Articles | Volume 24, issue 10
https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-24-4943-2020
© Author(s) 2020. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-24-4943-2020
© Author(s) 2020. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Research article
| 
23 Oct 2020
Research article |
| 23 Oct 2020
| 23 Oct 2020
Comparison of root water uptake models in simulating CO2 and H2O fluxes and growth of wheat
University of Bonn, Institute of Crop Science and Resource
Conservation (INRES), Katzenburgweg 5, 53115 Bonn, Germany
Matthias Langensiepen
University of Bonn, Institute of Crop Science and Resource
Conservation (INRES), Katzenburgweg 5, 53115 Bonn, Germany
Jan Vanderborght
Agrosphere, Institute of Bio- and Geosciences (IBG-3),
Forschungszentrum Jülich GmbH, 52428 Jülich, Germany
Hubert Hüging
University of Bonn, Institute of Crop Science and Resource
Conservation (INRES), Katzenburgweg 5, 53115 Bonn, Germany
Cho Miltin Mboh
BASF Digital Farming GmbH, Im Zollhafen 24, 50678 Cologne, Germany
Frank Ewert
University of Bonn, Institute of Crop Science and Resource
Conservation (INRES), Katzenburgweg 5, 53115 Bonn, Germany
Leibniz Centre for Agricultural Landscape Research (ZALF), Institute of Landscape Systems Analysis, Eberswalder Strasse 84, 15374 Muencheberg, Germany
Related authors
Thuy Huu Nguyen, Thomas Gaiser, Jan Vanderborght, Andrea Schnepf, Felix Bauer, Anja Klotzsche, Lena Lärm, Hubert Hüging, and Frank Ewert
Biogeosciences, 21, 5495–5515, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-21-5495-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-21-5495-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Leaf water potential was at certain thresholds, depending on soil type, water treatment, and weather conditions. In rainfed plots, the lower water availability in the stony soil resulted in fewer roots with a higher root tissue conductance than the silty soil. In the silty soil, higher stress in the rainfed soil led to more roots with a lower root tissue conductance than in the irrigated plot. Crop responses to water stress can be opposite, depending on soil water conditions that are compared.
Marit G. A. Hendrickx, Jan Vanderborght, Pieter Janssens, Sander Bombeke, Evi Matthyssen, Anne Waverijn, and Jan Diels
SOIL, 11, 435–456, https://doi.org/10.5194/soil-11-435-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/soil-11-435-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
We developed a method to estimate errors in soil moisture measurements using limited sensors and infrequent sampling. By analyzing data from 93 cropping cycles in agricultural fields in Belgium, we identified both systematic and random errors for our sensor setup. This approach reduces the need for extensive sensor networks and is applicable to agricultural and environmental monitoring and ensures more reliable soil moisture data, enhancing water management and improving model predictions.
Jayson Gabriel Pinza, Ona-Abeni Devos Stoffels, Robrecht Debbaut, Jan Staes, Jan Vanderborght, Patrick Willems, and Sarah Garré
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1166, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1166, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
We can use hydrological models to estimate how water is allocated in soils with compaction. However, compaction can also affect how much plants can grow in the field. Here, we show that when we consider this affected plant growth in our sandy soil compaction model, the resulting water allocation can change a lot. Thus, to get more reliable model results, we should know the plant growth (above and below the ground) in the field and include them in the models.
Daniel Leitner, Andrea Schnepf, and Jan Vanderborght
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 29, 1759–1782, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-29-1759-2025, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-29-1759-2025, 2025
Short summary
Short summary
Root water uptake strongly affects plant development and soil water balance. We use novel upscaling methods to develop land surface and crop models from detailed mechanistic models. We examine the mathematics behind this upscaling, pinpointing where errors occur. By simulating different crops and soils, we found that the accuracy loss varies based on root architecture and soil type. Our findings offer insights into balancing model complexity and accuracy for better predictions in agriculture.
Thuy Huu Nguyen, Thomas Gaiser, Jan Vanderborght, Andrea Schnepf, Felix Bauer, Anja Klotzsche, Lena Lärm, Hubert Hüging, and Frank Ewert
Biogeosciences, 21, 5495–5515, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-21-5495-2024, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-21-5495-2024, 2024
Short summary
Short summary
Leaf water potential was at certain thresholds, depending on soil type, water treatment, and weather conditions. In rainfed plots, the lower water availability in the stony soil resulted in fewer roots with a higher root tissue conductance than the silty soil. In the silty soil, higher stress in the rainfed soil led to more roots with a lower root tissue conductance than in the irrigated plot. Crop responses to water stress can be opposite, depending on soil water conditions that are compared.
