## MODELING CASSAVA YIELD: A RESPONSE SURFACE

APPROACH

## A.O. Bello Federal University of Technology, Nigeria

## A BSTRACT

This paper  reports  on  application  of  theory  of  experimental  design  usingechniques  in  R graphical  t programming  language  and  application  of  nonlinear  bootstrap  regression  method  to  demonstrate  the invariant property of parameter estimates of the Inverse polynomial Model IPM in a nonlinear surface.

## K EYWORDS

Design properties, riance prediction function, Bootstrap non-linear regression, Cassava Va

## 1. INTRODUCTION

Yield  has  always  being  a  major  yard  stick  for  measuring  successful  agricultural  method  and economic indices.

There  has  being  increased  demand  for  export  of  cassava  to  China,  US  and  other  developed nations of the world whose production of currency papers, starch related products, recently fas increasing bio-fuel energy and others, largely depends on Africa's production of cassava. The demand for Cassava has globally increased and it overshoot supply, the of drop in occurrence yield has put a lot of pressure on production of Cassava and the present increase in cultivation not  enough  to  curb  demand,  according  to  Food  and  Agriculture  Organization  of  the  United Nationsdatabase FAOSTAT (2009.

Achieving the production efficiency of cassava is the problem that this research tends to employ statistical  tools  to  approach,  focusing  on  the  area  of  modelling  Cassava  yield  plantation  an highlighting the respective point of intercept and gradient levels of fertilizer and crop spac with the variety of cassava that is capable of delivering the cassava production efficiency. T soil, cultural practices, and socio-economic factors also play a key role in cassava production. many tropical countries, soil fertility is usually poor and requires fertilization to achieve a level of cassava  yield Muengula-Manyi1,  et  al.,  2012 morusi2011 M. . O on the other hand reported that the incidence of CMD infection that affects cassava yield was depressed by high dosage of NPK (100 kg ha-1 when compared to plants in soil with low NPK (10 kg ha -1.

## 1.2 The World Bio-Fuel Target: The Pressing Pressure for Highva Yield Cassa .

According to Rishi Sidhu2011, cassava  is  the  newest  addition  to io-fuel line-up,  joining the b other bio-chemical substances, and has doubled in price because of its new role, quoting New

International Journal on Computational Sciences &amp; Applications (IJCSA) Vol.4, No.3, June 2014

York Times.To find a new source of energy, Chinese scientists perfected a process to make fuel from cassava. he European Union has aid that 10 percent of transportation fuel must come from T s renewable sources like bio or wind power by 2020, and the U.S. requires bio  to - fuel - fuel  use reach 36 billion gallons annually by 2022. These targets, according  D. to Timothy Searchinger(2013)  r esearch scholar at Princeton University.  to have quick increase in a Failure yield would not only affect the bio arget but also amount to cassava food and its by - fuel t - products shortage.

## 2.METHODOLOGY

RSM involves several experiments, and using the resul e experiment to provide direction ts of on for what to do next. This next action could be to focus the experiment around a different set conditions, or to collect more data in the current experimental region in order to fit a higher -model or confir what we seem to have found ( sell V. Lenth 2012 . m Rus , )

$$y = f ( x ) \beta + \varepsilon \text{ \quad \ \$$

Where ), ..., ( , 2 , 1 k x x x x glyph&lt;UNKNOWN&gt;  s  is  the  coefficient  estimates,r  term)  ~   (0; 1)  and  (erro N independent. f is  the  function  that  describes  the  form  in  which  the  response  and  the  input variable  are  related,  its  mathematical  form  is  not  known  in  practice.  It  is  often  approximate within the experimental region. The purpoonsidering a model such as is to establish a se of c Eq. 1 relationship, albeit approximations, that can be used to predict response values for given setti of  the  control  variables,  determine  significance  of  the  factors.  The  totality  of  the  predictors' settings is denoted by D, considering n matrix form; Eq. 1, i

$$y = X \beta + \varepsilon$$

Ordinary least quares estimator ofis - Y X X X ' ) ' ( ˆ 1 glyph&lt;UNKNOWN&gt; glyph&lt;UNKNOWN&gt; 

