How well do crop modeling groups predict wheat phenology, given calibration data from the target population?

Plant phenology, which describes the timing of plant development, is a major aspect of plant response to environment and for crops, a major determinant of yield. Since climate change is projected to alter crop phenology worldwide, there is a large effort to predict phenology as a function of environment. Many studies have focused on comparing model equations for describing how phenology responds to weather but the effect of crop model calibration, also expected to be important, has received much less attention. The objective here was to obtain a rigorous evaluation of prediction capability of wheat crop phenology models, and to analyze the role of calibration. The 27 participants in this multi-model study were provided experimental data for calibration and asked to submit predictions for sites and years not represented in those data. Participants were instructed to use and document their 99usual99 calibration approach. Overall, the models provided quite good predictions of phenology (median of mean absolute error of 6.1 days) and did much better than simply using the average of observed values as predictor. Calibration was found to compensate to some extent for differences between models, specifically for differences in simulated time to emergence and differences in the choice of input variables. Conversely, different calibration approaches led to major differences in prediction error between models with the same structure. Given the large diversity of calibration approaches and the importance of calibration, there is a clear need for guidelines and tools to aid with calibration. Arguably the most important and difficult choice for calibration is the choice of parameters to estimate. Several recommendations for calibration practices are proposed. Model applications, including model studies of climate change impact, should focus more on the data used for calibration and on the calibration methods employed.