G. Bareth, C. Hütt, A. Jenal, A. Bolten, I. Kleppert, H. Firl, J. Wolf, and H. Hüging
Int. Arch. Photogramm. Remote Sens. Spatial Inf. Sci., XLVIII-1-W2-2023, 1867–1872, https://doi.org/10.5194/isprs-archives-XLVIII-1-W2-2023-1867-2023, https://doi.org/10.5194/isprs-archives-XLVIII-1-W2-2023-1867-2023, 2023
Jan Vanderborght, Valentin Couvreur, Felicien Meunier, Andrea Schnepf, Harry Vereecken, Martin Bouda, and Mathieu Javaux
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 25, 4835–4860, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-25-4835-2021, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-25-4835-2021, 2021
Short summary
Short summary
Root water uptake is an important process in the terrestrial water cycle. How this process depends on soil water content, root distributions, and root properties is a soil–root hydraulic problem. We compare different approaches to implementing root hydraulics in macroscopic soil water flow and land surface models.
Jordi Vilà-Guerau de Arellano, Patrizia Ney, Oscar Hartogensis, Hugo de Boer, Kevin van Diepen, Dzhaner Emin, Geiske de Groot, Anne Klosterhalfen, Matthias Langensiepen, Maria Matveeva, Gabriela Miranda-García, Arnold F. Moene, Uwe Rascher, Thomas Röckmann, Getachew Adnew, Nicolas Brüggemann, Youri Rothfuss, and Alexander Graf
Biogeosciences, 17, 4375–4404, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-17-4375-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-17-4375-2020, 2020
Short summary
Short summary
The CloudRoots field experiment has obtained an open comprehensive observational data set that includes soil, plant, and atmospheric variables to investigate the interactions between a heterogeneous land surface and its overlying atmospheric boundary layer, including the rapid perturbations of clouds in evapotranspiration. Our findings demonstrate that in order to understand and represent diurnal variability, we need to measure and model processes from the leaf to the landscape scales.
Cited articles
Addiscott, T. M. and Whitmore, A. P.: Simulation of solute in soil leaching of differing permeabilities, Soil Use Manage., 7, 94–102, 1991.
Allen, R. G., Pereira, L. S., Raes, D., and Smith, M.: FAO Irrigation and
Drainage Paper – Crop Evapotranspiration, FAO, Italy, 1998.
Bronstert, A. and Plate, E. J.: Modelling of runoff generation and soil
moisture dynamics for hillslopes and micro-catchments, J. Hydrol., 198, 177–195, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-1694(96)03306-9, 1997.
Cai, G., Vanderborght, J., Klotzsche, A., van der Kruk, J., Neumann, J., Hermes, N., and Vereecken, H.: Construction of Minirhizotron Facilities for
Investigating Root Zone Processes, Vadose Zone J., 15, 1–13, https://doi.org/10.2136/vzj2016.05.0043, 2016.
Cai, G., Vanderborght, J., Couvreur, V., Mboh, C. M., and Vereecken, H.:
Parameterization of Root Water Uptake Models Considering Dynamic Root
Distributions and Water Uptake Compensation, Vadose Zone J., 17, 1–21, https://doi.org/10.2136/vzj2016.12.0125, 2017.
Cai, G., Vanderborght, J., Langensiepen, M., Schnepf, A., Hüging, H., and
Vereecken, H.: Root growth, water uptake, and sap flow of winter wheat in
response to different soil water conditions, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 22, 2449–2470, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-22-2449-2018, 2018.
Carminati, A., Vetterlein, D., Weller, U., Vogel, H.-J., and Oswald, S. E.:
When Roots Lose Contact, Vadose Zone J., 8, 805–809, https://doi.org/10.2136/vzj2008.0147, 2009.
Cochard, H.: Xylem embolism and drought-induced stomatal closure in maize,
Planta, 215, 466–471, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00425-002-0766-9, 2002.
Collaborative Research Center: Transregio 32 Database, available at: https://www.tr32db.uni-koeln.de/site/index.php, last access: October 2020.