Y, estimates  riance va 1 2 ) ' ( ) ˆ ( glyph&lt;UNKNOWN&gt; glyph&lt;UNKNOWN&gt; X X Var   and the predicted response given glyph&lt;UNKNOWN&gt; glyph&lt;UNKNOWN&gt; glyph&lt;UNKNOWN&gt; ) ( ˆ , ) ( ˆ x f x y  with variance as

$$V a r [ \hat { y } ( x ) ] = \delta ^ { 2 }$$

The proper choice of design is very important in any response surface investigation. This is tr because the quality of prediction, as measured by the size of the prediction variance, depends o the  design  matrix  D  as  can  be  seen  from  formulaIt  is  therefore  imperative  that  the ). ˆ (  Var prediction variance in Eq. 3 be as small as possi ed that the postulated model in Eq. 1 ble provid does not suffer from lack of fit. [SeeKhuri et al (2010) Khuri, AI, Cornell (1996) Andre I and for details].

## 2.1Orthogonality

A design D is said to be orthogonal if the matrix XX is diagonal, where X is t  in he model matrix Eq. 2. The elements ofwill be uncorrelated because the off diagonal elements of  ˆ ) will ˆ (  Var be zero.

International Journal on Computational Sciences &amp; Applications (IJCSA) Vol.4, No.3, June 2014

## 2.2Rotatability:

A design D is said to be rotatable if the prediction variance in Eq. 3 ispoints that constant at all are  equidistant  from  the  design  centre.  The  prediction  variance  remains  unchanged  under  any rotation of the coordinate axes.

## C. Uniform Precision:

A rotatable design is said to have the additional uniform precision property i the f Var [ (x)] at y ˆ origin is equal to its value at a distance of one from the origin. This helps in producing so stability in the prediction variance in the vicinity of the design centre

$$\text{any in the creation variance} \, \begin{matrix} \\ \\ \\$$

## 2.2The Choice Of Design and Model :

The problem of establishing cassava production efficiency in a world of inadequate resources, where resources such as maner, seedling, fertilizers, time etc cannot be risked to test run all - pow possible yield in a realplanting venture emphasis on tropical regions of Africa, where other life agricultural factors are asymptotically the same. . et (2000 ,noted that the cost of Parsad, R al ) constructing a response surface affects the choice of design of experiment and this can have large influence on accuracy of the approximation. These call for caution in making choice of design and model.

In  the  quest  of  modelling  cassava  yield  effectively,  a  good  choice  of  design  and  model (methodology) is vital. The above challenges sug need for a methodology that has the gest the ability  to  develop  a  smaller  design  that  can  lead  to  a  model  that  will  adequately  suggest  a possible  yields  per  planting  input  factors.    A  design  that  will  help  to  reduce  the  number  o experimental runs which uld be costly or unattainable. The ability to model all possible yields co per planting input will help to estimate the quantity of harvest that will eventually be due exports  and  local  consumption.  Also  this  will  ensure  good  planning  for  each  farming  a nd economic year.

## 2.3The Design

The first rder design proposed for fitting first odel [factorial Design].  second - order - o - degree m -The design  proposed  for  fitting  second  model [The  Central  Composite  design  (CCD)] - d gree --Orthogonality,  Rotatability  and  Unirecision  are  desired  properties  in  any  design. form  P CCD consist the full factorial runs (or fractional factorial of resolution V) with nf runs, also "cube point", (ii) The axial or star runs consisting n  on the axis of each factor  at a = 2k points distance from the center of the design and, (iii) The center runs 0) without replication. 0 n (0, 0...,

