Articles | Volume 29, issue 6
https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-29-1759-2025
© Author(s) 2025. 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-29-1759-2025
© Author(s) 2025. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Research article
| 
28 Mar 2025
Research article |
| 28 Mar 2025
| 28 Mar 2025
From hydraulic root architecture models to efficient macroscopic sink terms including perirhizal resistance: quantifying accuracy and computational speed
IBG-3 (Agrosphäre), Forschungszentrum Jülich GmbH, Wilhelm-Johnen-Str., 52428 Jülich, Germany
Andrea Schnepf
IBG-3 (Agrosphäre), Forschungszentrum Jülich GmbH, Wilhelm-Johnen-Str., 52428 Jülich, Germany
Jan Vanderborght
IBG-3 (Agrosphäre), Forschungszentrum Jülich GmbH, Wilhelm-Johnen-Str., 52428 Jülich, Germany
Related authors
Mona Giraud, Ahmet Kürşad Sırcan, Thilo Streck, Daniel Leitner, Guillaume Lobet, Holger Pagel, and Andrea Schnepf
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-572, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-572, 2025
This preprint is open for discussion and under review for SOIL (SOIL).
Short summary
Short summary
We developed a multiscale simulation model that combines 3D plant architecture with carbon cycling in the rhizosphere and soil to understand how dry spells impact carbon and water flows, focusing on the activity of the soil microbes. We found that the microbial communities’ characteristics and dry spells’ start dates significantly affect rhizosphere CO2 emissions and carbon cycling. This model can help understand the effects of climate change on plant growth and soil organic matter dynamics.
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.
Mona Giraud, Ahmet Kürşad Sırcan, Thilo Streck, Daniel Leitner, Guillaume Lobet, Holger Pagel, and Andrea Schnepf
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-572, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-572, 2025
This preprint is open for discussion and under review for SOIL (SOIL).
Short summary
Short summary
We developed a multiscale simulation model that combines 3D plant architecture with carbon cycling in the rhizosphere and soil to understand how dry spells impact carbon and water flows, focusing on the activity of the soil microbes. We found that the microbial communities’ characteristics and dry spells’ start dates significantly affect rhizosphere CO2 emissions and carbon cycling. This model can help understand the effects of climate change on plant growth and soil organic matter dynamics.
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.
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.
Thuy Huu Nguyen, Matthias Langensiepen, Jan Vanderborght, Hubert Hüging, Cho Miltin Mboh, and Frank Ewert
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 24, 4943–4969, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-24-4943-2020, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-24-4943-2020, 2020
Short summary
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.
Cited articles
Baca Cabrera, J. C., Vanderborght, J., Boursiac, Y., Behrend, D., Gaiser, T., Nguyen, T. H., and Lobet, G.: The evolution of root hydraulic traits in wheat over 100 years of breeding, bioRxiv [data set], https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.10.10.617660, 2024. a
Barba, L. A.: Defining the Role of Open Source Software in Research Reproducibility, Computer, 55, 40–48, https://doi.org/10.1109/MC.2022.3177133, 2022. a
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. a, b, c
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. a, b, c
Couvreur, V., Faget, M., Lobet, G., Javaux, M., Chaumont, F., and Draye, X.: Going with the flow: multiscale insights into the composite nature of water transport in roots, Plant Physiol., 178, 1689–1703, 2018. a
de Willigen, P.: Uptake potential of non‐regularly distributed roots, J. Plant Nutr., 10, 1273–1280, https://doi.org/10.1080/01904168709363656, 1987. a