Colombi, T., Kirchgessner, N., Walter, A., and Keller, T.: Root Tip Shape Governs Root Elongation Rate under Increased Soil Strength, Plant Physiol., 174, 22892301, https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.17.00357, 2017.
Couvreur, V., Vanderborght, J., and Javaux, M.: A simple three-dimensional
macroscopic root water uptake model based on the hydraulic architecture
approach, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 16, 2957–2971, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-16-2957-2012, 2012.
Couvreur, V., Vanderborght, J., Beff, L., and Javaux, M.: Horizontal soil
water potential heterogeneity: Simplifying approaches for crop water dynamics models, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 18, 1723–1743, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-18-1723-2014, 2014.
De Faria, R. T., Madramootoo, C. A., Boisvert, J., and Prasher, S. O.: Comparison of the versatile soil moisture budget and SWACROP models for a wheat crop in Brazil, Can. Agric. Eng., 36, 57–68, 1994.
de Jong van Lier, Q., van Dam, J. C., Metselaar, K., de Jong, R., and Duijnisveld, W. H. M.: Macroscopic Root Water Uptake Distribution Using a Matric Flux Potential Approach, Vadose Zone J., 7, 10651078, https://doi.org/10.2136/vzj2007.0083, 2008.
Desborough, C.: The impact of root weighting on the response of transpiration to moisture stress in land surface schemes, Mon. Weather Rev., 125, 1920–1930, https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0493(1997)125<1920:TIORWO>2.0.CO;2, 1997.
Dickinson, R. E., Henderson-Sellers, A., Rosenzweig, C., and Sellers, P. J.:
Evapotranspiration models with canopy resistance for use in climate models,
a review, Agr. Forest Meteorol., 54, 373–388, https://doi.org/10.1016/0168-1923(91)90014-H, 1991.
Domec, J. and Pruyn, M. L.: Bole girdling affects metabolic properties and
root, trunk and branch hydraulics of young ponderosa pine trees, Tree Physiol., 28, 1493–1504, 2008.
Dunbabin, V. M., Postma, J. A., Schnepf, A., Pagès, L., Javaux, M., Wu,
L., Leitner, D., Chen, Y. L., Rengel, Z., and Diggle, A. J.: Modelling root-soil interactions using three-dimensional models of root growth,
architecture and function, Plant Soil, 372, 93–124, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11104-013-1769-y, 2013.
Egea, G., Verhoef, A., and Vidale, P. L.: Towards an improved and more
flexible representation of water stress in coupled photosynthesis-stomatal
conductance models, Agr. Forest Meteorol., 151, 1370–1384,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agrformet.2011.05.019, 2011.
Ewert, F., Rodriguez, D., Jamieson, P. D., Semenov, M. A., Mitchell, R. A.
C., Goudriaan, J., Porter, J. R., Kimball, B. A., Pinter Jr., P. J., Manderscheid, R., Weigel, H. J., Fangmeier, A., Fereres, E., and Villalobos,
F.: Effects of elevated CO2 and drought on wheat: testing crop simulation models for different experimental and climatic conditions, Agr. Ecosyst. Environ., 93, 249–266, 2002.
Farquhar, G. D. and von Caemmerer, S.: Modelling of Photosynthetic Response
to Environmental Conditions, in: Physiological Plant Ecology II, edited by: Lange, O. L., Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg, 550–582, 1982.
Farquhar, G. D., von Caemmerer, S., and Berry, J. A.: A biochemical model of photosynthetic CO2 assimilation in leaves of C3 species, Planta, 90, 7890, https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00386231, 1980.
Feddes, R. A. and Raats, P. A. C.: Parameterizing the soil–water–plant root system, in: Wageningen Frontis Series, vol. 6, 2004.
Feddes, R. A., Kowalik, P. J., and Zaradny, H.: Simulation of Field Water Use
and Crop Yield, Wiley, available at: https://books.google.de/books?id=zEJzQgAACAAJ (last access: 31 October 2017), 1978.
Feddes, R. A., Hoff, H., Bruen, M., Dawson, T., De Rosnay, P., Dirmeyer, P.,
Jackson, R. B., Kabat, P., Kleidon, A., Lilly, A., and Pitman, A. J.: Modeling root water uptake in hydrological and climate models, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 82, 2797–2809, https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0477(2001)082<2797:MRWUIH>2.3.CO;2, 2001.