The  total  number  of  runs 0 n n n N a f glyph&lt;UNKNOWN&gt; glyph&lt;UNKNOWN&gt; glyph&lt;UNKNOWN&gt; (See Klaus  Hinkelmann,  Design  and  Analysis    of Experiments  Volume 1  Second Editir details). on fo

$$b = \sum _ { i = 1 } ^ { N } x _ { i } ^ {$$

International Journal on Computational Sciences &amp; Applications (IJCSA) Vol.4, No.3, June 2014

$$\begin{array} { c } \cdot & \cdot \\ \text{For appropriate distance from the center } \alpha = ( n f ) ^ { \sqrt { 4 } } \\ b ^ { 2 } = N c \Leftrightarrow [ n f + 2 \alpha ^ { 2 } ] ^ { 2 } = [ n f + n _ { a } + n _ { 0 } ] n _ { f } \\ & \text{and} \\ d = 2 c & ( 6 ) \\ 2. 4 \text{ The Inverse Polynomial Model (IPM) A Class of } \Gamma \end{array}$$

## 2.4The Inverse Polynomial Model (IPM) A Class  Nonlinear Model of

The general forms of Inverse Polynomials of (Nelder, 1966; Nduka, 1994; Holger Dette, 2007) are family of nonear function. - l i

$$& \frac { x _ { 1 }, x _ { 2 }, \dots, x _ { k } } { y } = p o l y n o m i a l \, \text{in} \ x _ { 1 }, x _ { 2 }, \dots, x _ { k } \ \text{(Nelder1964)} \\ & \prod _ { i = 1 } ^ { k } \frac { x _ { i } } { q } = \prod _ { i = 1 } ^ { k } ( \beta _ { 0 } + \beta _ { 1 i } x _ { i } + \beta _ { 2 i } x _ { i } ^ { 2 } + \dots + \beta _ { p - 1 i } x _ { i } ^ { p - 1 } ) \quad \quad ( 7 )$$

Where, k = number of factors p = number of levels of factor i. eld per unit area. q = the yi

Intrinsically  Non near  Model;  Non inearity  i parameters  and  when  linearity  cannot  be - li - l n achieved through transformation

A regression model is called nonr, if the derivatives of the model with respect to the model - li ea parameters depend on one or more parameters. Method of Gaussis more adequ te in - Newton a estimation  of  inverse  polynomial  model;  it  is  preferable  because  of  its  faster  convergence  i inverse  polynomials,  also  the  boundedness,  invariant  of  parameter  estimates,  distribution  free asymmetry, and quick location of optimum properties favoureice of Inverse Polynomial d the cho model. [See Nduka, E. C. 1994 nd 1997]. a

*First Order Model;

$$\prod _ { i = 1 } ^ { k } \frac { \stackrel { \cdot } { x _ { i } } } { q } = ( \beta _ { _ { 0 1 } } + \beta _ { _ { i 1 } } x _ { _ { 1 } } ) ( \beta _ { _ { 0 2 } } + \beta _ { _ { i 2 } } x _ { _ { 2 } } ) \ \text{ also, let } q = y$$

$$\frac { x _ { 1 } x _ { 2 } } { q } = \beta _ { 0 1 } \beta _ { 0 2 } + \beta _ { 0 1 } \beta _ { 1 2 } x _ { 2 } + \beta _ { 1 1 } \beta _ { 0 2 } x _ { 1 } + \beta _ { 1 1 } \beta _ { 1 2 } x _ { 1 } x _ { 2 }$$

$$y ^ { - 1 } = \beta _ { 1 1 } + \beta _ { 0 1 } x _ { 1 } ^ { - 1 } + + \beta _ { 1 0 } x _ { 2 } ^ { - 1 } + + \beta _ { 0 0 } ( x _ { 1 } x _ { 2 } ) ^ { - 1 }$$

*Second Order Form Quadratic Surface (k=2, p=4)

$$\frac { x x } { q } = ( \beta _ { 0 1 } + \beta _ { 1 1 } x + \beta _ { 2 1 } x ^ { 2 } ) \| \beta _ { 0 2 } + \beta _ { 1 2 } x + \beta _ { 2 2 } x ^ { 2 } ) \| \beta _ { 0 3 } + \beta _ { 1 3 } x + \beta _ { 2 3 } x ^ { 2 } ) \| \beta _ { 0 4 } + \beta _ { 1 4 } x + \beta _ { 2 4 } x ^ { 2 } )$$

above is rewritten considering only up to the 2nd order as ;

$$& y ^ { - 1 } = \beta _ { 1 1 } + \beta _ { 0 1 } x _ { 1 } ^ { - 1 } + \beta _ { 1 0 } x _ { 2 } ^ { - 1 } + \beta _ { 0 2 } x _ { 2 } x _ { 1 } ^ { - 1 } + \beta _ { 2 0 } x _ { 1 } x _ { 2 } ^ { - 1 } + \beta _ { 0 0 } ( x _ { 1 } x _ { 2 } ) ^ { - 1 } \\ & ( 1 0 )$$

