther Fischer, 2018. "Transforming the global food system," Nature, Nature, vol. 562(7728), pages 501-502, October.
    10. Allen, Richard G. & Pruitt, William O. & Wright, James L. & Howell, Terry A. & Ventura, Francesca & Snyder, Richard & Itenfisu, Daniel & Steduto, Pasquale & Berengena, Joaquin & Yrisarry, Javier Basel, 2006. "A recommendation on standardized surface resistance for hourly calculation of reference ETo by the FAO56 Penman-Monteith method," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 81(1-2), pages 1-22, March.
    11. Istanbulluoglu, Ahmet, 2009. "Effects of irrigation regimes on yield and water productivity of safflower (Carthamus tinctorius L.) under Mediterranean climatic conditions," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 96(12), pages 1792-1798, December.
    12. Paredes, P. & Wei, Z. & Liu, Y. & Xu, D. & Xin, Y. & Zhang, B. & Pereira, L.S., 2015. "Performance assessment of the FAO AquaCrop model for soil water, soil evaporation, biomass and yield of soybeans in North China Plain," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 152(C), pages 57-71.
    13. Egea, Gregorio & Diaz-Espejo, Antonio & Fernández, José E., 2016. "Soil moisture dynamics in a hedgerow olive orchard under well-watered and deficit irrigation regimes: Assessment, prediction and scenario analysis," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 164(P2), pages 197-211.
    14. Faruk Gul & Wolfgang Pesendorfer, 2014. "Expected Uncertain Utility Theory," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 82(1), pages 1-39, January.
    15. Blaney, Harry F. & Criddle, Wayne D., 1962. "Determining Consumptive Use and Irrigation Water Requirements," Technical Bulletins 171000, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    16. Luce, R Duncan & Krantz, David H, 1971. "Conditional Expected Utility," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 39(2), pages 253-271, March.
    17. Kipkorir, E. C. & Raes, D. & Massawe, B., 2002. "Seasonal water production functions and yield response factors for maize and onion in Perkerra, Kenya," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 56(3), pages 229-240, August.
    18. Moriana, A. & Girón, I.F. & Martín-Palomo, M.J. & Conejero, W. & Ortuño, M.F. & Torrecillas, A. & Moreno, F., 2010. "New approach for olive trees irrigation scheduling using trunk diameter sensors," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 97(11), pages 1822-1828, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Minhas, P.S. & Ramos, Tiago B. & Ben-Gal, Alon & Pereira, Luis S., 2020. "Coping with salinity in irrigated agriculture: Crop evapotranspiration and water management issues," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 227(C).
    2. Singh, Sukhbir & Angadi, Sangamesh V. & Grover, Kulbhushan K. & Hilaire, Rolston St. & Begna, Sultan, 2016. "Effect of growth stage based irrigation on soil water extraction and water use efficiency of spring safflower cultivars," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 177(C), pages 432-439.
    3. Santos, Reginaldo Ferreira & Bassegio, Doglas & de Almeida Silva, Marcelo, 2017. "Productivity and production components of safflower genotypes affected by irrigation at phenological stages," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 186(C), pages 66-74.
    4. Ahmad, Mirza Junaid & Iqbal, Muhammad Anjum & Choi, Kyung Sook, 2020. "Climate-driven constraints in sustaining future wheat yield and water productivity," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 231(C).
    5. Toumi, J. & Er-Raki, S. & Ezzahar, J. & Khabba, S. & Jarlan, L. & Chehbouni, A., 2016. "Performance assessment of AquaCrop model for estimating evapotranspiration, soil water content and grain yield of winter wheat in Tensift Al Haouz (Morocco): Application to irrigation management," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 163(C), pages 219-235.
    6. Geerts, Sam & Raes, Dirk, 2009. "Deficit irrigation as an on-farm strategy to maximize crop water productivity in dry areas," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 96(9), pages 1275-1284, September.
    7. Ayyoub, A. & Er-Raki, S. & Khabba, S. & Merlin, O. & Ezzahar, J. & Rodriguez, J.C. & Bahlaoui, A. & Chehbouni, A., 2017. "A simple and alternative approach based on reference evapotranspiration and leaf area index for estimating tree transpiration in semi-arid regions," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 188(C), pages 61-68.
    8. Shrestha, Nirman & Geerts, Sam & Raes, Dirk & Horemans, Stefaan & Soentjens, Sarah & Maupas, Fabienne & Clouet, Philippe, 2010. "Yield response of sugar beets to water stress under Western European conditions," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 97(2), pages 346-350, February.
    9. Vuciterna, Rina & Thomsen, Michael & Popp, Jennie & Musliu, Arben, 2017. "Efficiency and Competitiveness of Kosovo Raspberry Producers," 2017 Annual Meeting, February 4-7, 2017, Mobile, Alabama 252770, Southern Agricultural Economics Association.
    10. Collan, Mikael, 2008. "New Method for Real Option Valuation Using Fuzzy Numbers," Working Papers 466, IAMSR, Åbo Akademi.
    11. Çolak, Yeşim Bozkurt & Yazar, Attila & Gönen, Engin & Eroğlu, E. Çağlar, 2018. "Yield and quality response of surface and subsurface drip-irrigated eggplant and comparison of net returns," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 206(C), pages 165-175.
    12. Jewitt, Ian & Mukerji, Sujoy, 2017. "Ordering ambiguous acts," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 171(C), pages 213-267.
    13. Wenyao Niu & Yuan Rong & Liying Yu & Lu Huang, 2022. "A Novel Hybrid Group Decision Making Approach Based on EDAS and Regret Theory under a Fermatean Cubic Fuzzy Environment," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 10(17), pages 1-30, August.
    14. de Andres-Sanchez, Jorge, 2007. "Claim reserving with fuzzy regression and Taylor's geometric separation method," Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 40(1), pages 145-163, January.
    15. Mikhailov, L., 2004. "A fuzzy approach to deriving priorities from interval pairwise comparison judgements," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 159(3), pages 687-704, December.
    16. Hongyi Sun & Bingqian Zhang & Wenbin Ni, 2022. "A Hybrid Model Based on SEM and Fuzzy TOPSIS for Supplier Selection," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 10(19), pages 1-19, September.
    17. Liu, Yong-Jun & Zhang, Wei-Guo, 2015. "A multi-period fuzzy portfolio optimization model with minimum transaction lots," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 242(3), pages 933-941.
    18. Sakawa, Masatoshi & Kato, Kosuke, 1998. "An interactive fuzzy satisficing method for structured multiobjective linear fractional programs with fuzzy numbers," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 107(3), pages 575-589, June.
    19. Sajid Ali & Sang-Moon Lee & Choon-Man Jang, 2017. "Determination of the Most Optimal On-Shore Wind Farm Site Location Using a GIS-MCDM Methodology: Evaluating the Case of South Korea," Energies, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-22, December.
    20. Alekseev, Aleksandr & Sokolov, Mikhail V., 2021. "How to measure the average rate of change?," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 43-59.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jmathe:v:8:y:2020:i:5:p:717-:d:353649. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.