Plant and Soil

, Volume 335, Issue 1–2, pp 199–212 | Cite as

Nutrient uptake estimates for woody species as described by the NST 3.0, SSAND, and PCATS mechanistic nutrient uptake models

Regular Article


Minimalist mechanistic nutrient uptake models based on the fundamentals of nutrient movement in the soil, nutrient uptake kinetics, and root growth and morphology, have become important tools for research. Because different approaches to solution may lead to different simulation results, it would be useful to evaluate the SSAND, and PCATS mechanistic models along with the very successful crop model NST 3.0 using common data sets and by conducting both one dimensional and multiple dimensional sensitivity analyses. The predictions of nutrient uptake by the three models using the same data set were diverse, indicating a need to reexamine model structure. Both types of sensitivity analyses suggested that the effect of soil moisture on simulation can be influential when nutrient concentration in the soil solution is low. One dimensional sensitivity analysis also revealed that Imax negatively influenced estimates of nutrient uptake in the SSAND and PCATS models. Further analysis indicated that this phenomenon was also related to the low nutrient supplying ability typically found in forest soils. The predictions of SSAND under low-nutrient-supply scenarios are generally lower than these of NST 3.0. We suspect that both results are artifacts of the steady state models.


Imax Model comparison Multiple dimensional sensitivity analysis Soil moisture 



Support for this study was provided by the Forest Nutrition Cooperative and the Virginia Tech Department of Forest Resources and Environmental Conservation. The authors express their appreciation to Drs. Ruth Yanai and Tom Fox for their critical reviews of the manuscript.


