Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-mlc7c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-18T19:38:24.298Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Growth and yield estimation of banana through mathematical modelling: a systematic review

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 May 2022

S. L. Jayasinghe
Affiliation:
Department of Export Agriculture, Faculty of Animal Science and Export Agriculture, Uva Wellassa University, Passara Road, Badulla, 90000, Sri Lanka
C. J. K. Ranawana
Affiliation:
Department of Export Agriculture, Faculty of Animal Science and Export Agriculture, Uva Wellassa University, Passara Road, Badulla, 90000, Sri Lanka
I. C. Liyanage
Affiliation:
Department of Export Agriculture, Faculty of Animal Science and Export Agriculture, Uva Wellassa University, Passara Road, Badulla, 90000, Sri Lanka
P. E. Kaliyadasa*
Affiliation:
Department of Export Agriculture, Faculty of Animal Science and Export Agriculture, Uva Wellassa University, Passara Road, Badulla, 90000, Sri Lanka
*
Author for correspondence: P. E. Kaliyadasa, E-mail: ewon@uwu.ac.lk
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Banana is one of the main fruit crops in the world as it is a rich source of nutrients and has recently become popular for its fibre, particularly as a raw material in many industries. Mathematical models are crucial for strategic and forecasting applications; however, models related to the banana crop are less common, and reviews on previous modelling efforts are scarce, emphasizing the need for evidence-based studies on this topic. Therefore, we reviewed 75 full-text articles published between 1985 and 2021 for information on mathematical models related to banana growth and, fruit and fibre yield. We analysed results in order to provide a descriptive synthesis of selected studies. According to the co-occurrence analysis, most studies were conducted on the mathematical modelling of banana fruit production. Modellers often used multiple linear regression models to estimate banana plant growth and fruit yield. Existing models incorporate a range of predictor variables, growth conditions, varieties, modelling approaches and evaluation methods, which limits comparative evaluation and selection of the best model. However, the banana process-based simulation model ‘SIMBA’ and artificial neural network have proven their robust applicability to estimate banana plant growth. This review shows that there is insufficient information on mathematical models related to banana fibre yield. This review could aid stakeholders in identifying the strengths and limitations of existing models, as well as providing insight on how to build novel and reliable banana crop-related mathematical models.

Type
Crops and Soils Review
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press

Introduction

Banana (Musa spp.) is one of the world's oldest cultivated fruit plants (Perrier et al., Reference Perrier, De Langhe, Donohue, Lentfer, Vrydaghs, Bakry and Jenny2011; De Langhe et al., Reference De Langhe, Perrier, Donohue and Denham2015), originating in South East Asia and Indochina (Simmonds, Reference Simmonds1962; Nyombi, Reference Nyombi2010). Banana is also considered the fifth most valuable commercialized agricultural food crop, with a cultivated area of 3.8 million hectares over 122 countries worldwide (Hossain et al., Reference Hossain, Abdulla and Majumder2016; FAO, 2019, 2021). More than 1000 banana varieties are grown across the globe (FAO, 2021); among Asian countries, India is prominent for producing bananas, contributing approximately 25.7% of the total return (Rathod and Mishra, Reference Rathod and Mishra2018). The Asia-Pacific region has a 61% share of global consumption in the banana market. Banana is an important nutritional supplement since they contain 67 calories per 100 g of fruit (Sharrock and Lusty, Reference Sharrock and Lusty2000). Banana is rich in calcium, phosphorus and nitrogen and, supplies 23% of our daily potassium requirement (Mohapatra et al., Reference Mohapatra, Mishra and Sutar2010; Hossain et al., Reference Hossain, Abdulla and Majumder2016).

Bananas and plantains (i.e. cooking banana) are rhizomatous herbs whose inflorescence is produced by the terminal bud. The sequence of cycles is repeated for one to fifty generations or longer, indicating that is perennial (Turner, Reference Turner1994; Tixier et al., Reference Tixier, Malézieux and Dorel2004). The key developmental phases of banana plants contain sucker emergence, vegetative growth, flowering and fruiting (Tixier et al., Reference Tixier, Malézieux and Dorel2004).

The economically vital part of the banana plant is a ripe fruit; however, unripen fruit, inflorescence, leaves, stem and rhizome parts are used in many nations as a cooked vegetable and animal feed. Furthermore, banana can be known as a herbal plant as it is enriched with medicinal benefits. All parts of the banana have nutritional and therapeutic value (Kumar et al., Reference Kumar, Bhowmik, Duraivel and Umadevi2012), and prior studies have shown that the banana is abundant in bioactive compounds (carotenoids, flavonoids, phenolics, amines, phytosterols, vitamins) that have antioxidant qualities and can be exploited to provide pharmaceutical and health benefits (Pereira and Maraschin, Reference Pereira and Maraschin2015; Singh et al., Reference Singh, Singh, Kaur and Singh2016; Sidhu and Zafar, Reference Sidhu and Zafar2018).

Moreover, banana fibre has become a more popular type of natural fibre due to its many beneficial properties such as biodegradability, recyclability, chemical-free, low cost, low weight, high strength, non-toxic and odour-free (Vinoth et al., Reference Vinoth, Gokulnath, Barathkumar, Ahildarshan and Gokulprakash2018). Besides, it is a better alternative for synthetic and other types of natural fibres (Subagyo and Chafidz, Reference Subagyo and Chafidz2018). Fibre output is greatly influenced by variety; Musa textiles, for example, is known for its superior fibre characteristics. The extractable pseudostem and fibre yield percentage in the desert group (Musa acuminate) were found to be 46.4 and 0.53%, while in the cooking group (Musa paradisiaca), extractable pseudostem and fibre yield were 55.2 and 0.78%, respectively (Preethi and Balakrishna, Reference Preethi and Balakrishna2013). The high percentage of fibre consists of the pseudostem and the banana peduncle thrown away after harvesting fruits (Vinoth et al., Reference Vinoth, Gokulnath, Barathkumar, Ahildarshan and Gokulprakash2018). These fibres are used in many fields, such as textiles, paper industry as well as for bio and synthetic composites to be used in wide applications (Rosentrater et al., Reference Rosentrater, Todey and Persyn2009; Vinoth et al., Reference Vinoth, Gokulnath, Barathkumar, Ahildarshan and Gokulprakash2018; Priyadarshana et al., Reference Priyadarshana, Kaliyadasa, Ranawana and Senarathna2020). Also, banana fibre has been used to manufacture marine ropes as it is highly resistant to seawater due to the buoyancy properties (Subagyo and Chafidz, Reference Subagyo and Chafidz2018). Banana fibres have also been used as a raw material in building construction and handicraft manufacturing in the automotive industry because of their more robust physical characteristics. Banana fibre is already a more commercialized product in Japan, Germany and Australia as a natural fibre source. Currently, there is a higher tendency in promoting fibre as a by-product of the desert type banana cultivations in other Southeast Asian countries such as Sri Lanka and India (Vinoth et al., Reference Vinoth, Gokulnath, Barathkumar, Ahildarshan and Gokulprakash2018; Priyadarshana et al., Reference Priyadarshana, Kaliyadasa, Ranawana and Senarathna2020).

In the agricultural sector, modelling techniques are crucial in predicting crop growth and yield, allowing for more efficient and precise decision-making at present and in the future too (Jayasinghe et al., Reference Jayasinghe, Suriyagoda, Karunarathne and Wijeratna2018; Basso and Antle, Reference Basso and Antle2020; Hammer et al., Reference Hammer, Sentelhas and Mariano2020). In comparison, a large number of crop models have been developed and used for the main cereal crops (Rosenzweig et al., Reference Rosenzweig, Elliott, Deryng, Ruane, Müller, Arneth and Khabarov2014; Beza et al., Reference Beza, Silva, Kooistra and Reidsma2017), with little attention paid to tropical perennials (Rozendaal et al., Reference Rozendaal, Slingerland, Zuidema, Giller and Anten2020) such as banana. Crop modelling approaches are based on three key concepts: system, model and simulation (de Wit et al., Reference de Wit, Boogaard, Fumagalli, Janssen, Knapen, van Kraalingen, N, Supit, van der Wijngaart and van Diepen2019; Silva and Giller, Reference Silva and Giller2021). A ‘model’ is a simplified depiction of a system distinguished as physical, conceptual, pictorial and mathematical (Putri et al., Reference Putri, Purwanto, Pramono, Asbari, Wijayanti and Hyun2020); a ‘system' is a specific portion of an actuality that comprises interrelated elements, and the term ‘simulation’ refers to the use of computer models to mimic a condition or process (de Wit et al., Reference de Wit, Boogaard, Fumagalli, Janssen, Knapen, van Kraalingen, N, Supit, van der Wijngaart and van Diepen2019).

Among the different models, a mathematical model provides a description of the behaviour of real-world systems in mathematical concepts, terms, and languages such as equations, inequalities, functions, variables and constraints (Chaturvedi, Reference Chaturvedi2017). Moreover, these models allow for making crop predictions under specific environmental conditions (Medina-Ruíz et al., Reference Medina-Ruíz, Mercado-Luna, Soto-Zarazúa, Torres-Pacheco and Rico-García2011). Mathematical models are divided into various categories or types based on the different features and purposes for which they have been constructed (Fig. 1). To investigate crop reactions in various cropping systems, researchers plan to use hybrid models that integrate various models (Wang et al., Reference Wang, Takle and Shen2001; Jayasinghe et al., Reference Jayasinghe, Kumar and Kaliyadasa2021; Shahhosseini et al., Reference Shahhosseini, Hu, Huber and Archontoulis2021).

Fig. 1. Graphical representation of mathematical model classification based on the different features and purposes.

Crop simulation models (CSMs) that are process-based mathematical representations of the mechanisms that contribute to crop growth, development, and yield in response to genotype, environmental variables, and management (Stöckle et al., Reference Stöckle, Donatelli and Nelson2003; Antle et al., Reference Antle, Basso, Conant, Godfray, Jones, Herrero, Howittg, Keating, Munoz-Carpena, Rosenzweig, Tittonell and Wheeler2017). Crop modelling and machine learning are combined to provide crop yield forecasts and externalities quickly (Droutsas et al., Reference Droutsas, Challinor, Swiderski and Semenov2019; Folberth et al., Reference Folberth, Baklanov, Balkovič, Skalský, Khabarov and Obersteiner2019; Silva and Giller, Reference Silva and Giller2021). Hence, mathematical models have been used to estimate crop yield gaps (Van Ittersum et al., Reference Van Ittersum, Van Bussel, Wolf, Grassini, Van Wart, Guilpart, Claessens, de Groot, Wiebe, Mason-D'Croz, Yang, Boogaard, van Oort, van Loon, Saito, Adimo, Adjei-Nsiah, Agali, Bala, Chikowo, Kaizzi, Kouressy, Makoi, Ouattara, Tesfaye and Cassman2016; Schils et al., Reference Schils, Olesen, Kersebaum, Rijk, Oberforster, Kalyada, Khitrykau, Gobin, Kirchev, Manolova, Manolov, Trnka, Hlavinka, Palosuo, Peltonen-Sainio, Jauhiainen, Lorgeou, Marrou, Danalatos, Archontoulis, Fodor, Spink, Roggero, Bassu, Pulina, Seehusen, Uhlen, Żyłowskas, Nieróbca, Kozyra, Silva, Maçãs, Coutinho, Ion, Takáč, Mínguez, Eckersten, Levy, Herra, Hiltbrunner, Kryvobok, Kryvoshein, Bradley, Kindred, Topp, Boogaard, de Groot, Lesschen, van Bussel, Wolf, Zijlstra, van Loon and van lttersum2018), the gap between food demand and supply (Keating et al., Reference Keating, Herrero, Carberry, Gardner and Cole2014), and the projected land area required to feed the world's population (Yin et al., Reference Yin, Stam, Kropff and Schapendonk2003; Chenu et al., Reference Chenu, Chapman, Tardieu, McLean, Welcker and Hammer2009).

According to the literature, mathematical modelling approaches have rarely been employed in banana agro-systems (Jannoyer, Reference Jannoyer1995). Nonetheless, the few studies that have used mathematical models to forecast banana bunch yield revealed a lack of specificity in modelling outcomes, inadequate information on model development, small sample size, unclear assumptions and bias in model evaluation. Soltani et al. (Reference Soltani, Alimardani and Omid2010), for example, used the water displacement approach to construct a novel mathematical methodology for forecasting the volume of banana fruit, claiming that the method is sufficiently accurate because the regression coefficient was 0.974. They did not, however, fully describe the method, regression equation, and evaluation, as well as the fact that the amount of water absorbed by the banana impacts its attributes and that the results cannot be generalized to other situations. Ganry and Chillet (Reference Ganry and Chillet2008) used the thermal time to establish a model for forecasting the harvest time of banana bunches. In their experiment, improper position of temperature sensors resulted in imprecise harvesting date estimation, as well as no detailed estimations or computations were included. Yamaguchi and Araki, (Reference Yamaguchi and Araki2004) estimated the biomass of banana plants using linear regression models based on pseudostem volume for EAHB cultivars under rainfed cultivation. Despite having high fits (R 2 = 0.93), a small sample size (n = 14), and the exclusion of moisture stress from their model, the applicability of the model for future work in biomass prediction remains dubious. Woomer et al. (Reference Woomer, Bekunda and Nkalubo1999) used bunch volume to estimate bunch weights in rainfed cultivation of cooking banana (EAHB cv. Mbwazirume) with great precision (R 2 = 0.85–0.94), but yields were not predicted as the parameters changed until harvest (Jullien et al., Reference Jullien, Malézieux, Michaux-Ferrière, Chillet and Ney2001). Their model is inaccurate for use in bunch yield prediction, and no details on possible stress were provided in their model development.

