Advertisement

Plant and Soil

, Volume 428, Issue 1–2, pp 67–92 | Cite as

Mechanistic framework to link root growth models with weather and soil physical properties, including example applications to soybean growth in Brazil

  • Moacir Tuzzin de Moraes
  • A. Glyn Bengough
  • Henrique Debiasi
  • Julio Cezar Franchini
  • Renato Levien
  • Andrea Schnepf
  • Daniel Leitner
Regular Article
  • 310 Downloads

Abstract

Background and aims

Root elongation is generally limited by a combination of mechanical impedance and water stress in most arable soils. However, dynamic changes of soil penetration resistance with soil water content are rarely included in models for predicting root growth. Better modelling frameworks are needed to understand root growth interactions between plant genotype, soil management, and climate. Aim of paper is to describe a new model of root elongation in relation to soil physical characteristics like penetration resistance, matric potential, and hypoxia.

Methods

A new diagrammatic framework is proposed to illustrate the interaction between root elongation, soil management, and climatic conditions. The new model was written in Matlab®, using the root architecture model RootBox and a model that solves the 1D Richards equations for water flux in soil. Inputs: root architectural parameters for Soybean; soil hydraulic properties; root water uptake function in relation to matric flux potential; root elongation rate as a function of soil physical characteristics. Simulation scenarios: (a) compact soil layer at 16 to 20 cm; (b) test against a field experiment in Brazil during contrasting drought and normal rainfall seasons.

Results

(a) Soil compaction substantially slowed root growth into and below the compact layer. (b) Simulated root length density was very similar to field measurements, which was influenced greatly by drought. The main factor slowing root elongation in the simulations was evaluated using a stress reduction function.

Conclusion

The proposed framework offers a way to explore the interaction between soil physical properties, weather and root growth. It may be applied to most root elongation models, and offers the potential to evaluate likely factors limiting root growth in different soils and tillage regimes.

Keywords

Crop model Root growth model Soil compaction Soil strength Crop yield 

Notes

Acknowledgements

MTM appreciates the scholarship funded by the Brazilian Federal Agency for Support and Evaluation of Graduate Education (CAPES) to stay at the James Hutton Institute for 12 months (Process n° BEX 2934/15-9). This study has also received funding from Agrisus Foundation (PA n° 1236/13). The James Hutton Institute is funded by the Scottish Government.

Supplementary material

11104_2018_3656_MOESM1_ESM.mp4 (1.2 mb)
Video S1 Timelapse video of soybean root growth in the profile without soil compaction. (MP4 1208 kb)
11104_2018_3656_MOESM2_ESM.mp4 (1015 kb)
Video S2 Timelapse video of soybean root growth in the profile with a soil compaction. (MP4 1014 kb)
11104_2018_3656_MOESM3_ESM.mp4 (1021 kb)
Video S3 Timelapse video of soybean root growth in a drier season. (MP4 1021 kb)
11104_2018_3656_MOESM4_ESM.mp4 (1.1 mb)
Video S4 Timelapse video of soybean root growth in a wetter season. (MP4 1128 kb)