de Willigen, P., van Dam, J. C., Javaux, M., and Heinen, M.: Root Water Uptake as Simulated by Three Soil Water Flow Models, Vadose Zone J., 11, vzj2012.0018, https://doi.org/10.2136/vzj2012.0018, 2012. a
Doussan, C., Pagès, L., and Vercambre, G.: Modelling of the Hydraulic Architecture of Root Systems: An Integrated Approach to Water Absorption – Model Description, Ann. Bot., 81, 213–223, https://doi.org/10.1006/anbo.1997.0540, 1998. a, b
Duddek, P., Ahmed, M. A., Javaux, M., Vanderborght, J., Lovric, G., King, A., and Carminati, A.: The effect of root hairs on root water uptake is determined by root–soil contact and root hair shrinkage, New Phytologist, 240, 2484–2497, https://doi.org/10.1111/nph.19144, 2023. a
Eloundou, F. B.: Parameterization of Root-Soil Interaction Models using Experimental Data, Ph.D. thesis, BTU Cottbus-Senftenberg, 2021. a
Giraud, M., Gall, S. L., Harings, M., Javaux, M., Leitner, D., Meunier, F., Rothfuss, Y., van Dusschoten, D., Vanderborght, J., Vereecken, H., et al.: CPlantBox: a fully coupled modelling platform for the water and carbon fluxes in the soil–plant–atmosphere continuum, in silico Plants, 5, diad009, https://doi.org/10.1093/insilicoplants/diad009, 2023. a, b
Graefe, J., Prüfert, U., and Bitterlich, M.: Extension of the Cylindrical Root Model for Water Uptake to Non-Regular Root Distributions, Vadose Zone J., 18, 1–11, 2019. a
Khare, D., Selzner, T., Leitner, D., Vanderborght, J., Vereecken, H., and Schnepf, A.: Root System Scale Models Significantly Overestimate Root Water Uptake at Drying Soil Conditions, Front. Plant Sci., 13, 798741, https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2022.798741, 2022. a, b
Knipfer, T. and Fricke, W.: Water uptake by seminal and adventitious roots in relation to whole-plant water flow in barley (Hordeum vulgare L.), J. Exp. Bot., 62, 717–733, 2010. a
Koch, T., Heck, K., Schröder, N., Class, H., and Helmig, R.: A New Simulation Framework for Soil-Root Interaction, Evaporation, Root Growth, and Solute Transport, Vadose Zone J., 17, 1–21, https://doi.org/10.2136/vzj2017.12.0210, 2018. a
Kohl, M., Böttcher, U., and Kage, H.: Comparing different approaches to calculate the effects of heterogeneous root distribution on nutrient uptake: A case study on subsoil nitrate uptake by a barley root system, Plant Soil, 298, 145–159, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11104-007-9347-9, 2007. a, b
Landl, M., Schnepf, A., Vanderborght, J., Bengough, A. G., Bauke, S. L., Lobet, G., Bol, R., and Vereecken, H.: Measuring root system traits of wheat in 2D images to parameterize 3D root architecture models, Plant Soil, 425, 457–477, 2018. a
Leitner, D., Schnepf, A., and Vanderborght J.: Plant-Root-Soil-Interactions-Modelling/CPlantBox: Leitner2025_HESS_upscaling (Version Publication2025), Zenodo [code], https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.14732319, 2025a. a
Leitner, D., Schnepf, A., and Vanderborght J.: Plant-Root-Soil-Interactions-Modelling/dumux-rosi: Leitner2025_HESS_upscaling (Version Publication2025), Zenodo [code], https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.14732324, 2025b. a
Louarn, G. and Song, Y.: Two decades of functional–structural plant modelling: now addressing fundamental questions in systems biology and predictive ecology, Ann. Bot., 126, 501–509, 2020. a
Mai, T. H., Schnepf, A., Vereecken, H., and Vanderborght, J.: Continuum multiscale model of root water and nutrient uptake from soil with explicit consideration of the 3D root architecture and the rhizosphere gradients1, Plant Soil, 439, 273–292, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11104-018-3890-4, 2019. a, b, c
Meunier, F., Heymans, A., Draye, X., Couvreur, V., Javaux, M., and Lobet, G.: MARSHAL, a novel tool for virtual phenotyping of maize root system hydraulic architectures, in silico Plants, 2, diz012, https://doi.org/10.1093/insilicoplants/diz012, 2019. a