Furthermore, little effort has been made to model the fibre yield potential of banana plants. As mathematical modelling becomes a more ubiquitous and useful tool to understand plant responses, attention must be paid to reviewing previous studies related to modelling approaches. Such efforts would bridge the knowledge gap and provide a foundation for further investigations in mathematical modelling regarding the growth and yield of banana crops. Therefore, the main objective of the present review was to explore studies related to mathematical models that were used to estimate the growth and yield of bananas for both fruit and fibre and to synthesize the available information.

Method

Search strategy, extraction and recording data

The systematic review was based on the Preferred Reporting Items guidelines for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement (Moher et al., Reference Moher, Liberati, Tetzlaff and Altman2010; Jayasinghe and Kumar, Reference Jayasinghe and Kumar2021). We primarily employed the Scopus database to search related studies. The relevant articles and the search terms were iterated and refined to locate the most specific studies. We developed three sets of search terms [(TITLE-ABS-KEY (banana OR musa OR plantain OR banana OR false AND banana) AND TITLE-ABS-KEY (model* OR simulate* OR modelling OR predict* OR mathematic* OR estimate OR forecast OR statistic OR regression) AND TITLE-ABS-KEY (yield OR fibre OR growth OR fibre OR product* OR fruit OR weight OR bunch OR biomass)) AND PUBYEAR >1984] and conducted the search in the title, abstract and keywords using the search terms. We selected main subject disciplines (Agricultural and Biological Sciences, Engineering, Chemical Engineering, Environmental Science, Chemistry, Biochemistry, Materials Science, Energy etc.) connected to our topic to improve the sensitivity of the search for locating relevant literature from the Scopus database (Sargeant and O'Connor, Reference Sargeant and O'Connor2020). Conference papers, conference abstracts and short surveys were excluded, retaining only peer-reviewed journals, books, book chapters and reviews. Retaining only peer-reviewed publications can help ensure that the articles are reviewed by experts in the field (Meline, Reference Meline2006) and include sufficient facts about the methodologies they used in their studies. We also excluded articles written in languages other than English. The advanced search option available in Google Scholar was also used to find the full-reviewed articles and grey literature related to our scope. The search information yielded a total of 1082 articles, including 854 and 228 articles from the Scopus database and Google scholar, respectively. All the search information was initially recorded in a ‘comma-delimited (CSV)’ document with authors' details, titles, published years, abstract, keywords and journal details. Duplicates were deleted from all of the references using the Endnote software (version X9). After removing duplicate records, the sample was reduced to 567 records.

Prospective studies for systematic review were then appraised for eligibility based on relevance and acceptability, following the exclusion protocol suggested by previous work (Meline, Reference Meline2006; Linnenluecke et al., Reference Linnenluecke, Marrone and Singh2020). Accordingly, some studies (n = 445) were excluded from the further review because they (a) were clearly not in the scope of studies related to banana, Musa spp., or other fibre species (b) included incomplete or ambiguous methods and (c) failed to report sufficient statistics or data for estimating growth, development, fruit yield or fibre yield. As a result, a total of 122 full-text articles were eligible for further screening. Finally, the review team carefully selected 75 full-text articles for inclusion in the present review based on their relevance to the topic of the present study (Fig. 2). After screening related full-text articles, details were extracted from the manuscripts. The information on authors, year of publication, country of the study, statistical approach and the key findings were tabulated. Then, the articles were divided into three tables (Tables are given in the supplementary material as Table S1, S2, and S3), including articles related to mathematical modelling to estimate (1) fruit yield, (2) fibre yield and (3) growth and development of a banana plant.

Fig. 2. The protocol of preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA).

Mapping of keywords to visualize research topic

The thematic content of selected studies' keywords was visualized on a co-occurrence map using the VOSviewer software 1.6.5 (http://www.vosviewer.com, accessed on 9 February 2022) (Moral-Muñoz et al., Reference Moral-Muñoz, López-Herrera, Herrera-Viedma and Cobo2019; Marchiori and Franco, Reference Marchiori and Franco2020). The positioning of keywords on the map is based on the co-occurrence of the corresponding keywords related to mathematical models used to estimate bananas' growth and yield. The co-occurrence map was visualized based on 75 papers on mathematical models to estimate banana growth and yield.

Results

Co-occurrence analysis based on keywords

As per Fig. 3, the positioning of 652 keywords on the map was based on a clustering algorithm allocated by VOSviewer software 1.6.18. The similarity of any two keywords is inversely proportional to the distance between, with a smaller distance indicating a stronger similarity or relationship between the keywords (McAllister et al., Reference McAllister, Lennertz and Atencio Mojica2021). The frequency co-occurrence clearly shows the main keywords as well as how keywords link to each other within our field of study. We found that, the highest number of articles have been forcused on the mathematical modelling of banana fruit yield. The smallest occupancy is visualized by ‘natural-fibre’ within the context of our review title, signifying that a lower number of studies have been executed on this subject (Fig. 3).

Fig. 3. Colour online. The co-occurrence of keyword map based on the 75 selected full-text articles on mathematical models to estimate yield and growth of banana. Note. The occurrence of keywords was specified to the colour of a specific cluster algorithm.

The map identified six keyword clusters [(1) prediction/crop yield/growth rate, etc, (2) fruits, (3) natural fibre/tensile strength, (4) musa/banana (5) fruit production and (6) numerical model/ regression] based on probabilistic latent semantic analysis (McAllister et al., Reference McAllister, Lennertz and Atencio Mojica2021). Except for some noticeable overlap on the left side of the map where clusters of 5 and 6 terms are related and had tied together with clusters 1 and 4, most of the clusters (e.g., 1, 2, 3, 4) are distinguishable from one another. These overlapping map clusters indicate that the clusters are related but not similar enough to be grouped together (Fig. 3). Furthermore, it indicates a strong association between clusters and the connection to the same field of study, ensuring that banana modelling is more closely associated with fields such as fruit production, growth and yield, the later in the context of our systematic review. Natural fibre, tensile strength and related modelling aspects are further away and even have small clusters (Fig. 3), indicating that natural fibres and related modelling aspects relevant to the banana crop are scarce in publications.

Basic statistics of published papers related to banana crop modelling

The number of publications related to mathematical modelling on banana fruit production (a, b, c), growth and development (d, e, f), and fibre-related characteristics (g, h, i) by year, country, and mathematical approach is shown in Fig. 4. In 2020, the highest number of papers related to banana yield modelling attempts were reported (Fig. 4(a)), and India and Brazil, are the major countries where many scientists are interested in the topic (Fig. 4(b)). Multiple linear regression (MLR) approaches have been widely employed in the development of banana yield models, followed by machine learning techniques such as artificial neural networks (ANN) (Fig. 4(c)). The years 2009 and 2020, followed by 2008, had the largest number of publications among the efforts made in developing models to predict growth and development (Fig. 4(d)), and France being the top country that significantly contributed for developing growth-related models (Fig. 4(e)). As shown in Fig. 4(f), the majority of published models were built using MLR and CSM. Most articles on banana fibre were published in 2019, followed by 2017 (Fig. 4(g)), and India was the leading country for these publications (Fig. 4(h)). There were no particular fibre-related models generated using mathematical approaches (Fig. 4(i)), but the majority of articles in the literature indicated the use of mechanical measures to assess tensile strength, and several other characteristics were linked to banana fibre processing.

Fig. 4. Number of publications related to mathematical modelling on banana fruit yield (a, b, c), growth and development (d, e, f), and fibre-related characteristics (g, h, i) by year, country, and mathematical approach. Note. The country of the publication was chosen solely based on the first author.

Modelling of banana fruit production

Thirty four of the full-text articles were related to banana fruit production. The current review highlights how the fruit yield of banana has been estimated through mathematical modelling approaches in previous studies. In this context, several previous studies have shown evidence of how they used simulation, mechanistic, and/or statistical models to estimate the yield of bananas (Fig. 4 and Table S1).

MLR has been more prevalently used (38%) in modelling banana fruit/bunch yield according to the content analysis of previous studies (Fig. 4). Salvacion (Reference Salvacion2020) used time series analysis and a regression model to investigate the impact of climate (i.e., annual rainfall, frequency of wet days, precipitation seasonality, annual mean temperature and temperature seasonality) on banana yield at the provincial level in the Philippines. MLR analysis revealed that 10% of banana-producing areas in the country are affected by local weather conditions (Salvacion, Reference Salvacion2020). Sharath (Reference Sharath2016) used stepwise multiple regression and it showed that plant height at the fourth month, girth at the fifth month, the number of fruits per bunch, and fruit girth at the final stage were the most significant factors in predicting total banana yield, while sucker parameters and number of leaves had no significant impact on banana yield. Zucoloto et al. (Reference Zucoloto, Lima, Coelho and Xavier2013) found that morphological characteristics such as the third leaf's width, number of leaves per tree, the bunch's diameter, and the number of bananas per bunch estimated the bunch weight of banana cv. Prata Ana using MLR models with moderate accuracy (Coefficient of Determination (R 2) = 0.58).

Olivares et al. (Reference Olivares, Calero, Rey, Lobo, Landa and Gómez2022) converted soil morphological factors in banana plantations to numerical scale and created a multiple linear regression model between those parameters and the banana crop Productivity Index (PI), with R 2 = 0.645 as the model accuracy. Robinson and Human (Reference Robinson and Human1988) used regression allometries to forecast banana harvest based on seasonal variations in bunch development rate and bunch mass. However, 15% coefficient of variation (CV) reflected a 100-day harvest time, limiting the prediction capacity of the derived model.

Wairegi et al. (Reference Wairegi, Van Asten, Tenywa and Bekunda2009) developed a mathematical model with high accuracy (R 2 = 0.73) to estimate the bunch weights of bananas using parameters such as log-transformed girth of pseudostem at the base and 1 m height, a number of hands, and a number of fingers in the lower row of the second-lowest hand using an MLR method. The same authors employed a quadratic or linear regression model (R 2 = 0.58) to quantify the substantial geographic variations in banana yield including biotic constraints (e.g. percentages of nematodes and weevil) in highland banana production in Uganda (Wairegi et al., Reference Wairegi, van Asten, Tenywa and Bekunda2010).

The statistical models developed by Venugopalan and Shamasundaran (Reference Venugopalan and Shamasundaran2005) showed that at 70 days after planting (DAP), the number of leaves and plant girth with optimum values as eight leaves and 15.1 cm were the best yield indicators for bananas. Further, MLR showed that at 250 DAP, plant height and plant girth with optimum values as 159.2 and 67.8 cm and at 315 DAP, leaf breadth and leaf length with optimum values as 67.2 and 164.1 cm were the significant yield predictors. Finally, during the harvest stage, i.e. at 375 DAP, fingers per bunch and number of hands per bunch with optimum values as 26 fingers hand-1 and 13 hands bunch-1 were the best crop yield indicators. All models were robust as the coefficient of determination ranged from 0.81 to 0.99. Kuneepong et al. (Reference Kuneepong, Silayoi, Apauthaipong and Chutchwanchaiphan2020) used a general linear model for predicting the growth of a new banana variety (Kasetsart 2) in Thailand with aid of data related to local weather, irrigation systems and soil types. However, model predictions of banana yields for some locations were under-estimated in their model.

Scientists have also used MLR in conjunction with multivariate analysis to develop mathematical models for banana crops. For example Villegas-Santa and Castañeda-Sánchez (Reference Villegas-Santa and Castañeda-Sánchez2020) identified the relationship between soil variables and crop performances of bananas using the multivariate statistical tool. Three clusters of sites were evaluated based on dry mean weight, pH, and Ca + Mg/K ratio of soils, and all these soil properties highly correlated with banana yield, however the principal component analysis (PCA) was unable to identify the production quartiles due to the lack of significant causal relationships.

Jaiswal et al. (Reference Jaiswal, Jha and Bharadwaj2012) used a non-destructive method using calibration models in the wavelength range of 299–1100 nm and partial least square (PLS) as well as MLR to predict dry matter (DM), total soluble solids, and acid-Brix ratio, pH for a banana at their maturity and/or ripening stage. The result indicated that DM of banana could be accurately estimated in the best range of wavelength of 106.2–1089.4 nm with a correlation coefficient (R) value of 0.83. Salazar-Díaz and Tixier (Reference Salazar-Díaz and Tixier2021) investigated the impact of the plant community around each cacao tree and banana plant on their growth and yield parameters. First, they used linear mixed models to identify the radius of a specific species' zone of influence that best explained the proportion of attainable yield (PAY), using the number of plants from each category (banana, cocoa, wood trees, fruit trees) as a predictor. The models were relatively accurate in predicting the average effect of all plant communities, accounting for almost 60% of the variance in PAY, which is a good result. The Bayesian technique was used by Yeasin et al. (Reference Yeasin, Singh, Lama and Gurung2021) to forecast banana yield. They compared traditional regression models with modified Bayesian regression model, and observed that Bayesian regression [root mean square error (RMSE) = 216.9] predicts banana yields more accurately than traditional regression (RMSE = 223.1).