References

  1. Addiscott TM, Whitmore AP (1987) Computer simulation of changes in soil mineral nitrogen and crop nitrogen during autumn, winter and spring. J Agric Sci 109:141.  https://doi.org/10.1017/S0021859600081089 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Allen RG, Pereira LS, Raes D, Smith M (1998) Crop evapotranspiration: guidelines for computing crop requirements. Irrig Drain Pap No 56, FAO 300Google Scholar
  3. Allen RG, Pereira LS, Smith M et al (2005) Dual crop Coef cient method for estimating evaporation from soil and application extensions. Irrig Drain 131:2–13.  https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9437(2005)131 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bengough AG (1997) Modelling rooting depth and soil strength in a drying soil profile. J Theor Biol 186:327–338.  https://doi.org/10.1006/jtbi.1996.0367 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Bengough AG (2006) Root responses to soil physical conditions; growth dynamics from field to cell. J Exp Bot 57:437–447.  https://doi.org/10.1093/jxb/erj003 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Bengough AG (2012) Root elongation is restricted by axial but not by radial pressures: so what happens in field soil? Plant Soil 360:15–18.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11104-012-1428-8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bengough AG, Mullins CE (1991) Penetrometer resistance, root penetration resistance and root elongation rate in two sandy loam soils. Plant Soil 131:59–66.  https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00010420 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bengough AG, McKenzie BM, Hallett PD, Valentine TA (2011) Root elongation, water stress, and mechanical impedance: a review of limiting stresses and beneficial root tip traits. J Exp Bot 62:59–68.  https://doi.org/10.1093/jxb/erq350 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Benjamin JG, Nielsen DC (2006) Water deficit effects on root distribution of soybean, field pea and chickpea. F Crop Res 97:248–253.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2005.10.005 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bodner G, Leitner D, Nakhforoosh A et al (2013) A statistical approach to root system classification. Front Plant Sci 4:1–16.  https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2013.00292 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Bonfante A, Basile A, Acutis M et al (2010) SWAP, CropSyst and MACRO comparison in two contrasting soils cropped with maize in northern Italy. Agric Water Manag 97:1051–1062.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2010.02.010 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Busscher WJ (1990) Adjustment of flat-tipped penetrometer resistance data to a common water content. Trans ASAE 33:0519–0524.  https://doi.org/10.13031/2013.31360 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Casaroli D, de Jong van Lier Q, Dourado Neto D (2010) Validation of a root water uptake model to estimate transpiration constraints. Agric Water Manag 97:1382–1388.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2010.04.004 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Celia MA, Bouloutas ET (1990) A general mass-conservative numerical solutuion for unsaturated flow equation. Water Resour Res 26:1483–1496CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Clausnitzer V, Hopmans JW (1994) Simultaneous modeling of transient three-dimensional root growth and soil water flow. Plant Soil 164:299–314.  https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00010082 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. da Silva AP, Kay BD, Perfect E (1994) Characterization of the least limiting water range of soils. Soil Sci Soc Am J 58:1775.  https://doi.org/10.2136/sssaj1994.03615995005800060028x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. da Silva AP, Babujia LC, Franchini JC et al (2014) Soil structure and its influence on microbial biomass in different soil and crop management systems. Soil Tillage Res 142:42–53.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.still.2014.04.006 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. de Jong van Lier Q, van Dam JC, Metselaar K et al (2008) Macroscopic root water uptake distribution using a matric flux potential approach. Vadose Zone J 7:1065.  https://doi.org/10.2136/vzj2007.0083 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. de Jong van Lier Q, van Dam JC, Durigon A et al (2013) Modeling water potentials and flows in the soil–plant system comparing hydraulic resistances and transpiration reduction functions. Vadose Zone J 12:1–20.  https://doi.org/10.2136/vzj2013.02.0039 Google Scholar