Gallardo, M., Eastham, J., Gregory, P. J., and Turner, N. C.: A comparison of
plant hydraulic conductances in wheat and lupins, J. Exp. Bot., 47, 233–239, https://doi.org/10.1093/jxb/47.2.233, 1996.
Gayler, S., Ingwersen, J., Priesack, E., Wöhling, T., Wulfmeyer, V., and
Streck, T.: Assessing the relevance of subsurface processes for the simulation of evapotranspiration and soil moisture dynamics with CLM3.5:
Comparison with field data and crop model simulations, Environ. Earth Sci.,
69, 415–427, https://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-013-2309-z, 2013.
Goudriaan, J. and van Laar, H. H.: Modelling potential crop growth
processes, in: Textbook with exercises, Kluwer Academic Publisher, Dordrecht, the Netherlands, ISBN 0-7923-3220-2, 1994.
Henzler, T., Waterhouse, R. N., Smyth, A. J., Carvajal, M., Cooke, D. T. A. R. S., Steudle, E., and Clarkson, D. T.: Diurnal variations in hydraulic
conductivity and root pressure can be correlated with the expression of
putative aquaporins in the roots of Lotus japonicus, Planta, 210, 50–60, 1999.
Hernandez-ramirez, G., Lawrence-smith, E. J., Sinton, S. M., Schwen, A., and Brown, H. E.: Root Responses to Alterations in Macroporosity and Penetrability in a Silt Loam Soil, Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J., 78, 13921403, https://doi.org/10.2136/sssaj2014.01.0005, 2014.
Hsiao, T. C.: Plant responses to water stress, Annu. Rev. Plant Physiol. Plant Mol. Biol., 24, 519–570, 1973.
Huang, B. R., Taylor, H. M., and McMichael, B. L.: Growth and development of
seminal and crown roots of wheat seedlings as affected by temperature, Environ. Exp. Bot., 31, 471–477, https://doi.org/10.1016/0098-8472(91)90046-Q, 1991.
Irmak, S. and Mutiibwa, D.: On the dynamics of canopy resistance: Generalized linear estimation and relationships with primary micrometeorological variables, Water Resour. Res., 46, 1–20, https://doi.org/10.1029/2009WR008484, 2010.
Jamieson, P. D. and Ewert, F.: The role of roots in controlling soil water
extraction during drought: an analysis by simulation, F. Crop. Res., 60,
267–280, 1999.
Janott, M., Gayler, S., Gessler, A., Javaux, M., Klier, C., and Priesack, E.:
A one-dimensional model of water flow in soil-plant systems based on plant
architecture, Plant Soil, 341, 233–256, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11104-010-0639-0, 2011.
Javot, H. and Maurel, C.: The role of aquaporins in root water uptake, Ann.
Bot., 90, 301–313, https://doi.org/10.1093/aob/mcf199, 2002.
Jones, H. G.: Plants and Microclimate: A Quantitative Approach to Environmental Plant Physiology, Cambridge University Press, available at:
https://books.google.de/books?id=aPQ5WboKr1MC (last access: 14 March 2019), 1992.
Kage, H., Kochler, M., and Stützel, H.: Root growth and dry matter
partitioning of cauliflower under drought stress conditions: Measurement and
simulation, Eur. J. Agron., 20, 379–394, https://doi.org/10.1016/S1161-0301(03)00061-3, 2004.
Katerji, N., Rana, G., and Fahed, S.: Parameterizing canopy resistance using
mechanistic and semi-empirical estimates of hourly evapotranspiration: critical evaluation for irrigated crops in the Mediterranean, Hydrol. Process., 129, 117–129, https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.7829, 2011.
Kelliher, F. M., Leuning, R., Raupach, M. R., and Schulze, E. D.: Maximum
conductances for evaporation from global vegetation types, Agr. Forest Meteorol., 73, 1–16, https://doi.org/10.1016/0168-1923(94)02178-M, 1995.
Kramer, P. J. and Boyer, J. S.: Water Relations of Plants and Soils, Academic Press, Inc., available at: http://udspace.udel.edu/handle/19716/2830 (last access: 14 November 2017), 1995.
Langensiepen, M., Kupisch, M., Van Wijk, M. T., and Ewert, F.: Analyzing
transient closed chamber effects on canopy gas exchange for optimizing flux
calculation timing, Agr. Forest Meteorol., 164, 61–70,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agrformet.2012.05.006, 2012.