Olivares et al. (Reference Olivares, Araya-Alman, Acevedo-Opazo, Rey, Cañete-Salinas, Kurina, Balzarini, Lobo, Navas-Cortés, Landa and Gómez2020) developed a model to predict the banana Productivity Index (PI) in two main cultivation areas in Venezuela using soil properties of Magnesium (Mg), penetration resistance (PR), total microbial respiration (TMRc), bulk density (BD), and free-living omnivorous nematodes (NVLomc). The soil variables were selected through the random forest and the final model was derived from MLR (stepwise) models. The following model performed well, with a coefficient of determination (R 2) of 0.55, the root mean squared error (RMSE) of 1.0 and the mean absolute error (MAE) of 0.8 indicating the capability of estimate banana production using soil properties:

(1)$${\rm PI} = 9.03 + 0.19\,( {\rm Mg}) -\;8.78\,( {\rm PR}) -\;0.40\,( {\rm TMRc}) -\;4.70\,( {\rm BD}) + 0.02\,( {\rm NVLomc}) $$

In certain models, simple linear regression has been used to estimate banana yield or biomass using only one independent variable. For instance, Alcudia-Aguilar et al. (Reference Alcudia-Aguilar, Martínez-Zurimendi, van der Wal, Castillo-Uzcanga and Suárez-Sánchez2019) demonstrated that above-ground banana biomass (AGB) was strongly correlated with the diameter of pseudostem at the height of 30 cm (DBH) and to a certain extent with height data. Considering cross-evaluation, the best-derived model was:

(2)$${\eqalign{{\rm AGB} = {-} 0 .0927 + 0 .0203\;{\rm DB}{\rm H}^ 2\;{\rm with}\;R^2 = 0.88\;{\rm and}\;{\rm MSE} = 1.9}}$$

In the context of modelling of growth and yield of banana, non-linear mathematical models were also used by many authors that take complicated non-linear relationships of predictor variables and banana yield into account. Laskar et al. (Reference Laskar, Sileshi, Nath and Das2020) used mathematical models to estimate biomass accumulation of wild Musa spp. The predictors of diameter, height and combination of diameter and height of pseudostem were used to estimate total biomass using a non-linear, seemingly unrelated regression analysis. Further, mathematical forecasting approaches such as regression and time series analysis were used for linear data, but most real-world data are non-linear. Rathod and Mishra (Reference Rathod and Mishra2018) have tackled this problem in their study by proposing a new hybrid model to forecast mango and banana crop yield in Karnataka, India which is consisted of both linear and non-linear components. They have used banana and mango yield as dependent variables and weather variables, socioeconomics, and some other agricultural variables as independent variables.

Bugaud et al. (Reference Bugaud, Belleil and Tixier2011) developed a model to estimate the effects of source/sink parameters by simulating the increase in pulp dry weight as the source/sink ratio changes. To simulate the cell filling rate in the bunch according to the source/sink ratio during cell filling, they used a Michaelis-Menten relationship, which is a popular non-linear equation. The exponential regression model proposed by Ortiz-Ulloa et al. (Reference Ortiz-Ulloa, Abril-González, Pelaez-Samaniego and Zalamea-Piedra2020) that employs circumference at breast height (CBH) has the best biomass prediction capacity for Ecuadorian banana, with a R2 of 0.85 (Table S1). Negash et al. (Reference Negash, Starr and Kanninen2013) used allometric biomass models with linear and nonlinear regressions to estimate above and below-ground biomass of Enset's false banana plant, and found that the simple power model with trunk basal diameter at 10 cm (d10) and total plant height (H) performed well, explaining 90% of the total biomass:

(3)$${\rm Biomass}\,( Y) = 0.0007d10^{2.571}H^{0.101}$$

Weighted least square regression models were built by Stevens et al. (Reference Stevens, Diels, Brown, Bayo, Ndakidemi and Swennen2020) to estimate aboveground vegetative biomass over time and to forecast bunch potentials. Pseudostem volume as a predictor for bunch weight forecasting led to good model performance in both tested cultivars in their study [relative root mean squared error (RRMSE) 0.13–0.14].

Gaussian functions are commonly employed in statistics as a stochastic process to explain normal distributions using a set of random variables indexed by time or space. For example, de Deus et al. (Reference de Deus, Neves, Soares, de Lima Neto, de Albuquerque, dos Santos and Natale2020) developed models to estimate dry matter partitioning in banana mat (collection of fruit-bearing stems). Dry matter estimation models were generated for the different plant organs in mother and daughter plants of banana as a function (i.e., Gaussian) of the dry matter weight of the banana mat (Fig. 4 and Table S1).

Process-based crop simulation models were also found in our review. For instance, Tixier et al. (Reference Tixier, Malézieux and Dorel2004) made a tremendous effort to describe banana crop growth, development, and yield as a function of plant physiological parameters, weather conditions, soil properties and crop management-related variables. This model gives a reliable estimation of the harvesting time and the number of harvested bunches. The fruit development curve was used to estimate sink demand, which was calculated as the fruit's requirement multiplied by the number of fruits per bunch.

The ANN approach could handle non-linear relations among the biometrical characteristics in crop modelling research for a realistic representation of nonlinearity. An Autoregressive Integrated Moving Average (ARIMA) model was developed by Hossain et al. (Reference Hossain, Abdulla and Majumder2016) that analysed univariate time series data and estimated a value in a response time series to forecast the development of bananas in Bangladesh. Moreover, Hossain et al. (Reference Hossain, Abdulla and Majumder2016) mentioned that ARIMA (0, 2,1) could be considered the best model to forecast banana production in Bangladesh. Soares et al. (Reference Soares, Pasqual, Lacerda, Silva and Donato2013) estimated the bunch weight of banana using a Tropical (YB42-21) hybrid cultivar. The weight of the rachis, stalk length and diameter, weight of the second hand, the total number of hands per bunch, the weight of the fruit, number of fruits per bunch, length of the fruit, diameter of fruit, and number of fresh leaves at harvest were considered as input layers. They employed the ANNs method to predict banana yield with 10:10:1 architecture, and the model performed well with high accuracy (MPE = 1.40, MSD = 2.29 and R 2 = 91%).

de Souza et al. (Reference de Souza, Neto, Piazentin, Junior, Gomes, Bonini and Putti2019) developed a model using ANN to find the relationship between climatic variables (average temperature, minimum temperature, maximum temperature, relative humidity, precipitation and photoperiod) and banana bunch gestation period to predict the harvesting time. Network training indicated reliable results (RMSE = 0.3% and R 2 = 0.89). For a AAAB tetraploid banana hybrid, Soares et al. (Reference Soares, Pasqual, Lacerda, Silva and Donato2014) used ANN and MLR to determine bunch weights. Although the models were reliable (R 2 > 0.71), the model consisted with the predictors that could only be measured destructively at harvest.

Guimarães et al. (Reference Guimarães, Donato, Aspiazú and Azevedo2021) used ANNs to assess the yield of ‘Prata-Ana’ and ‘BRS Platina’ banana plants. The model was built using data on growth-reproductive-traits. For ‘Prata-Ana’ (R 2 = 0.99) and ‘BRS Platina’ (R 2 = 0.97–1), the optimum adjustments were obtained with two and three intermediate layer neurones, respectively. Eyduran et al. (Reference Eyduran, Akın, Eyduran, Çelik, Ertürk and Ercişli2020) investigated various ANN methods, including ARIMA (0,1,1), ARIMA (1,1,0) and ARIMA (1,1,1), as well as Exponential Smoothing (Holt, Brown and Damped) models, and discovered that the Brown exponential smoothing model was the best for forecasting banana harvest area and production (R 2 = 0.99 and mean absolute percentage error (MAPE) = 19). Khan et al. (Reference Khan, Qiu, Qureshi, Iqbal, Mehmood and Hussain2020) employed three potential deep ANN networks [Levenberg-Marquardt optimisation (LM), scale conjugate gradient back propagation (SCG) and Bayesian regularisation back propagation (BR)] to estimate future fruit production in Pakistan, including banana, from 1980 to 2025. Although the accuracy of these algorithms varies, the best accuracy is seen with BR, which has a 75% accuracy. To estimate banana harvest yields, a deep multilayered system that included a number of recurrent neural network-long term memory (RNN-LSTM) layers was also used. When compared to models that used multiple LSTM layers and models that used a single LSTM layer, the enhanced model performed better, with an RMSE of 34.8 and error rates of 45 and 43.5%, respectively (Rebortera and Fajardo, Reference Rebortera and Fajardo2019a, Reference Rebortera and Fajardo2019b).

Modelling of banana growth

A total of 20 studies presented mathematical modelling techniques to estimate plant growth and development. In particular, many attempts were executed to assess the leaf area of banana crops using regression analyses (n = 9) and crop simulation models (Fig 4. and Table S2).

MLR approaches (n = 7) are commonly used regression techniques in banana growth models, as shown in Fig. 4. A more realistic leaf area estimation model was developed by Donato et al. (Reference Donato, Donato, Brito, Fonseca, Gomes and Rodrigues Filho2020) for ‘Prata-Ana’ and ‘BRS Plantina' banana plants using the variables width (W), length (L) and width/length ratio (WLR). The following models gave precise results (R 2 around 0.96, and R = 0.98, respectively):

(4)$${\eqalign{{\rm LA}\,{\rm ( Prata}\hbox{-}{\rm An\sim a\ ) } = {-}0.0133624 + 0.000489859L + 0.00183182W}}$$
(5)$$\eqalign{{\rm LA}\,( {\rm Platina}) = 0.00237026 + 0.00478116\;W-0.0968020WLR}$$

Vinson et al. (Reference Vinson, Coneva, Kemble, Woods, Sibley, Fonsah, Perkins-Veazie and Kessler2018) developed a regression model to determine flower emergence and to assess vegetative and reproductive growth of Cavendish and non-Cavendish banana using the circumference of pseudostem (CM), the height-to-circumference ratio (HCR), and the number of days from planting to inflorescence emergence (DPE). Separate models were developed to predict leaf area of medium and tall banana varieties using regression models.

In addition, Mekwatanakarn and Turner (Reference Mekwatanakarn and Turner1989) constructed a robust model (R 2 = 0.96) to evaluate the leaf emergence rate in bananas in the subtropics by assessing the relation of leaf emergence rate to temperature and ontogeny. Allen et al. (Reference Allen, Dettmann, Johns and Turner1988) created a model for estimating the leaf initiation rate (LIR) of 17 banana cultivars based on average monthly air temperature, day length, age of planting, plant density and cultivar stature. The model was evaluated with an independent data set from South Africa and it gave a reliable prediction of LIR with R 2 = 0.78. Arantes et al. (Reference Arantes, Donato, Siqueira, Amorim and Rodrigues Filho2016) used MLR equations to find a correlation between chlorophyll index and nutrient contents of leaves and estimate the nutritional status of ‘Prata’ banana. The selected models reliably predict the leaf nutrient content of Prata' banana (R 2 = 0.84 to 0.97).

Nyombi et al. (Reference Nyombi, Van Asten, Leffelaar, Corbeels, Kaizzi and Giller2009) studied different phenological stages of highland bananas grown in East Africa and assessed growth and yield using simple regression as well as MLR algorithms. Individual area was estimated as:

(6)$$\eqalign{{\rm LA}\,( {\rm m}^ 2) & = {\rm length}\,{\rm ( m) } \times {\rm maximum}\;{\rm lamina}\;{\rm width}\;( {\rm m}) \cr& \quad\times 0.68\,( R^2 = 0.99)}$$

The product of the measured middle leaf area (MLA) and the number of active leaves was used to calculate the total plant leaf area (TLA) and estimated as:

(7)$$\eqalignno{{\rm MLA}\,( {\rm m}^ 2) & = {-} 0 .404 + 0 .381\;{\rm height}\,{\rm ( m) } + 0 .411\;{\rm girth}\,{\rm ( m) }\;\cr& \quad( R^2 = 0.67) & (7)}$$

The mathematical relationship between above-ground biomass (AGB in kg DM) and girth (cm) during the vegetative stage followed a power function, AGB = 0.0001 (girth) 2.35 (R 2 = 0.99), but followed exponential functions at flowering, AGB = 0.325e0.036 (girth) (R 2 = 0.79) and at harvest, AGB  =  0.069e0.068(girth)(R 2 = 0.96). Demirsoy (Reference Demirsoy2009) constructed models for the leaf area of fruit trees, including two banana varieties using simple linear regression. Several subsets of the independent variables were used in their leaf area prediction model, such as leaf length (L), leaf width (W), L 2, W 2 and [L 2/W 2].