## 3.PARAMETER ESTIMATION

## Nonlinear Estimation

The  normal  equation  is  extremely  d ult  to  solve,  if  it  have  multiple  solution  to  multiple iffic stationary  values  of  functionIt  is  said  to  have  no  closed  form  solution.  Thereby  the ). ˆ (  S procedure  of  iterative  method  must  be  approached  in  order  to  man  over  the  mathematical intractable problem.

## 3.1InversePolynomial Nonlinear Estimation

Considering the parameter  the estimate ( of  ,  ˆ ) glyph&lt;UNKNOWN&gt; is obtained by differentiating equation S (  ˆ ) and  equated  to  zero,  giving  rise  to  Jequations  and  solve  for  the Considering - normal glyph&lt;UNKNOWN&gt; s. determistic omponent of our model in Eq. 1.  T m of square error for non linear model is c he su defined as

$$S ( \theta ) = \sum _ { i = 1 } ^ { n } [ y _ { i } - f ( x _ { i }, \theta ) ] ^ { 2 } \, \quad \quad ( 1 1 )$$

When the J - normal equation becomes mathematical intractable, an iterative procedure is required.

$$S ( \theta ) = \sum _ { i = 1 } ^ { n } [ \begin{matrix} y _ { i } - f ( x _ { i }, \theta _ { j } ) \\ \end{matrix} ] ^ { 2 }$$

$$\text{Let } \beta _ { j } = \theta _ { j }$$

$$S ( \theta ) = \sum _ { i = 1 } ^ { n } [ y _ { i } - ( \theta _ { 0 0 } ( x _ { 1 } x _ { 2 } ) ^ { - 1 } + \theta _ { 0 1 } x _ { 2 } ^ { 1 } + \theta _ { 1 1 } ) ^ { - 1 } ] ^ { 2 } \, | \frac { \partial f ( x _ { i, } \theta ) } { \partial \theta _ { j } } | _ { ( \theta _ { j } - \theta _ { j } ^ { \theta _ { j } } ) }$$

$$\text{Combining } \frac { \partial S ( \theta ) } { \partial \theta _ { 0 0 } }, \frac { \partial S ( \theta ) } { \partial \theta _ { 0 1 } }, \frac { \partial S ( \theta ) } { \partial \theta _ { 1 0 } } \text{ and } \frac { \partial S ( \theta ) } { \partial \theta _ { 1 1 } } \text{ we the normal equation;}$$

$$& \sum _ { i = 1 } ^ { n } [ y _ { i } - f ( x _ { i } \theta ) ] [ \theta _ { 0 0 } ( x _ { 1 } x _ { 2 } ) ^ { - 1 } + \theta _ { 0 1 } x _ { 1 } ^ { - 1 } + \theta _ { 1 0 } x _ { 2 } ^ { - 1 } + \theta _ { 1 1 } ) ^ { - 2 } ] ( x _ { 1 } x _ { 2 } ) ^ { - 1 } = 0 \\ & \sum _ { i = 1 } ^ { n } [ y _ { i } - f ( x _ { i }, \theta ) ] [ \theta _ { 0 0 } ( x _ { 1 } x _ { 2 } ) ^ { - 1 } + \theta _ { 0 1 } x _ { 1 } ^ { - 1 } + \theta _ { 1 0 } x _ { 2 } ^ { - 1 } + \theta _ { 1 1 } ) ^ { - 2 } ] x _ { 1 } ^ { - 1 } = 0 \\ & \sum _ { i = 1 } ^ { n } [ y _ { i } - f ( x _ { i }, \theta ) ] [ \theta _ { 0 0 } ( x _ { 1 } x _ { 2 } ) ^ { - 1 } + \theta _ { 0 1 } x _ { 1 } ^ { - 1 } + \theta _ { 1 0 } x _ { 2 } ^ { - 1 } + \theta _ { 1 1 } ) ^ { - 2 } ] x _ { 2 } ^ { - 1 } = 0 \\ & \frac { \partial S ( \theta ) } { \partial \theta _ { 1 1 } } = 0 \\ & \frac { \partial S ( \theta ) } { \partial \theta _ { 1 1 } } = 0 \cdots.$$