  20. Diggle AJ (1988a) ROOTMAP—a model in three-dimensional coordinates of the growth and structure of fibrous root systems. Plant Soil 105:169–178.  https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02376780 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Diggle AJ (1988b) Rootmap: a root growth model. Math Comput Simul 30:175–180.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-4754(88)90121-8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Dresbøll DB, Thorup-Kristensen K, McKenzie BM et al (2013) Timelapse scanning reveals spatial variation in tomato (Solanum lycopersicum L.) root elongation rates during partial waterlogging. Plant Soil 369:467–477.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11104-013-1592-5 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Dunbabin VM, Postma JA, Schnepf A et al (2013) 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 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Dupuy L, Gregory PJ, Bengough AG (2010) Root growth models: towards a new generation of continuous approaches. J Exp Bot 61:2131–2143.  https://doi.org/10.1093/jxb/erp389 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Engels C, Rodrigues F, Ferreira A et al (2017) Drought effects on soybean cultivation - a review. Annu Res Rev Biol 16:1–13.  https://doi.org/10.9734/ARRB/2017/35232 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Feddes RA, Kowalik PJ, Zaradny H (1978) Simulation of field water use and crop yield. Pudoc, WageningenGoogle Scholar
  27. Foy CD (1992) Soil chemical factors limiting plant root growth. In: Hatfield JL, Stewart BA (eds) Advances in soil science: limitations to plant root growth, volume 19. Springer, New York, pp 97–131CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Franchini JC, Balbinot Junior AA, Debiasi H et al (2017) Root growth of soybean cultivars under different water availability conditions. Semin Ciênc Agrár 38:715–724.  https://doi.org/10.5433/1679-0359.2017v38n2p715 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Greenwood DJ, Neeteson JJ, Draycott A (1985) Response of potatoes to N fertilizer: dynamic model. Plant Soil 85:185–203.  https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02139623 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Gregory PJ (2006) Plant roots: growth activity and interaction with soils. Blackwell Publishing Ltd, Oxford, 318 p.  https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470995563
  31. Hartmann A, Šimůnek J (2016) Hydrus: root growth module, version 1. Department of Environmental Sciences, University of California Riverside, RiversideGoogle Scholar
  32. Hartmann A, Šimůnek J, Aidoo MK et al (2017) Implementation and application of a root growth module in HYDRUS. Vadose Zo J.  https://doi.org/10.2136/vzj2017.02.0040
  33. Hirasawa T, Tanaka K, Miyamoto D et al (1994) Effects of pre-flowering soil moisture deficits on dry matter production and ecophysiological characteristics in soybean plants under drought conditions during grain filling. Japanese J Crop Sci 63:721–730.  https://doi.org/10.1626/jcs.63.721 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Iijima M, Kato J (2007) Combined soil physical stress of soil drying, anaerobiosis and mechanical impedance to seedling root growth of four crop species. Plant Prod Sci 10:451–459.  https://doi.org/10.1626/pps.10.451 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Javaux M, Schröder T, Vanderborght J, Vereecken H (2008) Use of a three-dimensional detailed modeling approach for predicting root water uptake. Vadose Zone J 7:1079–1088.  https://doi.org/10.2136/vzj2007.0115 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Javaux M, Couvreur V, Vanderborght J, Vereecken H (2013) Root water uptake: from three-dimensional biophysical processes to macroscopic modeling approaches. Vadose Zone J 12:1–14.  https://doi.org/10.2136/vzj2013.02.0042 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Jin K, Shen J, Ashton RW et al (2013) How do roots elongate in a structured soil? J Exp Bot 64:4761–4777.  https://doi.org/10.1093/jxb/ert286 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. Jones CA, Bland WL, Ritchie JT, Williams JR (1991) Simulation of root growth. In: Hanks J, Ritchie JT (eds) Modeling plant and soil systems, 31st edn. Agron. Monogr, ASA, CSSA, SSSA, Madison, pp 91–123Google Scholar
  39. Kalogiros DI, Adu MO, White PJ et al (2016) Analysis of root growth from a phenotyping data set using a density-based model. J Exp Bot 67:1045–1058.  https://doi.org/10.1093/jxb/erv573 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. Kroes JG, Van Dam JC, Groenendijk P et al (2008) SWAP version 3.2. Theory description and user manual. Alterra, WageningenGoogle Scholar
  41. Landl M, Huber K, Schnepf A et al (2017) A new model for root growth in soil with macropores. Plant Soil 415:99–116.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11104-016-3144-2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Leitner D, Klepsch S, Bodner G, Schnepf A (2010a) A dynamic root system growth model based on L-systems. Plant Soil 332:177–192.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11104-010-0284-7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Leitner D, Klepsch S, Knieß A, Schnepf A (2010b) The algorithmic beauty of plant roots – an L-system model for dynamic root growth simulation. Math Comput Model Dyn Syst 16:575–587.  https://doi.org/10.1080/13873954.2010.491360 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Leitner D, Meunier F, Bodner G et al (2014) Impact of contrasted maize root traits at flowering on water stress tolerance – a simulation study. F Crop Res 165:125–137.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2014.05.009 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Licht MA, Al-Kaisi M (2005) Strip-tillage effect on seedbed soil temperature and other soil physical properties. Soil Tillage Res 80:233–249.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.still.2004.03.017 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Lipiec J, Horn R, Pietrusiewicz J, Siczek A (2012) Effects of soil compaction on root elongation and anatomy of different cereal plant species. Soil Tillage Res 121:74–81.