Langensiepen, M., Kupisch, M., Graf, A., Schmidt, M., and Ewert, F.: Improving the stem heat balance method for determining sap-flow in wheat,
Agr. Forest Meteorol., 186, 34–42, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agrformet.2013.11.007,
2014.
Leuning, R.: A critical appraisal of a combined stomatal-photosynthesis
model for C3 plants, Plant Cell Environ., 18, 339–355,
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-3040.1995.tb00370.x, 1995.
Li, X., Feng, Y., and Boersma, L.: Partition of photosynthates between shoot
and root in spring wheat (Triticum aestivu, L.) as a function of soil water
potential and root temperature, Plant Soil, 164, 43–50, 1994.
Lipiec, J., Siczek, A., Sochan, A., and Bieganowski, A.: Geoderma Effect of
sand grain shape on root and shoot growth of wheat seedlings, Geoderma, 265,
1–5, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoderma.2015.10.022, 2016.
Mahfouf, J. F., Ciret, C., Ducharne, A., Irannejad, P., Noilhan, J., Shao,
Y., Thornton, P., Xue, Y., and Yang, Z. L.: Analysis of transpiration results
from the RICE and PILPS workshop, Global Planet. Change, 13, 73–88,
https://doi.org/10.1016/0921-8181(95)00039-9, 1996.
Maurel, C., Verdoucq, L., Luu, D.-T., and Santoni, V.: Plant Aquaporins:
Membrane Channels with Multiple Integrated Functions, Annu. Rev. Plant Biol., 59, 595–624, https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.arplant.59.032607.092734, 2008.
Mboh, C. M., Srivastava, A. K., Gaiser, T., and Ewert, F.: Including root
architecture in a crop model improves predictions of spring wheat grain yield and above-ground biomass under water limitations, J. Agron. Crop Sci., 205, 109–128, https://doi.org/10.1111/jac.12306, 2019.
Merotto Jr., A. and Mundstock, C. M.: Wheat growth as affected by soil strength, Rev. Bras. Ciênc. Solo, 23, 197–202, 1999.
Mo, X. and Liu, S.: Simulating evapotranspiration and photosynthesis of winter wheat over the growing season, Agr. Forest Meteorol., 109, 203–222,
2001.
Noordwijk, M. V. A. N. and Brouwer, G.: Review of Quantitative Root Length
Data in Agriculture, in: Plant Roots and their Environment, vol. 24, edited
by: McMichael, B. L. and Persson, H., Elsevier, Amsterdam, 515–525, 1991.
Olioso, A., Carlson, T. N., and Brisson, N.: Simulation of diurnal transpiration and photosynthesis of a water stressed soybean crop, Agr. Forest Meteorol., 81, 41–59, https://doi.org/10.1016/0168-1923(95)02297-X, 1996.
Parent, B., Hachez, C., Redondo, E., Simonneau, T., Chaumont, F., and Tardieu, F.: Drought and Abscisic Acid Effects on Aquaporin Content Translate into Changes in Hydraulic Conductivity and Leaf Growth Rate: A Trans-Scale Approach, Plant Physiol., 149, 2000–2012, https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.108.130682, 2009.
Perez, P. J., Lecina, S., Castellvi, F., Mart, A., and Villalobos, F. J.: A
simple parameterization of bulk canopy resistance from climatic variables for estimating hourly evapotranspiration, Hydrol. Process., 532, 515–532, https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.5919, 2006.
Peterson, C. A. and Steudle, E.: Lateral hydraulic conductivity of early
metaxylem vessels in Zea mays L. roots, Planta, 189, 288–297,
https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00195088, 1993.
Prolingheuer, N., Scharnagl, B., Graf, A., Vereecken, H., and Herbst, M.: Spatial and seasonal variability of heterotrophic and autotrophic soil respiration in a winter wheat stand, Biogeosciences Discuss., 7, 9137–9173, https://doi.org/10.5194/bgd-7-9137-2010, 2010.
Quijano, J. C. and Kumar, P.: Numerical simulations of hydraulic redistribution across climates: The role of the root hydraulic conductivities, Water Resour. Res., 51, 8529–8550, https://doi.org/10.1002/2014WR016509, 2015.