$$\frac { \partial S ( \theta ) } { \partial \theta _ { 1 1 } }$$

The normal equation has no close form solution.

## 3.2 Gauss Newton Numerical Method

Consider the de rministic component of equation (1), by the Taylor first ximation; te - order appro

$$( 1 2 )$$

by substitution,

$$y \, =$$

International Journal on Computational Sciences &amp; Applications (IJCSA) Vol.4, No.3, June 2014

$$y \, =$$

For the j parameters  i observation, we have; and th

$$y \text{-} f _ { 1 } ^ { 0 } = \Sigma _ { j = n } ^ { j - 1 } \frac { g _ { j } | g _ { i } | g _ { j } } { \omega. } | ( \theta - \theta ^ { 0 } ) + \varepsilon \quad \ ( 1 3 )$$

$$\text{Note that $f_{1}^{0}$}$$

$$\text{Let } \beta _ { i } ^ { o } = ( \theta _ { j } - \theta _ { j } ^ { o } ) \quad \text{and } \, z _ { i j }$$

Eq. 13 can be written as

$$y _ { i } - f _ { i } ^ { o } = \sum _ { i = i } ^ { k } \beta _ { j } Z _ { j i } + \varepsilon _ { i } \\. \quad. \quad. \.$$

The above is also the same in matrix form below

$$Y - f ^ { 0 } = Z ^ { 0 } \beta + \varepsilon$$

Column vector 0 f Y glyph&lt;UNKNOWN&gt; (k X1) , Z(jxk) 0 is determinant matrix , is the coefficient matrix and glyph&lt;UNKNOWN&gt; (jx1) glyph&lt;UNKNOWN&gt; is the error term(kx1). The least square estimator is of form

$$\hat { \beta } = ( Z ^ { o } \cdot Z ^ { o } ) Z ^ { o } ( Y - f ^ { 0 } ) \quad \ \ ( 1 5 )$$

$$\min \text{izing the sum of square } \ S ^ { 0 } ( \theta ) = \sum _ { i = 1 } ^ { n } [ y _ { i } - f _ { i } ^ { o } - \sum \beta _ { j } Z _ { i j } ] ^ { 2 }$$

The initial value for and is supplied either through theoreti wledge of subject, cal kno intelligent  guess,  self er  function  in  R  or  grid  search  function  in  SAS.  A  good  choice  of - start starting value will ensure rapid convergence if not there may not be any convergence in the serie (See Schabenberger Oliver,"Nonlinea gression in SAS"). r Re Condition for Convergence

$$| \frac { ( \theta _ { i ( j + 1 ) } - \theta _ { i j } ) } { \theta _ { i j } } | < \delta, = 0. 0 0 0 0 1 \, \text{or} \, 1. 0 x 1 0 ^ { - 6 } & & i = 1, 2, \dots, n$$

## 3.3Gauss Newton Nonlinear Least Square Estimation of IPM

Starting value fors i.e ( , glyph&lt;UNKNOWN&gt; j 00  10 01 ,   and 11  ) is supplied for 1st iteration using equation[19], note and 2 11 1 2 10 1 1 01 1 2 1 00 ) ) ( glyph&lt;UNKNOWN&gt; glyph&lt;UNKNOWN&gt; glyph&lt;UNKNOWN&gt; glyph&lt;UNKNOWN&gt; glyph&lt;UNKNOWN&gt; glyph&lt;UNKNOWN&gt; glyph&lt;UNKNOWN&gt; glyph&lt;UNKNOWN&gt;      x x x x

## 3.4The general Bootstrap Algorithm .

- 1. Generate a sample x size k from distributioth replacement. *' of n F wi
- 2. Compute j  for this bootstrap sample.
- 3. Repeat steps 1 and 2, B time.