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.still.2012.01.013 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Lynch JP (2013) Steep, cheap and deep: an ideotype to optimize water and N acquisition by maize root systems. Ann Bot 112:347–357.  https://doi.org/10.1093/aob/mcs293 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  48. Lynch JP, Nielsen KL, Davis RD, Jablokow AG (1997) SimRoot: modelling and visualization of root systems. Plant Soil 188:139–151.  https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1004276724310 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Manavalan LP, Guttikonda SK, Phan Tran L-S, Nguyen HT (2009) Physiological and molecular approaches to improve drought resistance in soybean. Plant Cell Physiol 50:1260–1276.  https://doi.org/10.1093/pcp/pcp082 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  50. Masle J, Passioura J (1987) The effect of soil strength on the growth of young wheat plants. Aust J Plant Physiol 14:643.  https://doi.org/10.1071/PP9870643 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Miransari M (2016a) Soybean tillage stress. In: Miransari M (ed) Environmental stresses in soybean production, 1st edn. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 41–60.  https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-801535-3.00003-6
  52. Miransari M (2016b) Soybean production and compaction stress. In: Miransari M (ed) Environmental stresses in soybean production, 1st edn. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 251–271.  https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-801535-3.00004-8
  53. Moraes MT, Debiasi H, Franchini JC, Silva VR (2012) Correction of resistance to penetration by pedofunctions and a reference soil water content. Rev Bras Ciência Solo 36:1704–1713.  https://doi.org/10.1590/S0100-06832012000600004 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Moraes MT, Debiasi H, Franchini JC, Silva VR (2013) Soil penetration resistance in a rhodic eutrudox affected by machinery traffic and soil water content. Eng Agrícola 33:748–757.  https://doi.org/10.1590/S0100-69162013000400014 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Moraes MT, Debiasi H, Carlesso R et al (2016) Soil physical quality on tillage and cropping systems after two decades in the subtropical region of Brazil. Soil Tillage Res 155:351–362.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.still.2015.07.015 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Moraes MT, Debiasi H, Carlesso R et al (2017) Age-hardening phenomena in an oxisol from the subtropical region of Brazil. Soil Tillage Res 170:27–37.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.still.2017.03.002 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Mualem Y (1976) A new model for predicting the hydraulic conductivity of unsaturated porous media. Water Resour Res 12:513–522.  https://doi.org/10.1029/WR012i003p00513 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Ortigara C, Moraes MT, Debiasi H et al (2015) Modeling of soil load-bearing capacity as a function of soil mechanical resistance to penetration. Rev Bras Ciênc Solo 39:1036–1047.  https://doi.org/10.1590/01000683rbcs20140732 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Pagès L, Jordan MO, Picard D (1989) A simulation model of the three-dimensional architecture of the maize root system. Plant Soil 119:147–154.  https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02370279 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Pagès L, Vercambre G, Drouet J-L et al (2004) Root Typ: a generic model to depict and analyse the root system architecture. Plant Soil 258:103–119.  https://doi.org/10.1023/B:PLSO.0000016540.47134.03 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Pagès L, Bécel C, Boukcim H et al (2014) Calibration and evaluation of ArchiSimple, a simple model of root system architecture. Ecol Model 290:76–84.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2013.11.014 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Pereira LS, Allen RG, Smith M, Raes D (2015) Crop evapotranspiration estimation with FAO56: past and future. Agric Water Manag 147:4–20.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2014.07.031 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Pierret A, Doussan C, Capowiez Y et al (2007) Root functional architecture: a framework for modeling the interplay between roots and soil. Vadose Zone J 6:269–281.  https://doi.org/10.2136/vzj2006.0067 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Postma JA, Kuppe C, Owen MR et al (2017) OpenSimRoot: widening the scope and application of root architectural models. New Phytol 215:1274–1286.  https://doi.org/10.1111/nph.14641 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  65. Prusinkiewicz P, Lindenmayer A (1990) The algorithmic beauty of plants. Springer-Verlag, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Ritchie JT (1972) Model for predicting evaporation from a row crop with incomplete cover. Water Resour Res 8:1204–1213.  https://doi.org/10.1029/WR008i005p01204 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Rosa RD, Paredes P, Rodrigues GC et al (2012) Implementing the dual crop coefficient approach in interactive software. 1. Background and computational strategy. Agric Water Manag 103:8–24.