↓ Skip to main content

Pattern-oriented modelling as a novel way to verify and validate functional-structural plant models: a demonstration with the annual growth module of avocado.

Overview of attention for article published in Annals of Botany, February 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (82nd percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
4 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
20 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
69 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Pattern-oriented modelling as a novel way to verify and validate functional-structural plant models: a demonstration with the annual growth module of avocado.
Published in
Annals of Botany, February 2018
DOI 10.1093/aob/mcx187
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ming Wang, Neil White, Volker Grimm, Helen Hofman, David Doley, Grant Thorp, Bronwen Cribb, Ella Wherritt, Liqi Han, John Wilkie, Jim Hanan

Abstract

Functional-structural plant (FSP) models have been widely used to understand the complex interactions between plant architecture and underlying developmental mechanisms. However, to obtain evidence that a model captures these mechanisms correctly, a clear distinction must be made between model outputs used for calibration and thus verification, and outputs used for validation. In pattern-oriented modelling (POM), multiple verification patterns are used as filters for rejecting unrealistic model structures and parameter combinations, while a second, independent set of patterns is used for validation. To test the potential of POM for FSP modelling, a model of avocado (Persea americana 'Hass') was developed. The model of shoot growth is based on a conceptual model, the annual growth module (AGM), and simulates photosynthesis and adaptive carbon allocation at the organ level. The model was first calibrated using a set of observed patterns from a published article. Then, for validation, model predictions were compared with a different set of empirical patterns from various field studies that were not used for calibration. After calibration, our model simultaneously reproduced multiple observed architectural patterns. The model then successfully predicted, without further calibration, the validation patterns. The model supports the hypothesis that carbon allocation can be modelled as being dependent on current organ biomass and sink strength of each organ type, and also predicted the observed developmental timing of the leaf sink-source transition stage. These findings suggest that POM can help to improve the 'structural realism' of FSP models, i.e. the likelihood that a model reproduces observed patterns for the right reasons. Structural realism increases predictive power so that the response of an AGM to changing environmental conditions can be predicted. Accordingly, our FSP model provides a better but still parsimonious understanding of the mechanisms underlying known patterns of AGM growth.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 69 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 69 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 16 23%
Researcher 8 12%
Student > Master 8 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 4%
Professor 2 3%
Other 8 12%
Unknown 24 35%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 23 33%
Environmental Science 7 10%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 3%
Mathematics 2 3%
Engineering 2 3%
Other 4 6%
Unknown 29 42%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 14 June 2020.
All research outputs
#3,273,565
of 23,393,453 outputs
Outputs from Annals of Botany
#1,203
of 3,517 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#76,507
of 439,699 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Annals of Botany
#63
of 101 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,393,453 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 85th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,517 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 439,699 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 101 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.