By this procedure we end up with bootstrap values

$$\varphi \theta _ { b j } ^ { * } = [ \theta _ { b 0 } ^ { * }, \theta _ { b 1 } ^ { * }, \dots, \overset { \nu } { \theta _ { b k } ^ { * } } ] ^ { \cdot } \ j = 1, \dots, \overset { \nu } { B }$$

Afterward, we can use these bootstrap values to ca ll the quantities of interest. Generally, lculate a 500 or 1000 samples will be sufficient [See s Karlis (2004) for details] Dimitri .

## 4.NUMERICAL ANALYSIS.

The data considered for this work is an experimental data of two factorial design, graded into fo levels,  having  crop  spacing  (meters)  and  inorganic  fertilizer  application  per  crop  stand (decilitres).  Cassava  varieties  TMS  30572  were  exposed  to  the  factors  (crop  spacing  and fertilizer).  Plant  and  soil  analysis  were  also  carried  out  to  ensure  the  requi red  agricultural standards.  The  responses  generated  were  measured  in  yield  (kilograms)  and  dimension (centimetres) as dual responses Yield and Dim respectively.

## 4. 1 Bootstrap Re - sampling Method

The term bootstrap, coined by B. Efron (1986, and 1997), refe g the sample to learn rs to usin about the sampling distribution of a statistic without reference to external assumptions while i a method for improving estimators,  it is also well known as a method for estimating standard errors, bias and constructing dence intervals for parameters. It substitute considerate amount confi of computation in place of theoretical analysis ( d Tibshirani,1986) B.Efron an .

TABLE I. R - NLS ()ITERATION R ESULT

| IPM   |   S  |   iteration |    SSE | Convergence Tolerance   |   Pr>F |
|-------|-------|-------------|--------|-------------------------|--------|
| Yield |     6 |          10 |   2.25 | 7.47e07 -               |  0.001 |
| Dim   |     6 |          12 | 349.2  | 5.62e07 -               |  0.001 |

## 4. 2 Model Adequacy

The  Shapiro Wilk  normality  test  is  conducted  for  cassavaYield  and  cassavaDim  models -respectively; standardRes results W = 0:9386, W = 0:9767 respective closeness of standardRes values to '1' indicated the assumption of normally distributed errors is not violated.

TABLE II. BOOTSTRAP RESULT WIT H YIELD

| Parameter   | Bootstrap Sample   | Bootstrap Sample   | Observed Sample   | Observed Sample   |
|-------------|--------------------|--------------------|-------------------|-------------------|
|             | Estimates          | C.I (2.5% 97.5%)   | Estimates         | C.I (2.5% 97.5%)  |
| 11         | 0.356039089        | 0. 2 0.6           | 0.349449160       | 0.1 0.62          |
| 01         | - 0.00922816       | - 0.1 0.12         | - 0.00844514      | - 0.09 0.07       |
| 10         | - 0.22006195       | - 0.54 0.09        | - 0.21609962      | - 0.66 0.21       |
| 00         | 0.011454663        | - 0.05 0.078       | 0.011312689       | - 0.07 0.099      |
| 20         | 0.202227135        | - 0.242 0.617      | 0.197842082       | - 0.386 0.793     |

International Journal on Computational Sciences &amp; Applications (IJCSA) Vol.4, No.3, June 2014

First and second CassavaYield Model;

```
1 ^ { s t } = [ 0. 3 5 6 - 0. 0 0 9 \xi _ { 1 } ^ { 1 } - 0. 2 2 0 x _ { 2 } ^ { 1 } + 0. 0 1 1 6 \xi _ { 1 } x _ { 2 } ) ^ { - 1 } ] ^ { 1 } \\ 2 ^ { n d } = & [ 0. 3 5 6 - 0. 0 0 9 2 x _ { 1 } ^ { - 1 } - 0. 2 2 0 x _ { 2 } ^ { - 1 } + 0. 0 1 1 5 ( x _ { 1 } x _ { 2 } ) ^ { - 1 } + 0. 2 0 2 2 x _ { 1 } x _ { 2 } ^ { - 1 } ] ^ { - 1 }
```

## 5.DISCUSSION OF RESULTS

The various residual plots and test has giving a basis to s e inverse polynomial model ubmit that th is appropriate for fitting cassava yield (kg) and cassava dimension (cm).