Rodriguez, D., Ewert, F., Goudriaan, J., Manderscheid, R., Burkart, S., and
Weigel, H. J.: Modelling the response of wheat canopy assimilation to
atmospheric CO2 concentrations, New Phytol., 150, 337–346,
https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1469-8137.2001.00106.x, 2001.
Saliendra, N., Sperry, J., and Comstock, J.: Influence of leaf water status
on stomatal response to humidity, hydraulic conductance, and soil drought in
Betula occidentalis, Planta, 196, 357–366, https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00201396, 1995.
Shorinola, O., Kaye, R., Golan, G., Peleg, Z., Kepinski, S., and Uauy, C.:
Genetic screening for mutants with altered seminal root numbers in hexaploid
wheat using a high-throughput root phenotyping platform, G3 Genes Genomes
Genet., 9, 2799–2809, https://doi.org/10.1534/g3.119.400537, 2019.
Sperry, J. S.: Hydraulic constraints on plant gas exchange, Agr. Forest Meteorol., 104, 13–23, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0168-1923(00)00144-1, 2000.
Sperry, J. S., Stiller, V., and Hacke, U. G.: Xylem Hydraulics and the
Soil–Plant–Atmosphere Continuum: Opportunities and Unresolved Issues, Agron. J., 95, 1362–1370, 2003.
Srivastava, R. K., Panda, R. K., Chakraborty, A., and Halder, D.: Comparison
of actual evapotranspiration of irrigated maize in a sub-humid region using
four different canopy resistance based approaches, Agr. Water Manage., 202, 156–165, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2018.02.021, 2018.
Stadler, A., Rudolph, S., Kupisch, M., Langensiepen, M., van der Kruk, J., and Ewert, F.: Quantifying the effects of soil variability on crop growth
using apparent soil electrical conductivity measurements, Eur. J. Agron., 64, 8–20, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eja.2014.12.004, 2015.
Tardieu, F. and Simonneau, T.: Variability among species of stomatal control
under fluctuating soil water status and evaporative demand: modelling isohydric and anisohydric behaviours, J. Exp. Bot., 49, 419–432,
https://doi.org/10.1093/jxb/49.Special_Issue.419, 1998.
Tardieu, F., Parent, B., Caldeira, C. F., and Welcker, C.: Genetic and
Physiological Controls of Growth under Water Deficit, Plant Physiol., 164, 1628–1635, https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.113.233353, 2014.
TERENO – Terrestrial Environmental Observatories: Selhausen, available at:
https://www.tereno.net/ddp/dispatch?searchparams=freetext-Selhausen, last access: October 2020.
Trillo, N. and Fernández, R. J.: Wheat plant hydraulic properties under
prolonged experimental drought: Stronger decline in root-system conductance
than in leaf area, Plant Soil, 277, 277–284, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11104-005-7493-5, 2005.
Tsuda, M. and Tyree, M. T.: Whole-plant hydraulic resistance and vulnerability segmentation in Acer saccharinum, Tree Physiol., 17, 351–357, 1997.
Tuzet, A., Perrier, A., and Leuning, R.: A coupled model of stomatal conductance, photosynthesis, Plant Cell Environ., 26, 1097–1116,
https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-3040.2003.01035.x, 2003.
Vadez, V.: Root hydraulics?: The forgotten side of roots in drought adaptation, F. Crop. Res., 165, 15–24, 2014.
van Dam, J. C.: Field-scale water flow and solute transport, SWAP model
concepts, parameter estimation and case studies, available at:
http://www.pearl.pesticidemodels.eu/pdf/swap_thesis.pdf (last access: 4 November 2017), 2000.
Vanderborght, J., Graf, A., Steenpass, C., Scharnagl, B., Prolingheuer, N.,
Herbst, M., Franssen, H. H., and Vereecken, H.: Within-Field Variability of Bare Soil Evaporation Derived from Eddy Covariance Measurements, Vadose Zone J., 9, 943–954, https://doi.org/10.2136/vzj2009.0159, 2010.
Vandoorne, B., Beff, L., Lutts, S., and Javaux, M.: Root Water Uptake Dynamics of var. Under Water-Limited Conditions, Vadose Zone J., 11, 3,
https://doi.org/10.2136/vzj2012.0005, 2012.
van Genuchten, M. T.: A Closed-form Equation for Predicting the Hydraulic
Conductivity of Unsaturated Soils, Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J., 4, 892–898, 1980.
van Laar, H. H., Goudriaan, J., and Van Keulen, H.: SUCROS97: Simulation of
crop growth for potential and water-limited production situations, Quantitative approaches in Systems Analysis Number, September 1997, DLO Research Institute for Agrobiology and Soil Fertility (AB-DLO), Wegeningen, the Netherlands, 1997.