Postma, J. A., Kuppe, C., Owen, M. R., Mellor, N., Griffiths, M., Bennett, M. J., Lynch, J. P., and Watt, M.: OpenSimRoot: widening the scope and application of root architectural models, New Phytologist, 215, 1274–1286, 2017. a
Püschel, D., Bitterlich, M., Rydlová, J., and J., J.: Facilitation of plant water uptake by an arbuscular mycorrhizal fungus: a Gordian knot of roots and hyphae, Mycorrhiza, 2, 299–313, 2020. a
Roose, T. and Schnepf, A.: Mathematical models of plant–soil interaction, Philos. T. Ro. Soc. A, 366, 4597–4611, 2008. a
Ruhoff, A., de Andrade, B. C., Laipelt, L., Fleischmann, A. S., Siqueira, V. A., Moreira, A. A., Barbedo, R., Cyganski, G. L., Fernandez, G. M. R., Brêda, J. P. L. F., Paiva, R. C. D. d., Meller, A., Teixeira, A. d. A., Araújo, A. A., Fuckner, M. A., and Biggs, T.: Global Evapotranspiration Datasets Assessment Using Water Balance in South America, Remote Sens., 14, 2526, https://doi.org/10.3390/rs14112526, 2022. a
Schlesinger, W. H. and Jasechko, S.: Transpiration in the global water cycle, Agric. Forest Meteorol., 189-190, 115–117, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agrformet.2014.01.011, 2014. a
Schlüter, S., Blaser, S. R., Weber, M., Schmidt, V., and Vetterlein, D.: Quantification of root growth patterns from the soil perspective via root distance models, Front. Plant Sci., 9, 1084, https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2018.01084, 2018. a
Schnepf, A., Black, C. K., Couvreur, V., Delory, B. M., Doussan, C., Koch, A., Koch, T., Javaux, M., Landl, M., Leitner, D., Lobet, G., Mai, T. H., Meunier, F., Petrich, L., Postma, J. A., Priesack, E., Schmidt, V., Vanderborght, J., Vereecken, H., and Weber, M.: Call for Participation: Collaborative Benchmarking of Functional-Structural Root Architecture Models. The Case of Root Water Uptake, Front. Plant Sci., 11, 316, https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2020.00316, 2020. a, b
Schnepf, A., Black, C. K., Couvreur, V., Delory, B. M., Doussan, C., Heymans, A., Javaux, M., Khare, D., Koch, A., Koch, T., et al.: Collaborative benchmarking of functional-structural root architecture models: Quantitative comparison of simulated root water uptake, in silico Plants, 5, diad005, https://doi.org/10.1093/insilicoplants/diad005, diad005, 2023. a, b
Schwartz, N., Carminati, A., and Javaux, M.: The impact of mucilage on root water uptake – A numerical study, Water Resour. Res., 52, 264–277, https://doi.org/10.1002/2015WR018150, 2016. a
Soualiou, S., Wang, Z., Sun, W., de Reffye, P., Collins, B., Louarn, G., and Song, Y.: Functional–Structural Plant Models Mission in Advancing Crop Science: Opportunities and Prospects, Front. Plant Sci., 12, 747142, https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2021.747142, 2021. a
Vanderborght, J., Couvreur, V., Meunier, F., Schnepf, A., Vereecken, H., Bouda, M., and Javaux, M.: From hydraulic root architecture models to macroscopic representations of root hydraulics in soil water flow and land surface models, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 25, 4835–4860, https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-25-4835-2021, 2021. a, b, c, d, e, f, g, h
Vanderborght, J., Couvreur, V., Javaux, M., Leitner, D., Schnepf, A., and Vereecken, H.: Mechanistically derived macroscopic root water uptake functions: The α and ω of root water uptake functions, Vadose Zone J., 23, e20333, https://doi.org/10.1002/vzj2.20333, 2024. a
Wang, T., Xu, Y., Zuo, Q., Shi, J., Wu, X., Liu, L., Sheng, J., Jiang, P., and Ben-Gal, A.: Evaluating and improving soil water and salinity stress response functions for root water uptake, Agric. Water Manage., 287, 108451, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2023.108451, 2023. a
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.
Root water uptake strongly affects plant development and soil water balance. We use novel...