It  was  also  observed  that  the  residuals  does  not  sum  up  to  zero  as  of  the  cases  of  the  line surfaces. This is expected of a non  resu . The results of bootstrap and the observed data - linear lt show closer agreement, which produce a negligible bias value. The bootstrap C.I. and original sample C.I also agree quite well demonstrating the precision of the model coefficient estimates The  strong  sig ficance  of  crop  spacing  in  the  model  of  cassava  plantation  has  shown  that ni crowding of plants or mixed planting should be discouraged. The obtained non mates - linear esti were reintroduced as the starting values in model and the same estimates value were ob tained with  their  sum  of  squares  error  unchanged  and  zero  iteration  number,  indicating  a  global minimum estimates were obtained.

## 5.1CONCLUSION

It is acceptable to say the cassavaYield model is most adequate, robust and best to fit cassa yield and good rop spacing affects cassava yield in a direct proportion. c

## ACKNOWLEDGMENT

The author will like to express his appreciation to Prof. T.A. Bamiduro, University of Ibadan, Nigeria for his helpful comments and suggestions.

## REFERENCES

- [1] Andre I Khuri anSiuli Mukhopodhgay Advance Review Response Surface methodology Volume 2 d March/April 2010;JohnWiley and sons Inc.
- [2] B.Efron and Tibshirani(1986) Bootstrap Methods for standard errors, confidence interval and other measure of Statistical Accuracy; Statisience 1986 Vol No. 1, pg 54 tical Sc -77
- [3] B.Efron  and  Tibshirani(1997)  Improvements  of  cross tion;  Bootstrap  Method;Journal  of  the -Valida American Statistics Association 92(438)pg 548 -560
- [4] Christian  Ritz  and  Jens  Carl  S.(2008)  Non   Regression  with Springer  Science+Business -linear R Media LLC
- [5] Dimitris Karlis (April 2004)Department of Statistics Athens University of Economics Lefkada,  An introduction  to  Bootstrap  Methods  17th  Conference  of  Greek  Statistical  Society  http://stat -athens.aueb.gr/~karlis/le/boot.pdf fkada
- [6] FAOSTAT  (2009);http://faostat.fao.org  Food  and  agriculture  Organization  (FAO)  of  the  United Nations, Rome, Italy.
- [7] Gary W. Oehlert (University of Minnesota) A First Course in Design and Analysis of Experiments 2000 Edition.
- [8] Holger Dette  and  Christine  Kiss  (2007)  Optimal  Experimental  Designs  for  Inverse  Quadratic Regression Models; Ruhr niversity Bochum -U
- [9] J.  A.  Nelder(1966)  Weight  Regression  Quantal  Response  Data,  and  Inverse  Polynomials  National vegetable Research Station, Welle ne, Warwick, England. sbour

International Journal on Computational Sciences &amp; Applications (IJCSA) Vol.4, No.3, June 2014