Potdar and Pawar (Reference Potdar and Pawar1991) applied multiple linear regression to predict leaf area (LA) in the banana cultivars ‘Ardhapuri’ and ‘Basrai’ using various combinations of leaf length (L) and width (W), and found that the models had a predictive power with R2 of around 0.96. Taulya (Reference Taulya2013) used multiple linear regression to estimate the fresh mass (FW) of the plants from the growth parameters (plant height (H); number of functional leaves (L); and the mean pseudostem volume with R 2 = 0.59 accuracy:

(8)$$\eqalign{{\rm PV}( {\rm FW}) = 0.03873H + 0.281L + 3.169\;\times 10^{{-}6}\,{\rm Pv}) -\;2.905}$$

Latif et al. (Reference Latif, Mushoddad and Azmai2020) investigated the use of a simple logistic growth model to predict banana vegetative growth in response to foliar fertiliser. To simulate pseudostem height, pseudostem girth, and leaf area at harvest (Y), variables of time (week) (t), carrying capacity (maximum growth (cm) (K), constant (A) and growth rate (r) were used:

(9)$$Y = Y = K/1 + Ae-rt$$

Mendes et al. (Reference Mendes, Filippi, Demetrio and Rodriguez1999) applied adjusted Poisson regression models to study multiplication rates (Y) of in vitro banana plants during successive subcultures using number of shoots (N) as:

(10)$$Y = \exp \,( 3.75 + 2843N-0.2312\;\times \;N^2) \,( R^2 = 0.98) $$

Stochastic models are also widely exploited as mathematical models where random variables are considered. For example, Lamour et al. (Reference Lamour, Le Moguedec, Naud, Lechaudel, Taylor and Tisseyre2020) used a novel stochastic model to estimate the average time gap between two flowering occurrences on the banana plant (CD) using population dynamics and banana phenological development stages. The results indicated differences in CD with a median of 209 days ± 24 days. There was a positive effect of elevation, cultivar and irrigation v. Julian days on model fitting and the CD estimation. Moreover, some other crop simulation models deal with plantain (Musa × paradisiaca) crop systems to simulate growth or plantain yield. In the given context, Chaves et al. (Reference Chaves, Cayón and Jones2009) introduced models to estimate the potential yield of plantains using the models already developed by Spitters and Schapendonk (Reference Spitters and Schapendonk1990) and Kooman and Haverkort (Reference Kooman, Haverkort, Haverkort and MacKerron1995), especially considering the involvement of dry matter partitioning, light interception and daily conversion of light in dry matter production. Mechanistic modelling and non-linear regression analysis were used to develop the above models. Chaves et al. (Reference Chaves, Cayón and Jones2009) observed that leaf, stem and corm dry matter increased in equal proportions during the vegetative stage. However, only the stem was observed to extend its dry-matter content during the reproductive period, while the leaves and corm were found to reduce dry weight. Tixier et al. (Reference Tixier, Malézieux, Dorel and Wery2008) developed a model called SIMBA with different sub modules, design for a sustainable banana-based cropping system that mimics several cropping cycles at the field level.

A modified version of the SIMBA-GROW module was developed by Tixier et al. (Reference Tixier, Malézieux, Dorel and Wery2008) to simulate growth of banana plant considering four growth stages (planting, sucker initiation, flower initiation and harvesting) while taking the bunch as the sink. The SIMBA-GROW model is constructed using radiation interception, biomass conversion and dry matter partitioning to leaves, suckers and bunches. The physiological development of banana is determined by thermal degree days taking base temperature as 14°C. SIMBA-GROW calculates the plant growth for every cohort defined in the SIMBA POP module (Tixier et al., Reference Tixier, Malézieux, Dorel and Wery2008). SIMBA-POP is the first crop model for long-term simulation in non-synchronized banana cropping systems (Tixier et al., Reference Tixier, Malézieux and Dorel2004). The SIMBA-POP sub-module was developed based on a cohort population concept (i.e., a group of individuals characterized by the same phonological stage) that simulates the banana plant population and its growth and development patterns. Further, this model considered the details about sucker selection which affects plant management (Tixier et al., Reference Tixier, Malézieux and Dorel2004). They used log-normal distribution for the sucker appearance and flowering patterns in the field as explained by Cottin et al. (Reference Cottin, Melin and Ganry1987).

Using a compaction score, the SIMBA-SOIL module simulates soil structure. This accounts for data on essential management practices in the banana field, including the use of fertilizers, harvest trailers and ploughing. The SIMBA-WAT, a water balance module that simulates the content of the soil, water, flow-off and nutrients leaching (Tixier et al., Reference Tixier, Malézieux, Dorel and Wery2008). Tixier et al. (Reference Tixier, Lavigne, Alvarez, Gauquier, Blanchard, Ripoche and Achard2011) developed the SIMBA-CC model to select cover crops for banana cover-cropping systems using 11 cover crop species, LAI, biomass, N content in the biomass, light interception traits, and values of optimal photosynthetically active radiation (PARopti). The SIMBA-COV sub-module simulates soil cover, including weed growth and the impact of herbicides, mulching, and crop residues on weed growth in banana cultivation. Weed growth is represented as a percentage of soil cover that calibrates using a logistic function and it has an inverse proportion to the leaf area index of banana. Damour et al. (Reference Damour, Ozier-Lafontaine and Dorel2012) used simplified indicators of soil water and nitrogen availability, as well as integrated plant characteristics, to estimate the growth of banana (Musa spp.) cultivated on cover-crop. Dorel et al. (Reference Dorel, Achard and Tixier2008) designed the SIMBA-Nitrogen (N) model to simulate N dynamics in the banana cropping system with reliable evaluated results that can use in N fertilizer management in banana cultivation.

The STICS (Standardized mulTIdisciplinary Crop Simulator) model was used by Brisson et al. (Reference Brisson, Ozier-Lafontaine and Dorel1997) to estimate the impact of soil and water management on banana growth between planting and flowering. Solar radiation, minimum and maximum temperatures, rainfall, and evaporation were taken into the model development. Soil parameters of carbon and nitrogen were also considered as input variables. The model simulates the carbon, nitrogen and water balance of the banana cropping system and calculates growth using environmental data. A comprehensive description of model calibration and evaluation was not given in their paper.

ANN models are widely applied in crop modelling studies and indicate their applicability to estimate banana plants' growth rate. Revathi et al. (Reference Revathi, Sivakumaran, Ramajayam, Saraswathi, Backiyarani and Uma2019) developed a non-destructive model for tissue-cultured banana plantlets during the acclimatization period using bootstrapped artificial neural network (BANN). Both non-destructive and destructive growth parameters, greenhouse temperature, radiation and carbon dioxide concentration were recorded on a regular basis as independent data. The projected growth statistics indicate the reliability of the model to predict the growth with satisfactory Nash and Sutcliffe efficiency (NSE) coefficient, RMSE and MAE.

Modelling of banana fibre

No previous studies have specifically (Jayasinghe and Kumar, Reference Jayasinghe and Kumar2021) addressed the modelling of fibre yield of the banana plant according to our review results. However, many efforts have been made to predict the tensile strength (n = 14) and other mechanical properties (n = 4) of banana fibre (Fig. 4 and Table S3). Two studies that use mathematical approaches to assess the fibre yield of false bananas (Ensete ventricosum) have been identified, and we have included them in our review. Researchers employed a range of statistics to investigate fibre properties and a diverse applications in the search (Fig. 4), demonstrating how predictive models are used to determine the orientation and, mechanical and chemical properties of banana fibre using different regressions, numerical measures (i.e., mean, median, mode, percentiles, range, variance and standard deviation), and ANN statistics.

For instance, Chokshi et al. (Reference Chokshi, Gohil, Lalakiya, Patel and Parmar2020) used mathematical models (e.g. exponential, linear, logarithmic, polynomial and power models) to predict the tensile strength at different strain rates of natural fibre. The polynomial model yielded higher accuracy (R 2 = 0.96) to predict tensile strength at low and high strain rates. Mwesigwa and Mwasiagi (Reference Mwesigwa and Mwasiagi2019) used a MLR model with strong model performance (R 2 = 0.9) to study the parameters influencing the tensile and compressive characteristics of banana bio-composites. Monzón et al. (Reference Monzón, Paz, Verdaguer, Suárez, Badalló, Ortega and Diaz2019) used a statistical approach to characterize the mechanical properties of newly developed technical textile with a composite of banana fibre and compare the results with numerical simulation. Madhusudan et al. (Reference Madhusudan, Bhargava and Madhukiran2018) used mathematical equations to predict hygric strain coefficients for natural hybrid composites of banana and pineapple.

The basic mathematical model was used by Mizera et al. (Reference Mizera, Herak and Hrabě2017) to describe the dying behaviour of false bananas and fibre strength. Venkateshwaran et al. (Reference Venkateshwaran, Elayaperumal and Sathiya2012) predicted tensile properties of hybrid-natural fibre composites. Besides, Venkateshwaran and ElayaPerumal (Reference Venkateshwaran and ElayaPerumal2011) assessed the tensile properties of banana fibre. de Oliveira et al. (Reference de Oliveira, do Nascimento, Costa, Santana, Costa and Ribeiro2020) developed nine mathematical models to study the drying behaviour, moisture diffusivity, activation energy and thermodynamic properties of banana pseudostem fibre using thermogravimetric, morphological and spectroscopic methods. Devireddy and Biswas (Reference Devireddy and Biswas2018) developed a mathematical model to calculate thermal conductivity and the predicted thermal conductivity was very close to actual values. Chokshi and Gohil (Reference Chokshi and Gohil2018) developed mathematical models to predict the tensile strength of the banana fibre. According to their study, linear relationships of exponential, linear, logarithmic, polynomial and power models were used to study the behaviour of tensile strength and they found that tensile strength increases with an increase in strain rate.

Patwari et al. (Reference Patwari, Bhuiyan, Ahsan, Khan and Khan2019) proposed a quadratic model to forecast the compressive load of moulded green composite materials (containing banana fibre):

(11)$$Y = aX^2 + bX + c$$

Bhaskar et al. (Reference Bhaskar, Srinivas and Devireddy2020) developed a novel mathematical model to predict the transverse thermal conductivity of hybrid composites based on microstructural characteristics. Mizera et al. (Reference Mizera, Herák, Hrabě, Müller and Kabutey2016) used general exponential models to describe the effect of gauge length of false banana fibre for tensile strength.

Natural fibres have many advantages over synthetic fibres, but the reduction of quality is a drawback of natural fibres due to climate and growing conditions (Rao et al., Reference Rao, Rao, Naidu and Bahubalendruni2017). When predicting the tensile strength of the fibre, the issue has arisen due to the variation of the cross-sectional area of the fibre with the length (Sia et al., Reference Sia, Fernando, Joseph and Chua2018). Sia et al. (Reference Sia, Fernando, Joseph and Chua2018) produced a Weibull distribution with modification to predict the tensile strength of the fibre by providing the solution to the issue of cross-sectional variation. As per their findings, the fibre tensile strength decreases when the gauge length of the fibre increases. We found some other statistical approaches related to fibre processing that was adopted by researchers. For example, Macedo et al. (Reference Macedo, Vimercati, da Silva Araújo, Saraiva and Teixeira2020) and Veeramanipriya et al. (Reference Veeramanipriya, Sundari and Asaithambi2019) developed simple mathematical models to identify the drying kinetics of banana fibre. Devireddy and Biswas (Reference Devireddy and Biswas2018) and developed a mathematical model to calculate thermal conductivity with minimum errors (>11%).

Pujari et al. (Reference Pujari, Ramakrishna and Padal2017a) compared the performances of ANN and regression analysis for predicting the water absorption behaviour of jute and banana fibre reinforced epoxy composites and indicated that ANN gives better results for physical properties of natural fibre composites of banana than the regression analysis. Moreover, Pujari et al. (Reference Pujari, Ramakrishna and Padal2017b) predicted the volume changes of jute and banana fibre composites by using ANN and regression analysis and they indicated that ANN performs better than regression analysis.

For the enset or false banana crop (Ensete ventricosum), a close relative of the banana crop, Haile (Reference Haile2014) attempted to estimate enset fibre content from aboveground plant traits using a linear regression model, but even when fibredata was log transformed, he was unable to produce significant regression equations (R 2 = 0.01). For the first time, Yemataw et al. (Reference Yemataw, Said, Dejene, Ocimati, Amwonya and Blomme2021) developed an allometric model that can correctly estimate enset fibre yield. The PCA was selected using a biplot and the Kaiser–Meyer–Olkin (KMO) method of eigen values over one, and a backwards regression analysis was utilised to automatically establish the most significant model to explain fibre yield. Accordingly, fibre yields of enset can be estimated using leaf length, petiole length and plant height (adj. R 2 = 0.35–0.57).

Discussion

As a traded fruit and natural fibre source, the continuous production of banana should be maintained to cater to the demand, and banana-growing systems should be managed with effective strategies and techniques. Modern agricultural systems have inspired the mathematical modelling approach for growth and yield with the technological revolution (Jones et al., Reference Jones, Antle, Basso, Boote, Conant, Foster and Janssen2017). Based on this premise, mathematical modelling (Fig. 1) plays a crucial role in providing a link between the concept and the actual biological unit of banana systems (Connor et al., Reference Connor, Loomis and Cassman2011). Some scientists in different countries have modelled banana growth and fruit yield using mathematical models (Fig. 4). To understand how mathematical models have been used in estimating banana yield and growth, we have presented our results based on three separate aspects of the mathematical modelling of banana: (1) fruit/banana yield, (2) growth and (3) fibre yield.

