# Reply to: “Comment on root orientation can affect detection accuracy of ground-penetrating radar”

- 219 Downloads
- 6 Citations

## Abstract

### Introduction

We showed that root orientation affected a parameter of ground penetrating radar (GPR), amplitude area (*A*) (Tanikawa et al. Plant Soil 373:317–327, 2013). The aims of this reply to Wu et al. (2014) are (i) to correct the two inaccuracies in Tanikawa et al. (2013) and (ii) to improve our method of estimating *A*(90°) using *A*(*x*) of root angle *x*.

### Methods

Measured *A* values of Tanikawa et al. (2013) were analyzed with the modified equations.

### Results

The first inaccuracy was the use of incorrect units for the coefficient *b* (the phase shift) in the sinusoidal waveform of *A*(*x*). The units should have been radians instead of degrees. The second inaccuracy was the mis-derivation of *A*(*x*) into *A*(*x* + 90°). In the modified method, *A*(90°) was estimated by *A*(*x*) from two orthogonally intersecting transect lines and a transect line at a diagonal to them.

### Conclusions

The two inaccuracies did not affect the previous main conclusions that the parameter *T* was suitable for estimating root diameter and that grid transects are likely to identify clear hyperbolas reflecting roots in radar profiles (Tanikawa et al. 2013). By the improved method, we could accurately estimate root diameter by scanning using three transect lines intersecting at angles of *x*, *x* + 45°, and *x* + 90°.

## Keywords

Carbon storage Coarse root Grid transects Nondestructive measurement Root angle Root diameter## Abbreviations

- GPR
Ground-penetrating radar

*x*Root angle subtended to the transect lines

*A*Amplitude area

*A*(90°)The maximum value of

*A*(*x*) reflecting root diameter- Σ
*A* Sum of amplitude areas for all of reflection waveforms

- Single
*A*_{max} Amplitude area of the maximum reflection waveform

*T*Time interval between zero crossings

- Σ
*T* Sum of time intervals for all reflection waveforms

## Notes

### Acknowledgments

We thank Y. Matsuda for reviewing a draft of this manuscript. We additionally thank the editor and two anonymous reviewers for their constructive comments on an earlier draft of the manuscript. We acknowledge financial support from the Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research from the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology, Japan (No. 22380090, 25252027). This work was also supported by the Program for Supporting Activities for Female Researchers funded by MEXT’s Special Coordination Fund for Promoting Science and Technology.

## References

- Barton CM, Montagu KD (2004) Detection of tree roots and determination of root diameters by ground penetrating radar under optimal conditions. Tree Physiol 24:1323–1331. doi: 10.1093/treephs/24.12.1323 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Cui XH, Shen JS, Cao X, Chen XH, Zhu XL (2011) Modeling tree root diameter and biomass by ground-penetrating radar. Sci China Earth Sci 54:711–719. doi: 10.1007/s11430-010-4103-z CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Guo L, Chen J, Cui X, Fan B, Lin H (2013a) Application of ground penetrating radar for coarse root detection and quantification: a review. Plant Soil 362:1–23. doi: 10.1007/s11104-012-1455-5 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Guo L, Lin H, Fan B, Cui X, Chen J (2013b) Impact of root water content on root biomass estimation using ground penetrating radar: evidence from forward simulations and field controlled experiments. Plant Soil 371:503–520. doi: 10.1007/s11104-013-1710-4 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Tanikawa T, Hirano Y, Dannoura M, Yamase K, Aono K, Ishii M, Igarashi T, Ikeno H, Kanazawa Y (2013) Root orientation can affect detection accuracy of ground-penetrating radar. Plant Soil 373:317–327. doi: 10.1007/s11104-013-1798-6 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Wu Y, Guo L, Li W, Cui XH, Chen J (2014) Comment on: “root orientation can affect detection accuracy of ground-penetrating radar”. Plant Soil. doi: 10.1007/s11104-014-2124-7