- [10] J. A. Nelder(1968) Inverse Polynomials, A useful Group of Multi sponse Functions; The -Factor Re National vegetable Research Station, Wellesbourne, Warwick, England
- [11] Jennifer Abraham Cassava: A Plethora Of Opportunities -C opyright © 2013 Punch Nigeria Limited · January 10, 2013
- [12] Klaus Hinkelmann  ,(State University Department of Statistics    Blacksburg,  VA)and  Oscar Kempthorne (Iowa State University  Department of Statistics  Ames, IA)d Analysis  of - Design an Experiment s  Volume 1 Introduction to Experimental Design  Second Edition
- [13] Khuri, AI, Cornell, JA. Response Surfaces. 2nd edition.New York: Dekker; 1996.
- [14] M. Muengula-Manyi1, et al., 2012 Application of response surface methodology to the optimization of  amy lase  production  by  Aspergillus  oryzae  MTCC  1847  American  Journal  Of  Experimental Agriculture 2(3): 336, 2012 Science Domain International -350
- [15] Nduka, E.C. and T.A. Bamiduro, 1997. A new generalized inverse polynomial for response surface designs. J. NiStat. Assoc., 11: 41 g. -48.
- [16] Nduka, E. C. (1994) Inverse polynomials in the Exploration of Response Surfaces, A Phd Thesis,U. I
- [17] Omorusi, V.I., Ayanru. D.K.G. (2011). Effect of NPK fertilizer on diseases, pests, and mycorrhizal symbiosis in Cassava Int. J. Agric. Biol., 13, 391 . -395.
- [18] Parsad,  R.,  Srivastava,  R.  and    Batra,  P.K.  (2004).  Designs  for  Fitting  Response  Surfaces  in Agricultural Experiments. IASRI, Publication
- [19] Rajender Parsad And P.K. Batra(2000) Response Surface Design I.A.S.R.I.Avenue, New , Library Delhi - 110 012
- [20] Rishi Sidhu -Cassava, The Latest Biofuel -April12th,2011http://www.Foreignpolicyblogs.Com/2011/04/12/Cassava.
- [21] Russell V. Lenth, (The University of Iowa) Response  Methods in R, and illustration Usi -Surface ng rsm Updated to version 2.00, 5 December 2012
- [22] Russell V. Lenth, (The University of Iowa)Surface Plots in the rsm Package Updated to version 2.00, 3 December 2012

California.http

- [23] Schabenberger Oliver,"Nonlinear Regression in SAS" University of : www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/mult\_pkg/faq/general/citingats.htm
- [24] Timothy D. Searchinger(2013) Bioenergy writings www.scholar.princeton.edu/tsearch/page
- [25] Whitcomb  and  Anderson  Excerpted  from  manuscript  for  Chapter  10  of  RSM  Simplified,  See $www.statease. om/rsm\_simplified.html$ c

## Appendix

fig1

![image](https://ac.marcodsn.me/arxiv-markdown-images/1408.0251v2-figure-918b59d8-606c-4060-9f8c-69688e53ae34.jpg)

International Journal on Computational Sciences &amp; Applications (IJCSA) Vol.4, No.3, June 2014

fig ii

![image](https://ac.marcodsn.me/arxiv-markdown-images/1408.0251v2-figure-33e362c8-a90f-431e-b802-613f760f3d74.jpg)

## Boostrap Residual crror

![image](https://ac.marcodsn.me/arxiv-markdown-images/1408.0251v2-figure-c06c03a6-cd18-4bb5-80b3-5695cbb13ff4.jpg)

Boostrap Residual error

![image](https://ac.marcodsn.me/arxiv-markdown-images/1408.0251v2-figure-9fc3989b-7074-4854-b534-f14a131132a6.jpg)

density-default(x

![image](https://ac.marcodsn.me/arxiv-markdown-images/1408.0251v2-figure-9bd293c5-4168-44ef-9cde-8a6232512b4e.jpg)

Fig III

![image](https://ac.marcodsn.me/arxiv-markdown-images/1408.0251v2-figure-2c728388-c1b6-4fee-bcb4-a27ac5535300.jpg)

## Author

The  Author  is  trained  in  the  discipline  of  statistics  from  the  cradle  of  National diploma and Master degree in Statistics from University of Ibadan, Nigeria. He is still under  traini ,  His  fleer  for  Design  of  an  Experiment  and  Nonlinearity  studies ng produced this work. His fleer is also extended to Envirometric research.

![image](https://ac.marcodsn.me/arxiv-markdown-images/1408.0251v2-figure-bd471fea-3373-4a59-9855-863bbd6df796.jpg)
Adeshina Oyedele Bello
Modeling Cassava Yield: A Response Surface Approach
This paper reports on application of theory of experimental design using
graphical techniques in R programming language and application of nonlinear
bootstrap regression method to demonstrate the invariant property of parameter
estimates of the Inverse polynomial Model (IPM) in a nonlinear surface.