In the present review, 34 and 20 previous studies were found to estimate fruit yield and growth, respectively. However, no studies have been performed to assess banana fibre yield to date based on our search. The review also confirmed the less frequent occurrence of ‘fibre yield’ and its distant link to aspects of banana crop modelling in the keyword co-occurrence map (Fig. 3). This may be because the application of modelling techniques has not been fully exploited for banana fibre yield as it is an emerging venture being explored recently.

To understand and exploit the mechanism of mathematical models, we extracted the modelling approaches of selected studies. A range of techniques has been implemented for the mathematical modelling of bananas (Fig. 4). Regression analysis is a simple, commonly used mathematical technique used by many authors to estimate banana growth, yield and fibre properties. Our review explicated that most of the developed models are linear. Many authors have developed simple linear and/or MLR equations to estimate banana productivity (Potdar and Pawar, Reference Potdar and Pawar1991; Wairegi et al., Reference Wairegi, Van Asten, Tenywa and Bekunda2009; Zucoloto et al., Reference Zucoloto, Lima, Coelho and Xavier2013; Alcudia-Aguilar et al., Reference Alcudia-Aguilar, Martínez-Zurimendi, van der Wal, Castillo-Uzcanga and Suárez-Sánchez2019; Olivares et al., Reference Olivares, Araya-Alman, Acevedo-Opazo, Rey, Cañete-Salinas, Kurina, Balzarini, Lobo, Navas-Cortés, Landa and Gómez2020), and growth (Potdar and Pawar, Reference Potdar and Pawar1991; Demirsoy, Reference Demirsoy2009; Nyombi, Reference Nyombi2010; Vinson et al., Reference Vinson, Coneva, Kemble, Woods, Sibley, Fonsah, Perkins-Veazie and Kessler2018; Donato et al., Reference Donato, Donato, Brito, Fonseca, Gomes and Rodrigues Filho2020). In all these models, the growth and yield of bananas have been modelled as a function of either plant characteristics or weather, soil, and/or management practices by integrating agronomic knowledge. Some scientists applied true eigenvector-based multivariate analysis (eg., PCA) combined with MLR (e.g., Sharath, Reference Sharath2016; Villegas-Santa and Castañeda-Sánchez, Reference Villegas-Santa and Castañeda-Sánchez2020) to explore major patterns of the physiological predictors and yield of bananas. The problem of component collinearity can be avoided with PCA, but the challenge of determining the ideal number of eigenvectors still exists, hence some modellers (e.g., Jaiswal et al., Reference Jaiswal, Jha and Bharadwaj2012) used PLS regression in their modelling efforts.

Rathod and Mishra (Reference Rathod and Mishra2018) proposed a new hybrid model consisted of both linear and non-linear components. The hybrid model with the ARIMA and Support Vector Regression (SVR) model's conflation performed well in both model development and evaluation. Some authors, such as Yeasin et al. (Reference Yeasin, Singh, Lama and Gurung2021) and Khan et al. (Reference Khan, Qiu, Qureshi, Iqbal, Mehmood and Hussain2020) used Bayesian regression techniques to predict banana production since Bayesian statistics are often more powerful because they provide a whole distribution of regression parameters rather than just point estimates. Stevens et al. (Reference Stevens, Diels, Brown, Bayo, Ndakidemi and Swennen2020) estimated banana crop growth and yield using weighted least squares regression. When modelling the behaviour of random errors in a model, WLS can be utilised with functions that have either linear or nonlinear parameters. When modellers want to model the average number of occurrences per unit of time, they utilise modified Poisson regression, which combines a log Poisson regression model with robust variance estimation. Mendes et al. (Reference Mendes, Filippi, Demetrio and Rodriguez1999) used this allometrics to investigate the multiplication rates of in vitro propagated banana plants over time. In linear mixed models, simple linear models are extended to include both fixed and random effects, making it a flexible method for analysing complicated datasets with repeated or clustered observations. Salazar-Díaz and Tixier (Reference Salazar-Díaz and Tixier2021) used LMM to evaluate banana and cacao interactions in heterogeneous multi strata agroecosystems, with the aim of predicting banana productivity. Furthermore, Gompertz, Gaussian, and non-linear logistic models have provided a reasonable representation of banana growth and yield. For instance, de Deus et al. (Reference de Deus, Neves, Soares, de Lima Neto, de Albuquerque, dos Santos and Natale2020) studied dry matter partitioning of the banana plant using the Gaussian process model.

Our review explicated that most developed models are linear (Tables S1 and S2), but a significant issue with developing a regression model is the many independent variables that may consume a degree of freedom (Harrell Jr. et al., Reference Harrell, Lee and Mark1996). We observed that linear regression models have been used to predict the effect of some plant-related variables (age, height, weight and number of shoots), which may not give a real picture of the system. In the development of models, the modeller should select appropriate predictors that describe the dependent variables (growth, yield and fibre properties) of banana using numerical values. Moreover, the data demand of regression models is lower that of crop simulation models (Irwin et al., Reference Irwin, Good and Tannura2008). However, multiple regression models require well-defined descriptors to predict growth or yield.

Crop simulation models have become an essential tool during the last decade to model growth and yield of banana plants. Tixier et al. (Reference Tixier, Malézieux, Dorel and Wery2008) developed the process-based SIMBA model with several sub modules design for a sustainable banana-based cropping system that can be simulated at the field level over various cropping cycles (Tixier et al., Reference Tixier, Peyrard, Aubertot, Gaba, Radoszycki, Caron-Lormier, Vinatier, Mollot and Sabbadin2013). This model serves as a powerful tool to choose the best genotypes for cultivating bananas. It includes almost all essential environmental variables, cohort dynamics, soil parameters, cropping patterns and eco-physiological factors. It should be noted that this model requires complex information to understand the model principles. Some findings (e.g. Chaves et al., Reference Chaves, Cayón and Jones2009) have highlighted the importance of incorporating the source-sink relationship with plant growth.

There are some other process-based models (e.g., APSIM, CROPSYST, DAISY, FASSET, HERMES, DNDC, WOFOSt, DSSAT, AquaCrop and STICS) (Sannagoudar et al., Reference Sannagoudar, Patil and Rajanna2019; Hoogenboom et al., Reference Hoogenboom, Justes, Pradal, Launay, Asseng, Ewert and Martre2021) that can be utilized as banana crop simulation models. Effective banana crop simulation model outputs (i.e., growth, fruit and fibre yield) are only possible if the model's parameters are accurately represented in the simulation and the input cultivar related data are accurate and reliable (Grassini et al., Reference Grassini, van Bussel, Van Wart, Wolf, Claessens, Yang and Cassman2015; Geethanjali and Muralidhara, Reference Geethanjali, Muralidhara, Fong, Dey and Joshi2021). Future research should focus on developing crop models for banana and expanding crop model capabilities to include nutrient limitation methods as well as yield reductions due to pests and diseases.

Machine learning techniques have enabled substantial progress in recent crop model development (Droutsas et al., Reference Droutsas, Challinor, Swiderski and Semenov2019; Folberth et al., Reference Folberth, Baklanov, Balkovič, Skalský, Khabarov and Obersteiner2019). Christian (Reference Christian2020) showed that crop meta-models based on machine learning algorithms may accurately mimic biophysical crop models for yield potential. The machine learning approaches include linear regression models, feedforward, recurrent and convolutional neural networks, decision tree and random forest, support vector regression, agicultural deep learning, autoregressive integrated moving average, and Bayesian regression (Chakraborty and Joseph, Reference Chakraborty and Joseph2017). Recently, ANN has been widely accepted in crop modelling as a reliable computer-based non-linear empirical model (Poznyak et al., Reference Poznyak, Chairez and Poznyak2019). Considering given benefits of ANN, many scientists have utilized this technique to model the growth, yield and fibre properties of banana.

Several limitations need to be overcome in some mathematical models, leading to more extensive use and acceptance by general users. Even though some models (SIMBA, ANN models) provide a robust simulation of the growth and yield of banana, these models could be more straightforward and evaluated with independent data sets obtained from other banana-growing environments that involve tedious and time-consuming processes. Moreover, the main constraint is that many mathematical models disregarded plant and environmental interactions and only focused on a single plant to estimate specific processes. Crouch and Haines (Reference Crouch and Haines2004) stated that a successful mathematical model needs to use suitable mathematical techniques, principles and predictors. Some previous studies have identified the importance of plant, soil, climate and cropping conditions as predictor variables to build mathematical models. In the given context, assembling and measuring some predictor variables is a challenging task in the model development, calibration and evaluation steps. For instance, the comprehensive crop models developed by Tixier et al. (Reference Tixier, Malézieux, Dorel and Wery2008) to stimulate the growth and yield of banana based on cropping cycles are complex and, costly that require long-term monitoring to obtain measurements. Hence, model should be simplified to some extent to reduce the amount of data required to buld and assess the models while avoiding clumsy and excessive modelling techniques (Yin and Struik, Reference Yin and Struik2017; Basso and Antle, Reference Basso and Antle2020).

Sufficient meaningful data should be selected from an empirical data set for model calibration using the identification analysis as proposed by De Swaef et al. (Reference De Swaef, Bellocchi, Aper, Lootens and Roldán-Ruiz2019), with the aid of sensitivity functions and collinearity analysis (Brun et al., Reference Brun, Reichert and Künsch2001). Every stage of modelling is riddled with uncertainty (i.e. errors in observations, prediction uncertainty, model uncertainty) (Chapagain et al., Reference Chapagain, Ojeda, Mohammed, Brown, Remenyi and Harris2020). Model evaluation is a vital part of mathematical modelling that compares measured values and predictions from mathematical models (Giordano et al., Reference Giordano, Fox and Horton2013; Strano et al., Reference Strano, Hao, Everson and Evans2013). Different parameters have been used to validate models as shown in the findings of the current review (Table S1, S2 and S3), such as RMSE, MAPE, MAE, NSE, relative root mean square error (RRMSE), correlation coefficient (R), coefficient of variation (CV), SD and determination coefficient (R 2). From a statistical perspective, RMSE is the same as standard error that measures the extent of change in mean absolute difference. RMSE alone is insufficient to use for model evaluation as it is not enough to conclude a model's predictive abilities, and RMSE cannot estimate the mean absolute difference between observed and measured values (Cao et al., Reference Cao, Hanan, Yan, Liu, Yue, Zhu and Ge2012; Gramatica and Sangion, Reference Gramatica and Sangion2016). Therefore, it is better to use other parameters such as R 2, NSE and MAE to show its accuracy. Most of the reviewed studies included evaluation results. However, the model evaluation procedures were not clearly stated in some of the studies used in our review.

In future research, mathematical models of banana can help in the development of novel concepts, parameters, techniques and the design of new trials. There are no crop models in the existing literature that can predict banana production for future climate scenarios. Climate trends, the Extended Virtual Riesling model (Schmidt et al., Reference Schmidt, Bahr, Friedel and Kahlen2019), high-quality weather data (Hayman et al., Reference Hayman, Rickards, Eckard and Lemerle2012; Bracho-Mujica et al., Reference Bracho-Mujica, Hayman, Sadras and Ostendorf2021), and the bias-corrected regional climate model (RCM) (Webber et al., Reference Webber, Matthews, Vinayachandran, Neema, Sanchez-Franks, Vijith, Amol and Baranowski2018; Falconnier et al., Reference Falconnier, Corbeels, Boote, Affholder, Adam, MacCarthy, Ruane, Nendel, Whitbread, Justes, Ahuja, Akinseye, Alou, Amouzou, Anapalli, Baron, Basso, Baudron, Bertuzzi, Challinor, Chen, Deryng, Elsayed, Faye, Gaiser, Galdos, Gayler, Gerardeaux, Giner, Grant, Hoogenboom, Ibrahim, Kamali, Kersebaum, Kim, van der Laan, Leroux, Lizaso, Maestrini, Meier, MequanintF, Porter, Priesack, Ripoche, Sida, Singh, Smith, Srivastava, Sinha, Tao, Thorburn, Timlin, Traore, Twine and Webber2020) should be taken into consideration for designing process-based banana yield simulation models. Furthermore, banana crop models can be combined with geospatial systems, artificial intelligence and remote sensing approaches (Ruane et al., Reference Ruane, Goldberg and Chryssanthacopoulos2015; Hersbach et al., Reference Hersbach, Bell, Berrisford, Hirahara, Horányi, Muñoz-Sabater, Nicolas, Peubey, Radu, Schepers, Simmons, Soci, Abdalla, Abellan, Balsamo, Bechtold, Biavati, Bidlot, Bonavita, De Chiara, Dahlgren, Dee, Diamantakis, Dragani, Flemming, Forbes, Fuentes, Geer, Haimberger, Healy, Hogan, Holm, Janisková, Keeley, Laloyaux, Lopez, Lupu, Radnoti, de Rosnay, Rozum, Vamborg, Villaume and Thépaut2020), where a large variety of global gridded data sets can be used in modelling efforts in the future. Crop models have recently been combined with phenomics, breeding and testing in other crops (Cooper et al., Reference Cooper, Podlich, Luo, Varshney and Tuberosa2007; Hammer et al., Reference Hammer, Sentelhas and Mariano2020), which we can apply to banana modelling in the future. Existing genotypes should be screened via models (Marshall-Colon et al., Reference Marshall-Colon, Long, Allen, Allen, Beard, Benes and Hart2017) for high fruit and fibre yields, and banana crop ideotypes should then be designed accordingly. Despite the fact that there are various allometric models for calculating false banana (Enset) fibre yields (Yemataw et al., Reference Yemataw, Said, Dejene, Ocimati, Amwonya and Blomme2021), no work on banana fibre yield modelling has been done yet, indicating the need for modellers to fill this gap in the future.