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2011.10.013 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Saglio PH, Rancillac M, Bruzan F, Pradet A (1984) Critical oxygen pressure for growth and respiration of excised and intact roots. Plant Physiol 76:151–154.  https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.76.1.151 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  69. Saikumar S, Varma CMK, Saiharini A et al (2016) Grain yield responses to varied level of moisture stress at reproductive stage in an interspecific population derived from Swarna /O . Glaberrima introgression line. NJAS - Wageningen J Life Sci 78:111–122.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.njas.2016.05.005 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Schmidt S, Gregory PJ, Grinev DV, Bengough AG (2013) Root elongation rate is correlated with the length of the bare root apex of maize and lupin roots despite contrasting responses of root growth to compact and dry soils. Plant Soil 372:609–618.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11104-013-1766-1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Schnepf A, Leitner D, Klepsch S (2012) Modeling phosphorus uptake by a growing and exuding root system. Vadose Zone J 11.  https://doi.org/10.2136/vzj2012.0001
  72. Schnepf A, Leitner D, Schweiger PF et al (2016) L-system model for the growth of arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi, both within and outside of their host roots. J R Soc Interface 13:1–11.  https://doi.org/10.1098/rsif.2016.0129 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Schnepf A, Leitner D, Landl M et al (2017) CRootBox: a structural-functional 1 modelling framework for root systems 2. Biorxiv 3:139980.  https://doi.org/10.1101/139980 Google Scholar
  74. Šimůnek J, Hopmans JW (2009) Modeling compensated root water and nutrient uptake. Ecol Model 220:505–521.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2008.11.004 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Tardieu F (2013) Plant response to environmental conditions: assessing potential production, water demand, and negative effects of water deficit. Front Physiol 4:1–11.  https://doi.org/10.3389/fphys.2013.00017 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Tardieu F, Draye X, Javaux M (2017) Root water uptake and ideotypes of the root system: whole-plant controls matter. Vadose Zone J 16.  https://doi.org/10.2136/vzj2017.05.0107
  77. Taylor HM, Ratliff LF (1969) Root elongation rates of cotton and peanuts as a function of soil strength and water content. Soil Sci 108:113–119CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Taylor HM, Roberson GM, Parker JJ (1966) Soil strength-root penetration relations for medium- to coarse-textured soil materials. Soil Sci 102:18–22.  https://doi.org/10.1097/00010694-196607000-00002 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Tron S, Bodner G, Laio F et al (2015) Can diversity in root architecture explain plant water use efficiency? A modeling study. Ecol Model 312:200–210.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2015.05.028 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Valentine TA, Hallett PD, Binnie K et al (2012) Soil strength and macropore volume limit root elongation rates in many UK agricultural soils. Ann Bot 110:259–270.  https://doi.org/10.1093/aob/mcs118 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  81. van Dam JC, Feddes RA (2000) Numerical simulation of infiltration, evaporation and shallow groundwater levels with the Richards equation. J Hydrol 233:72–85.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-1694(00)00227-4 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. van Genuchten MT (1980) A closed-form equation for predicting the hydraulic conductivity of unsaturated soils. Soil Sci Soc Am J 44:892–898.  https://doi.org/10.2136/sssaj1980.03615995004400050002x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Vereecken H, Schnepf A, Hopmans JW et al (2016) Modeling soil processes: review, key challenges, and new perspectives. Vadose Zone J 15:1–57.  https://doi.org/10.2136/vzj2015.09.0131 Google Scholar
  84. Vetterlein D, Doussan C (2016) Root age distribution: how does it matter in plant processes? A focus on water uptake. Plant Soil 407:145–160.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11104-016-2849-6 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Willmott CJ, Robeson SM, Matsuura K (2012) A refined index of model performance. Int J Climatol 32:2088–2094.  https://doi.org/10.1002/joc.2419 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Wu Y, Cosgrove DJ (2000) Adaptation of roots to low water potentials by changes in cell wall extensibility and cell wall proteins. J Exp Bot 51:1543–1553.  https://doi.org/10.1093/jexbot/51.350.1543 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  87. Wu L, McGechan MB, McRoberts N et al (2007) SPACSYS: integration of a 3D root architecture component to carbon, nitrogen and water cycling—model description. Ecol Model 200:343–359.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2006.08.010 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Federal University of Rio Grande do SulPorto AlegreBrazil
  2. 2.The James Hutton InstituteDundeeUK
  3. 3.School of Science and EngineeringUniversity of DundeeDundeeUK
  4. 4.Embrapa SojaLondrinaBrazil
  5. 5.Forschungszentrum Juelich GmbHInstitute of Bio- and Geosciences, IBG-3: AgrosphereJuelichGermany
  6. 6.SimulationswerkstattLeondingAustria

Personalised recommendations