Verhoef, A. and Egea, G.: Agricultural and Forest Meteorology Modeling plant
transpiration under limited soil water: Comparison of different plant and
soil hydraulic parameterizations and preliminary implications for their use
in land surface models, Agr. Forest Meteorol., 191, 22–32,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agrformet.2014.02.009, 2014.
Vico, G. and Porporato, A.: Modelling C3 and C4 photosynthesis under
water-stressed conditions, Plant Soil, 313, 187–203,
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11104-008-9691-4, 2008.
Wang, J., Yu, Q., and Lee, X.: Simulation of crop growth and energy and
carbon dioxide fluxes at different time steps from hourly to daily, Hydrol.
Process., 21, 2267–2274, https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.6414, 2007.
Watt, M., Silk, W. K., and Passioura, J. B.: Rates of Root and Organism
Growth, Soil Conditions, and Temporal and Spatial Development of the Rhizosphere, Ann. Bot., 97, 839–855, https://doi.org/10.1093/aob/mcl028, 2006.
Wesseling, J. G. and Brandyk, T.: Introduction of occurrence of high groundwater levels and surface water storage in computer program SWATRE, Team Integraal Waterbeherr, Alteraar – WUR, Wegeningen, the Netherlands, 48, 1636, 1985.
Wesseling, J. G., Elbers, J. A., Kabat, P., and van den Broek, B. J.: SWATRE:
instructions for input, Internal Note, Winand Staring Centre, Wageningen, the Netherlands, 1991.
Williams, J. and Izaurralde, R.: The APEX model, Watershed Model, Blackland Research Center, USDA, Temple, Texas, USA, https://doi.org/10.1201/9781420037432.ch18, 2005.
Willmott, C. J.: On The Validation Of Models, Phys. Geogr., 2, 184–194,
https://doi.org/10.1080/02723646.1981.10642213, 1981.
Wöhling, T., Gayler, S., Priesack, E., Ingwersen, J., Wizemann, H. D.,
Högy, P., Cuntz, M., Attinger, S., Wulfmeyer, V., and Streck, T.:
Multiresponse, multiobjective calibration as a diagnostic tool to compare
accuracy and structural limitations of five coupled soil-plant models and
CLM3.5, Water Resour. Res., 49, 8200–8221, https://doi.org/10.1002/2013WR014536, 2013.
Yin, X. and Schapendonk, A. H. C. M.: Simulating the partitioning of biomass
and nitrogen between roots and shoot in crop and grass plants, NJAS – Wageningen J. Life Sci., 51, 407–426, https://doi.org/10.1016/S1573-5214(04)80005-8,
2004.
Yin, X., Struik, P. C., Romero, P., Harbinson, J., Evers, J. B., Van Der
Putten, P. E. L., and Vos, J.: Using combined measurements of gas exchange
and chlorophyll fluorescence to estimate parameters of a biochemical C3 photosynthesis model: A critical appraisal and a new integrated approach
applied to leaves in a wheat (Triticum aestivum) canopy, Plant Cell Environ., 32, 448–464, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-3040.2009.01934.x, 2009.
Zeng, X., Dai, Y.-J., Dickinson, R. E., and Shaikh, M.: The role of root
distribution for climate simulation over land, Geophys. Res. Lett., 25,
4533–4536, https://doi.org/10.1029/1998GL900216, 1998.
Zhao, C., Deng, X., Shan, L., Steudle, E., Zhang, S., and Ye, Q.: Changes in
Root Hydraulic Conductivity During Wheat Evolution, J. Integr. Plant Biol.,
47, 302–310, 2005.
Short summary
The mechanistic Couvreur root water uptake (RWU) model that is based on plant hydraulics and links root system properties to RWU, water stress, and crop development can evaluate the impact of certain crop properties on crop performance in different environments and soils, while the Feddes RWU approach does not possess such flexibility. This study also shows the importance of modeling root development and how it responds to water deficiency to predict the impact of water stress on crop growth.
The mechanistic Couvreur root water uptake (RWU) model that is based on plant hydraulics and...