The mathematical models presented in this review are beneficial to analyse the growth and yield of bananas, and the process-based simulation models demonstrate the methodologies with precise detail, offering outstanding notions and inspiration to other modellers to engage with modelling techniques. Some models have been embedded with subtle details that provide an opportunity to leverage the development of reliable, versatile and generalized banana-plant-inspired algorithms.

Conclusions

Mathematical models have been highly exploited to estimate the growth and yield of bananas, acting as a tool for predicting, planning and managing resources and important in bridging the conceptualization and realization. However, the cropping pattern of the banana plant is very intricate, and quantitative integration of appropriate variables is essential to develop a robust model with high accuracy. Some recent studies also utilized machine learning approaches (i.e. ANN), which is advantageous as it optimize complex growing systems and simulate the growth and yield of banana. No studies have previously been conducted to estimate banana fibre yield using mathematical approaches, thus highlighting the necessity of developing models to investigate the mechanism of banana fibre production. Overall, the present systematic review assesses evidence-based modelling efforts made by previous researchers to estimate banana growth and yield. However, different predictor variables, growing conditions, varietal differences, modelling approaches and evaluation procedures used in the existing models restrict the comparative assessment and selection of the best model. Hence, accurate, novel and informative models for estimating banana growth and yield of both fruit and fibre are encouraged, utilizing appropriate predictors and algorithms.

Supplementary material

The supplementary material for this article can be found at https://doi.org/10.1017/S0021859622000259

Author contributions

P. E. K. conceived the idea for the topic and P. E. K. and S. L. J. contributed to the conception and systematic bibliography search. S. L. J. retrieved the data. P. E. K., S. L. J., C. J. R., and I. C. L. performed the review. S. L. J. and I. C. L. performed statistical analyses. P. E. K. and S. L. J. and I. C. L. drafted the manuscript. P. E. K. and C. J. R. revised the manuscript and approved the final version. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Financial support

This research was supported by the Accelerating Higher Education Expansion and Development (AHEAD) Operation of the Ministry of Higher Education funded by the World Bank.

Conflict of interest

The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.

Ethical standards

Not applicable.

