IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0315493.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Gradient boosting for yield prediction of elite maize hybrid ZhengDan 958

Author

Listed:
  • Oumnia Ennaji
  • Sfia Baha
  • Leonardus Vergutz
  • Achraf El Allali

Abstract

Understanding accurate methods for predicting yields in complex agricultural systems is critical for effective nutrient management and crop growth. Machine learning has proven to be an important tool in this context. Numerous studies have investigated its potential for predicting yields under different conditions. Among these algorithms, Random Forest (RF) has gained prominence due to its ability to manage large data sets with high dimensions, as well as its ability to uncover complicated non-linear relationships and interactions between variables. RF is particularly suitable for scenarios with categorical variables and missing data. Given the complex web of management practices and their nonlinear effects on yield prediction, it is important to investigate new machine learning algorithms. In this context, our study focused on the evaluation of gradient boosting methods, particularly Extreme Gradient Boosting (XGB) and Gradient Boosting Regressor (GBR), as potential candidates for yield estimation of the maize hybrid Zhengdan 958. Our aim was not only to evaluate and compare these algorithms with existing approaches, but also to comprehensively analyze the resulting model uncertainties. Our approach includes comparing multiple machine learning algorithms, developing and selecting suitable features, fine-tuning the models by training and adjusting the hyperparameters, and visualizing the results. Using a recent dataset of over 1700 maize yield data pairs, our evaluation included a spectrum of algorithms. Our results show robust prediction accuracy for all algorithms. In particular, the predictions of XGB (RMSE = 0.37, R2 = 0.87 and MAE = 0.26) and GBR(RMSE = 0.39, R2 = 0.86 and MAE = 0.27), emphasized the central role of weather characteristics and confirmed the high dependence of crop yield prediction on environmental attributes. Utilizing the capabilities of gradient boosting for yield prediction holds immense potential and is consistent with the promise of this method to serve as a catalyst for further investigation in this evolving field

