Türkiye'de Sığır Eti ve Süt Üretimindeki Zamansal Değişimlerin Doğrusal Olmayan Modellerle Analizi

Öz

Bu araştırmada, Türkiye İstatistik Kurumu (TÜİK) tarafından yayınlanan 2001-2023 yıllarına ait istatistiksel tablolardan elde edilen veri seti kullanılarak, sığır eti (ton) üretimi için 9 farklı model (McNally, Gompertz, Gamma, Bertalanffy, Orskov, Brody, Wood, Kuadratik, Wilmink) ve sığır sütü (ton) üretimi için de 8 farklı model (Lojistik, McNally, Gamma, Bertalanffy, Brody, Wood, Kuadratik, Wilmink) istatistiksel olarak karşılaştırılmıştır. Modellerin uygunluğu; hata kareler ortalaması, düzeltilmiş belirleme katsayısı, doğruluk ve sapma faktörleri ile bilgi kriterleri (Akaike bilgi kriteri, düzeltilmiş Akaike bilgi kriteri, Bayesian bilgi kriteri) kullanılarak değerlendirilmiştir. Araştırma sonucunda, her iki veri seti için en uygun modelin, sığır eti (ton) üretimi için Brody modeli, sığır sütü (ton) üretimi için ise Lojistik model olduğu belirlenmiştir. Bu modeller, diğer modellere kıyasla en düşük hata kareler ortalaması ve bilgi kriterleri (Akaike bilgi kriteri, düzeltilmiş Akaike bilgi kriteri, Bayesian bilgi kriteri) değerlerine sahip olduğu bildirmiştir. Araştırma, doğru model seçiminin yalnızca hata terimlerine dayanmak yerine, farklı istatistiksel kriterlerin birlikte değerlendirilmesiyle daha sağlıklı yapılabileceğini ortaya koymuştur. Gelecek çalışmalarda, Brody ve Lojistik modellerin farklı veri setlerinde analiz edilmesi önerilmektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Modelleme
• Sığır et ve süt (ton) üretimi.
• SAS
• Yıl

Analysis of Temporal Changes in Beef and Milk Production in Türkiye Using Nonlinear Models

Öz

In this study, using the data set obtained from the statistical tables for the years 2001-2023 published by the Turkish Statistical Institute (TUIK), 9 different models (McNally, Gompertz, Gamma, Bertalanffy, Orskov, Brody, Wood, Quadratic, Wilmink) for beef meat (tonnes) production and 8 different models (Logistic, McNally, Gamma, Bertalanffy, Brody, Wood, Quadratic, Wilmink) for beef milk (tonnes) production were compared statistically. The suitability of the models was evaluated using the mean square error, corrected coefficient of determination, accuracy and bias factors and information criteria (Akaike information criterion, corrected Akaike information criterion, Bayesian information criterion). As a result of the study, it was determined that the most suitable model for both data sets was the Brody model for beef meat (tonnes) production and the Logistic model for beef milk (tonnes) production. These models have been reported to have the lowest mean square error and information criteria (Akaike information criterion, corrected Akaike information criterion, Bayesian information criterion) values compared to other models. The research has revealed that the correct model selection can be made more soundly by evaluating different statistical criteria together, rather than relying solely on error terms. In future studies, it is recommended that Brody and Logistic models be analyzed on different data sets..

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Modelling.
• Beef meat and milk (tonnes) production.
• SAS
• Year

Kaynakça

1. Ağyar O. Comparative analysis of the equations used in modeling indıvidual lactation curves in Anatolian water buffalo (bubalus bubalis). Black Sea Journal of Agriculture, 2024; 7(6): 671-678.
2. Araujo RO., Marcondes CR., DameMCF., Garnero AV., Gaunski RJ., Everling DM., Rorato, PRN. Classical nonlinear models to describe the growth curve for Murrah buffalo breed. Ciência Rural Santa Maria 2012; 42(3): 520-525.
3. Bilgin ÖC., Esenbuğa N. Parameter estimation in linear-nonlinear growth models, Animal Production 2003; 44(2): 81-90.
4. Çetenak T., Gök İ., Yavuz E., Şahin M. Statistical models and evaluation criteria used in poultry farming. Black Sea Journal of Agriculture, 2024; 7(6): 710-719.
5. Daşkıran G., Koncagül S., Bingol M. Growth characteristics of indigenous Norduz female and male lambs. Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 2010; 16(1): 62-69.
6. Demirbaş M. Sustainability of the livestock sector in Türkiye: Productivity and environmental impacts. Journal of Agriculture and Nature 2020; 23(1): 45-60
7. Engindeniz S., Taşkın T., Gbadamonsi AA., Ahmed AS., Cisse AS., Seioudy A., Kandemir Ç., Koşum N. Analysis of consumers' milk and dairy product preferences. Tekirdağ Faculty of Agriculture Journal, 2021; 18(3): 470–481.
8. FAO. The state of food and agriculture 2021: Making agrifood systems more resilient to shocks and stresses. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. 2021.

9. Gbangboche AB., Glele-Kakai R., Salifou,S., Albuquerque LG., Leroy P. Comparison of non-linear growth models to describe the growth curve in West African dwarf sheep. Animal 2008; 2(7): 1003–1012.
10. Gök T., Mikail N., Akkol S. Analysis of the first lactation curve in Holstein cows with different mathematical models. KSÜ Tarım ve Doğa Derg., 2019; 22(4): 601-608.
11. Gök Y., Şahin M., Yavuz E. Comparative analysis of individual lactation curve models in some cattle breeds. KSU J Agric Nat, 2021; 24(5): 1118-1125.
12. Pereira L., Costa A., Silva R. Nonlinear growth models applied to livestock production: A review. Journal of Animal Science and Biotechnology, 2019; 10(12): 1-15.
13. Seber GAF., Wild CJ. Nonlinear regression. Wiley-Interscience, 2003.
14. Şahin M., Efe E. Use of cubic spline regressions in modeling lactation curves in dairy cattle. KSU J Nat Sci 2010; 13(2): 17-22.
15. Şahin A., Ulutaş Z., Karadavut U., Yıldırım A., Arslan S. Comparison of growth curve in Anatolian buffalo calves using various nonlinear models. Kafkas University Veterinary Faculty Journal 2014; 20(3): 357-362.
16. Şahin M., Gök İ. Modeling of native sheep breeds in Türkiye by years with nonlinear mathematical models. International Journal of Pure and Applied Sciences 2025; 11(2): 527-533.
17. Tolun T., Yavuz E., Şahin M., Gök İ. Modeling egg curves in partridges. Black Sea Journal of Agriculture, 2023; 6(1): 21-25.
18. Tolun T., Gök İ., Şahin M. Modeling of some egg characteristics in henna partridges. Black Sea Journal of Agriculture, 2024; 7(6): 729-742
19. Yalçınöz E., Şahin M. Modeling of egg yield curves in laying hens. KSÜ Journal of Agriculture and Nature 2020; 23(5): 1373-1378
20. Yağanoğlu AM. A comparative study of the nonlinear methods for estimating body weight based on body measurements in different sample sizes in Morkaraman sheep. Journal of the Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Caucasus University2022; 28(2): 261-265.
21. Yavuz E., Abacı SH., Erensoy K., Şahin M. Modeling of ındividual egg weights of Lohmann-Brown layer hens. Turkish Journal of Veterinary & Animal Sciences 2023; 47(3): 229-335.
22. Yılmaz S., Şahin M. Long-term trend analysis of beef production in Türkiye: 2000-2020 period. Journal of Agricultural Economics 2022; 28(3): 112-126.