References

Alcudia-Aguilar, A, Martínez-Zurimendi, P, van der Wal, H, Castillo-Uzcanga, MM and Suárez-Sánchez, J (2019) Allometric estimation of the biomass of Musa spp. in homegardens of Tabasco, Mexico. Tropical and Subtropical Agroecosystems 22, 143152.Google Scholar
Allen, R, Dettmann, E, Johns, G and Turner, D (1988) Estimation of leaf emergence rates of bananas. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 39, 5362.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Antle, JM, Basso, B, Conant, RT, Godfray, HCJ, Jones, JW, Herrero, M, Howittg, RE, Keating, BA, Munoz-Carpena, R, Rosenzweig, C, Tittonell, P and Wheeler, TR (2017) Towards a new generation of agricultural system data, models and knowledge products: design and improvement. Agricultural Systems 155, 255268.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Arantes, AdM, Donato, SL, Siqueira, DLd, Amorim, EP and Rodrigues Filho, VA (2016) Chlorophyll index for real-time prediction of nutritional status of'Prata'banana. Revista Brasileira de Engenharia Agrícola e Ambiental 20, 99106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Basso, B and Antle, J (2020) Digital agriculture to design sustainable agricultural systems. Nature Sustainability 3, 254256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beza, E, Silva, JV, Kooistra, L and Reidsma, P (2017) Review of yield gap explaining factors and opportunities for alternative data collection approaches. European Journal of Agronomy 82, 206222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bhaskar, VV, Srinivas, K and Devireddy, S (2020) A novel mathematical correlation for thermal conductivity of hybrid composites reinforced with natural fibres. Materials Today: Proceedings 26, 22082211.Google Scholar
Bracho-Mujica, G, Hayman, P, Sadras, V and Ostendorf, B (2021) A method for simulating risk profiles of wheat yield in data-sparse conditions. The Journal of Agricultural Science 158, 112.Google Scholar
Brisson, N, Ozier-Lafontaine, H and Dorel, M (1997) Effects of soil management and water regime on banana growth between planting and flowering. Simulation using the STICS model. Paper presented at the II International Symposium on Banana: I International Symposium on Banana in the Subtropics 490, Puerto de la Cruz, Tenerife, Spain.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brun, R, Reichert, P and Künsch, HR (2001) Practical identifiability analysis of large environmental simulation models. Water Resources Research 37, 10151030.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bugaud, C, Belleil, T and Tixier, P (2011) Modelling the effect of source/Sink modifications on pulp dry weight of banana ‘Cavendish’. Paper presented at the IX International Symposium on Modelling in Fruit Research and Orchard Management 1068, Canada.Google Scholar
Cao, H-x, Hanan, JS, Yan, L, Liu, Y-x, Yue, Y-B, Zhu, D-w and Ge, D-k (2012) Comparison of crop model validation methods. Journal of Integrative Agriculture 11, 12741285.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chakraborty, C and Joseph, A (2017) Machine learning at central banks. Bank of England Working Paper No. 674. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3031796 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3031796CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chapagain, R, Ojeda, J, Mohammed, C, Brown, J, Remenyi, T and Harris, R (2020) Historical and current approaches to decompose uncertainty in crop model predictions. Paper presented at the Second International Crop Modelling Symposium (iCROPM 2020), Le Corum Montpellier France.Google Scholar
Chaturvedi, DK (2017) Modeling and Simulation of Systems Using MATLAB® and Simulink®. Boca Raton, FL: CRC press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chaves, B, Cayón, G and Jones, JW (2009) Modeling plantain (Musa AAB Simmonds) potential yield. Agronomía Colombiana 27, 359366.Google Scholar
Chenu, K, Chapman, SC, Tardieu, F, McLean, G, Welcker, C and Hammer, GL (2009) Simulating the yield impacts of organ-level quantitative trait loci associated with drought response in maize: a “gene-to-phenotype” modeling approach. Genetics 183, 15071523.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chokshi, S and Gohil, P (2018) Effect of strain rate on tensile strength of natural fibre reinforced polyester composites. International Journal of Mechanical Engineering and Technology 9, 861869.Google Scholar
Chokshi, S, Gohil, P, Lalakiya, A, Patel, P and Parmar, A (2020) Tensile strength prediction of natural fibre and natural fibre yarn: strain rate variation upshot. Materials Today: Proceedings 27, 12181223.Google Scholar
Christian, B (2020) The Alignment Problem: Machine Learning and Human Values. New York: WW Norton & Company.Google Scholar
Connor, DJ, Loomis, RS and Cassman, KG (2011) Crop Ecology: Productivity and Management in Agricultural Systems. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cooper, M, Podlich, DW and Luo, L (2007) Modeling QTL effects and MAS in plant breeding. In Varshney, RK and Tuberosa, R (eds), Genomics-assisted Crop Improvement. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer, pp. 5795.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cottin, R, Melin, P and Ganry, J (1987) Modelling of banana production. Influence of some parameters in Martinique. Fruits (France) 42, 691701.Google Scholar
Crouch, R and Haines, C (2004) Mathematical modelling: transitions between the real world and the mathematical model. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology 35, 197206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Damour, G, Ozier-Lafontaine, H and Dorel, M (2012) Simulation of the growth of banana (Musa spp.) cultivated on cover-crop with simplified indicators of soil water and nitrogen availability and integrated plant traits. Field Crops Research 130, 99108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
de Deus, JAL, Neves, JCL, Soares, I, de Lima Neto, AJ, de Albuquerque, FMR, dos Santos, LL and Natale, W (2020) Multivariate selection and classification of mathematical models to estimate dry matter partitioning in the fertigated Prata banana in the Northeast Brazil. Field Crops Research 255, 107897.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Langhe, E, Perrier, X, Donohue, M and Denham, TP (2015) The original banana split: multi-disciplinary implications of the generation of African and Pacific plantains in island Southeast Asia. Ethnobotany Research and Applications 14, 299312.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Demirsoy, H (2009) Leaf area estimation in some species of fruit tree by using models as a non-destructive method. Fruits 64, 4551.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
de Oliveira, GQ, do Nascimento, RA, Costa, JF, Santana, EB, Costa, CML and Ribeiro, NFdP (2020) Drying of banana Pseudo-stem fibres: evaluation of kinetic models, effective diffusivity, thermodynamic properties, and structural characterization. Journal of Natural Fibres 17, 114.Google Scholar
de Souza, AV, Neto, AB, Piazentin, JC, Junior, BJD, Gomes, EP, Bonini, CdSB and Putti, FF (2019) Artificial neural network modelling in the prediction of bananas’ harvest. Scientia Horticulturae 257, 108724.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Swaef, T, Bellocchi, G, Aper, J, Lootens, P and Roldán-Ruiz, I (2019) Use of identifiability analysis in designing phenotyping experiments for modelling forage production and quality. Journal of Experimental Botany 70, 25872604.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Devireddy, SBR and Biswas, S (2018) Thermo-physical properties of short banana–jute fibre-reinforced epoxy-based hybrid composites. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part L: Journal of Materials: Design and Applications 232, 939951.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
de Wit, A, Boogaard, H, Fumagalli, D, Janssen, S, Knapen, R, van Kraalingen, D, N, , Supit, I, van der Wijngaart, R and van Diepen, K (2019) 25 years of the WOFOST cropping systems model. Agricultural Systems 168, 154167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Donato, LTF, Donato, SLR, Brito, CFB, Fonseca, VA, Gomes, CN and Rodrigues Filho, VA (2020) Estimating leaf area of prata-type banana plants with lanceolate type leaves. Revista Brasileira de Fruticultura 42, 17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dorel, M, Achard, R and Tixier, P (2008) SIMBA-N: modeling nitrogen dynamics in banana populations in wet tropical climate. Application to fertilization management in the Caribbean. European Journal of Agronomy 29, 3845.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Droutsas, I, Challinor, AJ, Swiderski, M and Semenov, MA (2019) New modelling technique for improving crop model performance-application to the GLAM model. Environmental Modelling & Software 118, 187200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eyduran, SP, Akın, M, Eyduran, E, Çelik, Ş, Ertürk, YE and Ercişli, S (2020) Forecasting banana harvest area and production in Turkey using time series analysis. Erwerbs-Obstbau 62, 281291.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Falconnier, GN, Corbeels, M, Boote, KJ, Affholder, F, Adam, M, MacCarthy, DS, Ruane, AC, Nendel, C, Whitbread, AM, Justes, E, Ahuja, LR, Akinseye, FM, Alou, IN, Amouzou, KA, Anapalli, SS, Baron, C, Basso, B, Baudron, F, Bertuzzi, P, Challinor, AJ, Chen, Y, Deryng, D, Elsayed, ML, Faye, B, Gaiser, T, Galdos, M, Gayler, S, Gerardeaux, E, Giner, M, Grant, B, Hoogenboom, G, Ibrahim, ES, Kamali, B, Kersebaum, KC, Kim, S-H, van der Laan, M, Leroux, L, Lizaso, JI, Maestrini, B, Meier, EA, MequanintF, Ndoli A, Porter, CH, Priesack, E, Ripoche, D, Sida, TS, Singh, U, Smith, WN, Srivastava, A, Sinha, S, Tao, F, Thorburn, PJ, Timlin, D, Traore, B, Twine, T and Webber, H (2020) Modelling climate change impacts on maize yields under low nitrogen input conditions in sub-Saharan Africa. Global Change Biology 26, 59425964.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
FAO (2019) Banana Facts and Figures. Rome, Italy: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.Google Scholar
FAO (2021) Banana Statistical Compendium 2020. Rome, Italy: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.Google Scholar
Folberth, C, Baklanov, A, Balkovič, J, Skalský, R, Khabarov, N and Obersteiner, M (2019) Spatio-temporal downscaling of gridded crop model yield estimates based on machine learning. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology 264, 115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ganry, J and Chillet, M (2008) Methodology to forecast the harvest date of banana bunches. Fruits 63, 371373.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Geethanjali, B and Muralidhara, B (2021) A framework for banana plantation growth using blockchain technology. In Fong, S, Dey, N, Joshi, A (eds), ICT Analysis and Applications. Singapore: Springer, pp. 615620.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Giordano, F, Fox, WP and Horton, S (2013) A First Course in Mathematical Modeling. Australia: Nelson Education.Google Scholar
Gramatica, P and Sangion, A (2016) A historical excursus on the statistical validation parameters for QSAR models: a clarification concerning metrics and terminology. Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling 56, 11271131.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Grassini, P, van Bussel, LG, Van Wart, J, Wolf, J, Claessens, L, Yang, H and Cassman, KG (2015) How good is good enough? Data requirements for reliable crop yield simulations and yield-gap analysis. Field Crops Research 177, 4963.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guimarães, BVC, Donato, SLR, Aspiazú, I and Azevedo, AM (2021) Yield prediction of ‘Prata Anã’ and ‘BRS Platina’ banana plants by artificial neural networks. Pesquisa Agropecuária Tropical 51, 111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haile, Y (2014) Regression analysis to estimate enset (Ensete ventricosum (Welw.) Cheesman) kocho yield from vegetative linear dimensions. Journal of Plant Sciences 2, 4349.Google Scholar
Hammer, RG, Sentelhas, PC and Mariano, JC (2020) Sugarcane yield prediction through data mining and crop simulation models. Sugar Technology 22, 216225.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harrell, FE Jr., Lee, KL and Mark, DB (1996) Multivariable prognostic models: issues in developing models, evaluating assumptions and adequacy, and measuring and reducing errors. Statistics in Medicine 15, 361387.3.0.CO;2-4>CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hayman, P, Rickards, L, Eckard, R and Lemerle, D (2012) Climate change through the farming systems lens: challenges and opportunities for farming in Australia. Crop and Pasture Science 63, 203214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hersbach, H, Bell, B, Berrisford, P, Hirahara, S, Horányi, A, Muñoz-Sabater, J, Nicolas, J, Peubey, C, Radu, R, Schepers, D, Simmons, A, Soci, C, Abdalla, S, Abellan, X, Balsamo, G, Bechtold, P, Biavati, F, Bidlot, J, Bonavita, M, De Chiara, G, Dahlgren, P, Dee, D, Diamantakis, M, Dragani, R, Flemming, J, Forbes, R, Fuentes, M, Geer, A, Haimberger, L, Healy, S, Hogan, JH, Holm, E, Janisková, M, Keeley, S, Laloyaux, P, Lopez, P, Lupu, C, Radnoti, G, de Rosnay, P, Rozum, I, Vamborg, F, Villaume, S and Thépaut, JN (2020) The ERA5 global reanalysis. Quarterly Journal of the Royal Meteorological Society 146, 19992049.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hoogenboom, G, Justes, E, Pradal, C, Launay, M, Asseng, S, Ewert, F and Martre, P (2021) iCROPM 2020: crop modeling for the future. The Journal of Agricultural Science 158, 13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hossain, MM, Abdulla, F and Majumder, A (2016) Forecasting of banana production in Bangladesh. American Journal of Agricultural and Biological Sciences 11, 9399.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Irwin, SH, Good, DL and Tannura, M (2008) Forming Expectations About 2008 US Corn and Soybean Yields – Application of Crop Weather Models That Incorporate Planting Progress. Marketing and Outlook Briefs 183490, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Department of Agricultural and Consumer Economics, United States. Available at https://10.0.85.244/ag.econ.183490Google Scholar
Jaiswal, P, Jha, SN and Bharadwaj, R (2012) Non-destructive prediction of quality of intact banana using spectroscopy. Scientia Horticulturae 135, 1422.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jannoyer, M (1995) Determining the name of reproductive organs of a banana inflorescence (Musa acuminata, cv ‘Grande Naine’) (Doctoral dissertation). INAPG, Institute National Agronomique Paris-Grignonde Paris (FRA), Australia.Google Scholar
Jayasinghe, SL and Kumar, L (2021) Potential impact of the current and future climate on the yield, quality, and climate suitability for tea [Camellia sinensis (L.) O. Kuntze]: a systematic review. Agronomy 11, 619.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jayasinghe, H, Suriyagoda, L, Karunarathne, A and Wijeratna, M (2018) Modelling shoot growth and yield of Ceylon tea cultivar TRI-2025 (Camellia sinensis (L.) O. Kuntze). The Journal of Agricultural Science 156, 200214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jayasinghe, SL, Kumar, L and Kaliyadasa, E (2021) The future of high-quality Ceylon tea seems bleak in the face of climate change. International Journal of Biometeorology 65, 16291646.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jones, JW, Antle, JM, Basso, B, Boote, KJ, Conant, RT, Foster, I and Janssen, S (2017) Brief history of agricultural systems modeling. Agricultural Systems 155, 240254.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jullien, A, Malézieux, E, Michaux-Ferrière, N, Chillet, M and Ney, B (2001) Within-bunch variability in banana fruit weight: importance of developmental lag between fruits. Annals of Botany 87, 101108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keating, BA, Herrero, M, Carberry, PS, Gardner, J and Cole, MB (2014) Food wedges: framing the global food demand and supply challenge towards 2050. Global Food Security 3, 125132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Khan, T, Qiu, J, Qureshi, MAA, Iqbal, MS, Mehmood, R and Hussain, W (2020) Agricultural fruit prediction using deep neural networks. Procedia Computer Science 174, 7278.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kooman, P and Haverkort, A (1995) Modelling development and growth of the potato crop influenced by temperature and daylength: LINTUL-POTATO. In Haverkort, AJ and MacKerron, DKL (eds), Potato Ecology and Modelling of Crops Under Conditions Limiting Growth. Wageningen, The Netherlands: Springer, pp. 4159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kumar, KS, Bhowmik, D, Duraivel, S and Umadevi, M (2012) Traditional and medicinal uses of banana. Journal of Pharmacognosy and Phytochemistry 1, 5163.Google Scholar
Kuneepong, P, Silayoi, B, Apauthaipong, T and Chutchwanchaiphan, J (2020) Modelling banana yields to evaluate land use in Thailand. Ministry of Agriculture & Cooperatives 7, 533539.Google Scholar
Lamour, J, Le Moguedec, G, Naud, O, Lechaudel, M, Taylor, J and Tisseyre, B (2020) Evaluating the drivers of banana flowering cycle duration using a stochastic model and on farm production data. Precision Agriculture 22, 124.Google Scholar
Laskar, SY, Sileshi, GW, Nath, AJ and Das, AK (2020) Allometric models for above and below-ground biomass of wild Musa stands in tropical semi evergreen forests. Global Ecology and Conservation 24, e01208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Latif, NSA, Mushoddad, NAMA and Azmai, NSM (2020) Agriculture management strategies using simple logistic growth model. Paper presented at the IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, Changchun, China.Google Scholar
Linnenluecke, MK, Marrone, M and Singh, AK (2020) Conducting systematic literature reviews and bibliometric analyses. Australian Journal of Management 45, 175194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Macedo, LL, Vimercati, WC, da Silva Araújo, C, Saraiva, SH and Teixeira, LJQ (2020) Effect of drying air temperature on drying kinetics and physicochemical characteristics of dried banana. Journal of Food Process Engineering 43, e13451.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Madhusudan, S, Bhargava, N and Madhukiran, J (2018) Prediction of hygric strain coefficients for hybrid natural composites. Materials Today: Proceedings 5, 72177224.Google Scholar
Marchiori, D and Franco, M (2020) Knowledge transfer in the context of inter-organizational networks: foundations and intellectual structures. Journal of Innovation & Knowledge 5, 130139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marshall-Colon, A, Long, SP, Allen, DK, Allen, G, Beard, DA, Benes, B and Hart, JC (2017) Crops in silico: generating virtual crops using an integrative and multi-scale modeling platform. Frontiers in Plant Science 8, 786.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McAllister, JT, Lennertz, L and Atencio Mojica, Z (2021) Mapping A discipline: a guide to using VOSviewer for bibliometric and visual analysis. Science & Technology Libraries 40, 130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Medina-Ruíz, C, Mercado-Luna, I, Soto-Zarazúa, G, Torres-Pacheco, I and Rico-García, E (2011) Mathematical modeling on tomato plants: a review. African Journal of Agricultural Research 6, 67456749.Google Scholar
Mekwatanakarn, W and Turner, D (1989) A simple model to estimate the rate of leaf production in bananas in the subtropics. Scientia Horticulturae 40, 5362.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meline, T (2006) Selecting studies for systemic review: inclusion and exclusion criteria. Contemporary Issues in Communication Science and Disorders 33, 2127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mendes, B, Filippi, S, Demetrio, C and Rodriguez, A (1999) A statistical approach to study the dynamics of micropropagation rates, using banana (Musa spp.) as an example. Plant Cell Reports 18, 967971.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mizera, Č, Herák, D, Hrabě, P, Müller, M and Kabutey, A (2016) Effect of length of false banana fibre () on mechanical behaviour under tensile loading. Scientia Agriculturae Bohemica 47, 9096.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mizera, Č, Herak, D and Hrabě, P (2017) Mathematical model describing the drying curves of false banana's fibre (Ensete ventricosum). Agronomy Research 15, 10941100.Google Scholar