  1. Baldwin JP, Nye PH, Tinker PB (1973) Uptake of solutes by multiple root systems from soil. III: A model for calculating the solute uptake by a randomly dispersed root system developing in a finite volume of soil. Plant Soil 38:621–635CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Barber SA (1995) Soil nutrient bioavailability: a mechanistic approach, 2nd edn. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  3. Claassen N, Steingrobe B (1999) Mechanistic simulation models for a better understanding of nutrient uptake from soil. In: Rengel Z (ed) Mineral nutrition of crops: fundamental mechanisms and implications. Food Products, New York, pp 327–367Google Scholar
  4. Claassen N, Syring KM, Jungk A (1986) Verification of a mathematical-model by simulating potassium uptake from soil. Plant Soil 95:209–220CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Comerford NB, Cropper WP Jr, Hua L, Smethurst PJ, Van Rees KCJ, Jokela EJ, Adams F (2006) Soil Supply and Nutrient Demand (SSAND): a general nutrient uptake model and an example of its application to forest management. Can J Soil Sci 86:665–673Google Scholar
  6. Edwards OW, Huffman EO (1959) Diffusion of aqueous solutions of phosphoric acid at 25º. J Phys Chem 63:1830–1833CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Gill AAS, Sadana US, Debasmita S (2005) Phosphorus influx and root-shoot relations as indicators of phosphorus efficiency of different crops. Commun Soil Sci Plant Anal 36:2315–2327CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Gillespie AR, Pope PE (1990) Rhizosphere acidification increases phosphorus recovery of black locust: II. Model predictions and measured recovery. Soil Sci Soc Am J 54:538–541CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Kelly JM, Ericsson T (2003) Assessing the nutrition of juvenile hybrid poplar using a steady state technque and a mechanistic model. For Ecol Manag 180:249–260CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Kelly JM, Barber SA, Edwards GS (1992) Modelling magnesium, phosphorus, and potassium uptake by loblolly pine seedlings using a Barber-Cushman approach. Plant Soil 139:209–218CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Kelly JM, Chappelka AH, Lockaby BG (1995) Measured and estimated parameters for a model of nutrient uptake by trees. N Z J For Sci 24:213–225Google Scholar
  12. Kelly JM, Scarbrough JD, Mays PA (2001) Hardwood seedling root and nutrient parameters for a model of nutrient uptake. J Environ Qual 30:427–439CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Kovar JL, Barber SA (1990) Potassium supply characteristics of thirty-three soils as influenced by seven rates of potassium. Soil Sci Soc Am J 54:1356–1361CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Marschner H (1995) Mineral nutrition of higher plants, 2nd edn. Academic, LondonGoogle Scholar
  15. Nye PH, Marriott FHC (1969) A theoretical study of the distribution of substances around roots resulting from simultaneous diffusion and mass flow. Plant Soil 30:459–472CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Nye PH, Spiers JA (1964) Simultaneous diffusion and mass flow to plant roots. In: Transactions : 8th International Congress of Soil Science, 31 Aug. -9 Sep. 1964. Bucharest, Romania. Publishing House of the Academy of the Socialist Republic of Romania, Rompresfilatelia, Bucharest, pp 535–541Google Scholar
  17. Nye PH, Tinker PB (1977) Solute movement in the soil-root system. University of California Press, Berkeley and Los AngelesGoogle Scholar
  18. Oates K, Barber SA (1987) NUTRIENT UPTAKE: a microcomputer program to predict nutrient absorption from soil by roots. J Agron Edu 16:65–68Google Scholar
  19. Parsons R (1959) Handbook of electro-chemical constants. Academic, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  20. Sadana US, Claassen N (1999) Potassium efficiency and dynamics in the rhizosphere of wheat, maize, and sugar beet evaluated by a mechanistic model. J Plant Nutr 22:939–950CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Sadana US, Claassen N (2000) Manganese dynamics in the rhizosphere and Mn uptake by different crops evaluated by a mechanistic model. Plant Soil 218:233–238CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Silberbush M, Barber SA (1983) Sensitivity of simulated phosphorus uptake to parameters used by a mechanistic-mathematical model. Plant Soil 74:93–100CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Singh B (2008) Nutrient uptake by hybrid poplar in competition with weed species under growth chamber and field conditions using the soil supply and nutrient demand (SSAND) model. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, CanadaGoogle Scholar
  24. Singh S, Sadana US (2002) Prediction of phosphorus uptake by wheat and its depletion in the rhizosphere using a mechanistic model. J Plant Nutr 25:623–633CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Smethurst PJ, Comerford NB (1993a) Potassium and phosphorus uptake by competing pine and grass: observations and model verification. Soil Sci Soc Am J 57:1602–1610CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Smethurst PJ, Comerford NB (1993b) Simulating nutrient uptake by single or competing and contrasting root systems. Soil Sci Soc Am J 57:1361–1367CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Smethurst PJ, Comerford NB, Neary DG (1993) Predicting the effects of weeds on K and P uptake by young slash pine on a Spodosol. For Ecol Manag 60:27–39CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Smethurst PJ, Mendham DS, Battaglia M, Misra R (2004) Simultaneous prediction of nitrogen and phosphorus dynamics in a Eucalyptus nitens plantation using linked CABALA and PCATS models. In: Borralho NMG (ed) Eucalyptus in a changing world. Proceedings of the IUFRO Conference, 11–15 October 2004. Aveiro, Portugal, pp 565–569Google Scholar
  29. Steingrobe B, Claassen N, Syring KM (2000) The effect of the function type for describing the soil buffer power on calculated ion transport to roots and nutrient uptake from the soil. J Plant Nutr Soil Sci-Zeitschrift Fur Pflanzenernahrung Und Bodenkunde 163:459–465CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Tinker PB, Nye PH (2000) Solute movement in the rhizosphere. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  31. Van Rees KCJ, Comerford NB (1990) The role of woody roots of slash pine seedlings in water and potassium absorption. Can J For Res 20:1183–1191CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Van Rees KCJ, Comerford NB, Mcfee WW (1990) Modelling potassium uptake by slash pine seedlings from low-potassium-supplying soils. Soil Sci Soc Am J 54:1413–1421CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Williams M, Yanai RD (1996) Multi-dimensional sensitivity analysis and ecological implications of a nutrient uptake model. Plant Soil 180:311–324CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Yanai RD (1994) A steady-state model of nutrient uptake accounting for newly grown roots. Soil Sci Soc Am J 58:1562–1571CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Forest Resources and Environmental ConservationVirginia TechBlacksburgUSA

Personalised recommendations