Suggested Citation

  • Oumnia Ennaji & Sfia Baha & Leonardus Vergutz & Achraf El Allali, 2024. "Gradient boosting for yield prediction of elite maize hybrid ZhengDan 958," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 19(12), pages 1-16, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0315493
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0315493
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0315493
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0315493&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0315493?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Wenting JIANG & Xiaohu LIU & Wen QI & Xiaonan XU & Yucui ZHU, 2017. "Using QUEFTS model for estimating nutrient requirements of maize in the Northeast China," Plant, Soil and Environment, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 63(11), pages 498-504.
    2. Holst, Jirko & Liu, Wenping & Zhang, Qian & Doluschitz, Reiner, 2014. "Crop evapotranspiration, arable cropping systems and water sustainability in southern Hebei, P.R. China," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 47-54.
    3. Diebold, Francis X & Mariano, Roberto S, 2002. "Comparing Predictive Accuracy," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 20(1), pages 134-144, January.
    4. Paudel, Dilli & Boogaard, Hendrik & de Wit, Allard & Janssen, Sander & Osinga, Sjoukje & Pylianidis, Christos & Athanasiadis, Ioannis N., 2021. "Machine learning for large-scale crop yield forecasting," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 187(C).
    5. Timo Teräsvirta & Chien‐Fu Lin & Clive W. J. Granger, 1993. "Power Of The Neural Network Linearity Test," Journal of Time Series Analysis, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 14(2), pages 209-220, March.
    6. Pavithra Mahesh & Rajkumar Soundrapandiyan, 2024. "Yield prediction for crops by gradient-based algorithms," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 19(8), pages 1-20, August.
    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. Terasvirta, Timo, 2006. "Forecasting economic variables with nonlinear models," Handbook of Economic Forecasting, in: G. Elliott & C. Granger & A. Timmermann (ed.), Handbook of Economic Forecasting, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 8, pages 413-457, Elsevier.
    2. Szafranek, Karol, 2019. "Bagged neural networks for forecasting Polish (low) inflation," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 35(3), pages 1042-1059.
    3. Shintani, Mototsugu, 2005. "Nonlinear Forecasting Analysis Using Diffusion Indexes: An Application to Japan," Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 37(3), pages 517-538, June.
    4. Timo Teräsvirta & Marcelo C. Medeiros & Gianluigi Rech, 2006. "Building neural network models for time series: a statistical approach," Journal of Forecasting, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 25(1), pages 49-75.
    5. Ali Taiebnia & Shapour Mohammadi, 2023. "Forecast accuracy of the linear and nonlinear autoregressive models in macroeconomic modeling," Journal of Forecasting, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 42(8), pages 2045-2062, December.
    6. Fabio Gobbi, 2021. "Evaluating Forecasts from State-Dependent Autoregressive Models for US GDP Growth Rate. Comparison with Alternative Approaches," Advances in Management and Applied Economics, SCIENPRESS Ltd, vol. 11(6), pages 1-7.
    7. Henrik Amilon, 2003. "A neural network versus Black-Scholes: a comparison of pricing and hedging performances," Journal of Forecasting, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 22(4), pages 317-335.
    8. Owusu Junior, Peterson & Tiwari, Aviral Kumar & Tweneboah, George & Asafo-Adjei, Emmanuel, 2022. "GAS and GARCH based value-at-risk modeling of precious metals," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 75(C).
    9. Bruno, Giancarlo, 2009. "Non-linear relation between industrial production and business surveys data," MPRA Paper 42337, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    10. Hauzenberger, Niko & Huber, Florian & Klieber, Karin & Marcellino, Massimiliano, 2025. "Bayesian neural networks for macroeconomic analysis," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 249(PC).
    11. Anatoly A. Peresetsky & Ruslan I. Yakubov, 2017. "Autocorrelation in an unobservable global trend: does it help to forecast market returns?," International Journal of Computational Economics and Econometrics, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 7(1/2), pages 152-169.
    12. Kelly Burns & Imad Moosa, 2017. "Demystifying the Meese–Rogoff puzzle: structural breaks or measures of forecasting accuracy?," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 49(48), pages 4897-4910, October.
    13. João C. Claudio & Katja Heinisch & Oliver Holtemöller, 2020. "Nowcasting East German GDP growth: a MIDAS approach," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 58(1), pages 29-54, January.
    14. Antonio Rubia & Trino-Manuel Ñíguez, 2006. "Forecasting the conditional covariance matrix of a portfolio under long-run temporal dependence," Journal of Forecasting, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 25(6), pages 439-458.
    15. Athanasopoulos, George & de Carvalho Guillén, Osmani Teixeira & Issler, João Victor & Vahid, Farshid, 2011. "Model selection, estimation and forecasting in VAR models with short-run and long-run restrictions," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 164(1), pages 116-129, September.
    16. Hao Chen & Qiulan Wan & Yurong Wang, 2014. "Refined Diebold-Mariano Test Methods for the Evaluation of Wind Power Forecasting Models," Energies, MDPI, vol. 7(7), pages 1-14, July.
    17. Antonello D’Agostino & Kieran Mcquinn & Karl Whelan, 2012. "Are Some Forecasters Really Better Than Others?," Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 44(4), pages 715-732, June.
    18. Cavit Pakel & Neil Shephard & Kevin Sheppard, 2009. "Nuisance parameters, composite likelihoods and a panel of GARCH models," Economics Papers 2009-W12, Economics Group, Nuffield College, University of Oxford.
    19. Christophe Chorro & Florian Ielpo & Benoît Sévi, 2017. "The contribution of jumps to forecasting the density of returns," Post-Print halshs-01442618, HAL.
    20. Carlo Altavilla & Paul De Grauwe, 2010. "Forecasting and combining competing models of exchange rate determination," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 42(27), pages 3455-3480.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:plo:pone00:0315493. 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: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    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.