Mohapatra, D, Mishra, S and Sutar, N (2010) Banana and its by-product utilisation: an overview. Journal of Scientific and Industrial Research 69, 323329.Google Scholar
Moher, D, Liberati, A, Tetzlaff, J and Altman, DG (2010) Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. International Journal of Surgery (London, England) 8, 336341.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Monzón, MD, Paz, R, Verdaguer, M, Suárez, L, Badalló, P, Ortega, Z and Diaz, N (2019) Experimental analysis and simulation of novel technical textile reinforced composite of banana fibre. Materials 12, 1134.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Moral-Muñoz, JA, López-Herrera, AG, Herrera-Viedma, E and Cobo, MJ (2019) Science mapping analysis software tools: a review. Springer Handbook of Science and Technology Indicators 159185.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mwesigwa, R and Mwasiagi, JI (2019) Use of regression models to study the factors affecting the tensile and compressive properties of banana bio-composites. Journal of Natural Fibres 16, 10551063.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Negash, M, Starr, M and Kanninen, M (2013) Allometric equations for biomass estimation of Enset (Ensete ventricosum) grown in indigenous agroforestry systems in the Rift Valley escarpment of southern-eastern Ethiopia. Agroforestry Systems 87, 571581.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nyombi, K (2010) Understanding growth of East Africa highland banana: experiments and simulation (PhD Dissertation), Wageningen University and Research.Google Scholar
Nyombi, K, Van Asten, PJ, Leffelaar, PA, Corbeels, M, Kaizzi, C and Giller, KE (2009) Allometric growth relationships of East Africa highland bananas (Musa AAA-EAHB) cv. Kisansa and Mbwazirume. Annals of Applied Biology 155, 403418.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Olivares, BO, Araya-Alman, M, Acevedo-Opazo, C, Rey, JC, Cañete-Salinas, P, Kurina, FG, Balzarini, M, Lobo, D, Navas-Cortés, JA, Landa, BB and Gómez, JA (2020) Relationship between soil properties and banana productivity in the two main cultivation areas in Venezuela. Journal of Soil Science and Plant Nutrition 20, 25122524.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Olivares, BO, Calero, J, Rey, JC, Lobo, D, Landa, BB and Gómez, JA (2022) Correlation of banana productivity levels and soil morphological properties using regularized optimal scaling regression. Catena 208, 105718.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ortiz-Ulloa, JA, Abril-González, MF, Pelaez-Samaniego, MR and Zalamea-Piedra, TS (2020) Biomass yield and carbon abatement potential of banana crops (Musa spp.) in Ecuador. Environmental Science and Pollution Research 25, 113.Google Scholar
Patwari, AU, Bhuiyan, SA, Ahsan, Q, Khan, IH and Khan, NH (2019) Prediction and optimization of compressive load of a green composite material from natural fibre using statistical approach. International Journal of Integrated Engineering 11, 8389.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pereira, A and Maraschin, M (2015) Banana (Musa spp) from peel to pulp: ethnopharmacology, source of bioactive compounds and its relevance for human health. Journal of Ethnopharmacology 160, 149163.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Perrier, X, De Langhe, E, Donohue, M, Lentfer, C, Vrydaghs, L, Bakry, F and Jenny, C (2011) Multidisciplinary perspectives on banana (Musa spp.) domestication. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 108, 1131111318.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Potdar, M and Pawar, K (1991) Non-destructive leaf area estimation in banana. Scientia Horticulturae 45, 251254.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Poznyak, A, Chairez, I and Poznyak, T (2019) A survey on artificial neural networks application for identification and control in environmental engineering: biological and chemical systems with uncertain models. Annual Reviews in Control 48, 250272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Preethi, P and Balakrishna, G (2013) Physical and chemical properties of banana fibre extracted from commercial banana cultivars grown in tamilnadu state. Agrotechnology 01, 13. doi: 10.4172/2168-9881.S11-008.Google Scholar
Priyadarshana, R, Kaliyadasa, P, Ranawana, S and Senarathna, K (2020) Biowaste management: banana fibre utilization for product development. Journal of Natural Fibres 19, 111.Google Scholar
Pujari, S, Ramakrishna, A and Padal, KB (2017 a) Comparison of ANN and regression analysis for predicting the water absorption behaviour of jute and banana fibre reinforcedepoxy composites. Materials Today: Proceedings 4, 16261633.Google Scholar
Pujari, S, Ramakrishna, A and Padal, KB (2017 b) Prediction of swelling behaviour of jute and banana fibre composites by using ANN and regression analysis. Materials Today: Proceedings 4, 85488557.Google Scholar
Putri, RS, Purwanto, A, Pramono, R, Asbari, M, Wijayanti, LM and Hyun, CC (2020) Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on online home learning: an explorative study of primary schools in Indonesia. International Journal of Advanced Science and Technology 29, 48094818.Google Scholar
Rao, PD, Rao, DV, Naidu, AL and Bahubalendruni, MR (2017) Mechanical properties of banana fibre reinforced composites and manufacturing techniques: a review. International Journal For Research & Development In Technology 8, 3946.Google Scholar
Rathod, S and Mishra, G (2018) Statistical models for forecasting mango and banana yield of Karnataka, India. Journal of Agricultural Science and Technology 20, 803816.Google Scholar
Rebortera, M and Fajardo, A (2019 a) Forecasting banana harvest yields using deep learning. Paper presented at the 2019 IEEE 9th International Conference on System Engineering and Technology (ICSET), Shah Alam, Malaysia.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rebortera, MA and Fajardo, AC (2019 b) An enhanced deep learning approach in forecasting banana harvest yields. (IJACSA) International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and Applications 10, 275280.Google Scholar
Revathi, S, Sivakumaran, N, Ramajayam, D, Saraswathi, M, Backiyarani, S and Uma, S (2019) Growth estimation during hardening phase of tissue cultured banana plantlets using bootstrapped artificial neural network. Journal of Environmental Biology 40, 719724.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robinson, JC and Human, N B (1988) Forecasting of banana harvest (‘Williams’) in the subtropics using seasonal variations in bunch development rate and bunch mass. Scientia horticulturae 34, 249263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rosentrater, KA, Todey, D and Persyn, R (2009) Quantifying total and sustainable agricultural biomass resources in South Dakota – a preliminary assessment. International Agricultural Engineering Journal 11, 114.Google Scholar
Rosenzweig, C, Elliott, J, Deryng, D, Ruane, AC, Müller, C, Arneth, A and Khabarov, N (2014) Assessing agricultural risks of climate change in the 21st century in a global gridded crop model intercomparison. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 111, 32683273.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rozendaal, D, Slingerland, M, Zuidema, P, Giller, K and Anten, N (2020) Crop growth models for tropical perennials: current advances and remaining challenges. Paper presented at the ICROPM2020: Second International Crop Modelling Symposium, Le Corum Montpellier France.Google Scholar
Ruane, AC, Goldberg, R and Chryssanthacopoulos, J (2015) Climate forcing datasets for agricultural modeling: merged products for gap-filling and historical climate series estimation. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology 200, 233248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Salazar-Díaz, R and Tixier, P (2021) Individual-based analysis of interactions between plants: a statistical modelling approach applied to banana and cacao in heterogeneous multistrata agroecosystems in Talamanca, Costa Rica. European Journal of Agronomy 127, 126295.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Salvacion, AR (2020) Effect of climate on provincial-level banana yield in the Philippines. Information Processing in Agriculture 7, 5057.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sannagoudar, MS, Patil, R and Rajanna, G (2019) Calibration and evaluation of DSSAT-CERES model for Kharif sorghum genotypes. Journal of Experimental Agriculture International 30, 18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sargeant, JM and O'Connor, AM (2020) Scoping reviews, systematic reviews, and meta-analysis: applications in veterinary medicine. Frontiers in Veterinary Science 7, 11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schils, R, Olesen, JE, Kersebaum, K-C, Rijk, B, Oberforster, M, Kalyada, V, Khitrykau, M, Gobin, A, Kirchev, H, Manolova, V, Manolov, I, Trnka, M, Hlavinka, P, Palosuo, T, Peltonen-Sainio, P, Jauhiainen, L, Lorgeou, J, Marrou, H, Danalatos, N, Archontoulis, S, Fodor, N, Spink, J, Roggero, PP, Bassu, S, Pulina, A, Seehusen, T, Uhlen, AK, Żyłowskas, K, Nieróbca, A, Kozyra, J, Silva, JV, Maçãs, BM, Coutinho, J, Ion, V, Takáč, J, Mínguez, MI, Eckersten, H, Levy, L, Herra, M, Hiltbrunner, J, Kryvobok, O, Kryvoshein, O, Bradley, RS, Kindred, D, Topp, CFE, Boogaard, H, de Groot, H, Lesschen, P, van Bussel, L, Wolf, J, Zijlstra, M, van Loon, MP and van lttersum, MK (2018) Cereal yield gaps across Europe. European Journal of Agronomy 101, 109120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schmidt, D, Bahr, C, Friedel, M and Kahlen, K (2019) Modelling approach for predicting the impact of changing temperature conditions on grapevine canopy architectures. Agronomy 9, 426.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shahhosseini, M, Hu, G, Huber, I and Archontoulis, SV (2021) Coupling machine learning and crop modeling improves crop yield prediction in the US Corn Belt. Scientific Reports 11, 115.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sharath, KM (2016) Pre-harvest Forecasting Models and Trends in Production of Banana (Musa spp.) in Kerala. Department of Agricultural Statistics, College of Agriculture, Vellayani.Google Scholar
Sharrock, S and Lusty, C (2000) Nutritive value of banana. In INIBAP Annual Report 1999. Montpellier, France: INIBAP, pp. 2831.Google Scholar
Sia, C, Fernando, L, Joseph, A and Chua, S (2018) Modified Weibull analysis on banana fibre strength prediction. Journal of Mechanical Engineering and Sciences 12, 34613471.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sidhu, JS and Zafar, TA (2018) Bioactive compounds in banana fruits and their health benefits. Food Quality and Safety 2, 183188.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Silva, JV and Giller, KE (2021) Grand challenges for the 21st century: what crop models can and can't (yet) do. The Journal of Agricultural Science 158, 112.Google Scholar
Simmonds, NW (1962) The Evolution of the Bananas. London, UK: Longmans.Google Scholar
Singh, B, Singh, JP, Kaur, A and Singh, N (2016) Bioactive compounds in banana and their associated health benefits – a review. Food Chemistry 206, 111.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Soares, J, Pasqual, M, Lacerda, W, Silva, S and Donato, S (2013) Utilization of artificial neural networks in the prediction of the bunches’ weight in banana plants. Scientia Horticulturae 155, 2429.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Soares, J, Pasqual, M, Lacerda, W, Silva, S and Donato, S (2014) Comparison of techniques used in the prediction of yield in banana plants. Scientia Horticulturae 167, 8490.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Soltani, M, Alimardani, R and Omid, M (2010) A new mathematical modeling of banana fruit and comparison with actual values of dimensional properties. Modern Applied Science 4, 104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spitters, C and Schapendonk, A (1990) Evaluation of breeding strategies for drought tolerance in potato by means of crop growth simulation. In Genetic Aspects of Plant Mineral Nutrition. The Netherlands: Springer, pp. 151161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stevens, B, Diels, J, Brown, A, Bayo, S, Ndakidemi, PA and Swennen, R (2020) Banana biomass estimation and yield forecasting from non-destructive measurements for two contrasting cultivars and water regimes. Agronomy 10, 1435.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stöckle, CO, Donatelli, M and Nelson, R (2003) CropSyst, a cropping systems simulation model. European Journal of Agronomy 18, 289307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Strano, G, Hao, L, Everson, RM and Evans, KE (2013) Surface roughness analysis, modelling and prediction in selective laser melting. Journal of Materials Processing Technology 213, 589597.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Subagyo, A and Chafidz, A (2018) Banana pseudo-stem fibre: preparation, characteristics, and applications. Banana Nutrition-Function and Processing Kinetics 119.Google Scholar
Taulya, G (2013) East African highland bananas (Musa spp. AAA-EA)’worry'more about potassium deficiency than drought stress. Field Crops Research 151, 4555.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tixier, P, Malézieux, E and Dorel, M (2004) SIMBA-POP: a cohort population model for long-term simulation of banana crop harvest. Ecological Modelling 180, 407417.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tixier, P, Malézieux, E, Dorel, M and Wery, J (2008) SIMBA, a model for designing sustainable banana-based cropping systems. Agricultural Systems 97, 139150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tixier, P, Lavigne, C, Alvarez, S, Gauquier, A, Blanchard, M, Ripoche, A and Achard, R (2011) Model evaluation of cover crops, application to eleven species for banana cropping systems. European Journal of Agronomy 34, 5361.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tixier, P, Peyrard, N, Aubertot, J-N, Gaba, S, Radoszycki, J, Caron-Lormier, G, Vinatier, F, Mollot, G and Sabbadin, R (2013) Modelling interaction networks for enhanced ecosystem services in agroecosystems. Advances in Ecological Research 49, 437480.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Turner, D (1994) Banana and Plantain. Environmental Physiology of Fruit Crop. CRC Press.Google Scholar
Van Ittersum, MK, Van Bussel, LG, Wolf, J, Grassini, P, Van Wart, J, Guilpart, N, Claessens, L, de Groot, H, Wiebe, K, Mason-D'Croz, D, Yang, H, Boogaard, H, van Oort, PAJ, van Loon, MP, Saito, K, Adimo, O, Adjei-Nsiah, S, Agali, A, Bala, A, Chikowo, R, Kaizzi, K, Kouressy, M, Makoi, JHJR, Ouattara, K, Tesfaye, K and Cassman, KG (2016) Can sub-Saharan Africa feed itself? Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 113, 1496414969.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Veeramanipriya, E, Sundari, AU and Asaithambi, R (2019) Numerical modelling of drying kinetics of banana flowers using natural and forced convection dryers. International Journal of Innovative Technology and Exploring Engineering (IJITEE) 8, 5.Google Scholar
Venkateshwaran, N and ElayaPerumal, A (2011) Modeling and evaluation of tensile properties of randomly oriented banana/epoxy composite. Journal of Reinforced Plastics and Composites 30, 19571967.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Venkateshwaran, N, Elayaperumal, A and Sathiya, G (2012) Prediction of tensile properties of hybrid-natural fibre composites. Composites Part B: Engineering 43, 793796.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Venugopalan, R and Shamasundaran, K (2005) Statistical model for evolving a crop-logging technique in banana. Tropical Agriculture 82, 2529.Google Scholar
Villegas-Santa, L and Castañeda-Sánchez, DA (2020) Multivariate analysis for modeling yield variability to define management zones in a banana agroecosystem. Dyna 87, 165172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vinoth, R, Gokulnath, K, Barathkumar, K, Ahildarshan, K and Gokulprakash, E (2018) Study of banana fibre: a review. International Journal for Scientific Research & Development 6, 127131.Google Scholar
Vinson, EL, Coneva, ED, Kemble, JM, Woods, FM, Sibley, JL, Fonsah, EG, Perkins-Veazie, PM and Kessler, JR (2018) Prediction of flower emergence and evaluation of cropping potential in selected banana cultivars (Musa sp.) cultivated in subtropical conditions of coastal Alabama. HortScience 53, 16341639.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wairegi, L, Van Asten, P, Tenywa, M and Bekunda, M (2009) Quantifying bunch weights of the East African Highland bananas (Musa spp. AAA-EA) using non-destructive field observations. Scientia Horticulturae 121, 6372.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wairegi, LW, van Asten, PJ, Tenywa, MM and Bekunda, MA (2010) Abiotic constraints override biotic constraints in East African highland banana systems. Field Crops Research 117, 146153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, H, Takle, ES and Shen, J (2001) Shelterbelts and windbreaks: mathematical modeling and computer simulations of turbulent flows. Annual Review of Fluid Mechanics 33, 549586.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Webber, BG, Matthews, AJ, Vinayachandran, P, Neema, C, Sanchez-Franks, A, Vijith, V, Amol, P and Baranowski, DB (2018) The dynamics of the Southwest Monsoon Current in 2016 from high-resolution in situ observations and models. Journal of Physical Oceanography 48, 22592282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Woomer, P, Bekunda, M and Nkalubo, S (1999) Estimation of banana yield based on bunch phenology. African Crop Science Journal 7, 341347.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yamaguchi, J and Araki, S (2004) Biomass production of banana plants in the indigenous farming system of the East African Highland: a case study on the Kamachumu Plateau in northwest Tanzania. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment 102, 93111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yeasin, M, Singh, K, Lama, A and Gurung, B (2021) Improved weather indices-based Bayesian regression model for forecasting crop yield. MAUSAM 72, 879886.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yemataw, Z, Said, A, Dejene, T, Ocimati, W, Amwonya, D and Blomme, G (2021) Estimating yield components, limiting factors, and yield gaps of enset in Ethiopia using easily measurable above-ground plant traits. Sustainability 13, 13255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yin, X and Struik, PC (2017) Can increased leaf photosynthesis be converted into higher crop mass production? A simulation study for rice using the crop model GECROS. Journal of Experimental Botany 68, 23452360.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Yin, X, Stam, P, Kropff, MJ and Schapendonk, AH (2003) Crop modeling, QTL mapping, and their complementary role in plant breeding. Agronomy Journal 95, 9098.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zucoloto, M, Lima, JDS, Coelho, RI and Xavier, AC (2013) Regression models to estimate the mass of the bunch of banana tree cv. Prata Anã. Bioscience Journal 29, 19972000.Google Scholar
Figure 0

Fig. 1. Graphical representation of mathematical model classification based on the different features and purposes.

Figure 1

Fig. 2. The protocol of preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA).

Figure 2

Fig. 3. Colour online. The co-occurrence of keyword map based on the 75 selected full-text articles on mathematical models to estimate yield and growth of banana. Note. The occurrence of keywords was specified to the colour of a specific cluster algorithm.

Figure 3

Fig. 4. Number of publications related to mathematical modelling on banana fruit yield (a, b, c), growth and development (d, e, f), and fibre-related characteristics (g, h, i) by year, country, and mathematical approach. Note. The country of the publication was chosen solely based on the first author.

Supplementary material: File

Jayasinghe et al. supplementary material

Tables S1-S3

Download Jayasinghe et al. supplementary material(File)
File 82.8 KB