Spatial distribution of fine root biomass in a remnant Eucalyptus tereticornis woodland in Eastern Australia

  • Raúl Ochoa-HuesoEmail author
  • Juan Piñeiro
  • Sally A. Power


In forests, the majority of fine roots are located within the upper soil horizons, and fine root biomass decreases with depth. We evaluated spatial patterns in the distribution of fine root biomass and determined relationships with soil properties and vegetation structure in a Eucalyptus tereticornis woodland in East Australia. Fine root biomass (0–50 cm depth) was 678 (± 96.9) g m−2 and decreased exponentially with depth. Total fine root biomass was positively related to aboveground herbaceous biomass and increased with increasing proximity to larger trees, reflecting contributions from both herbaceous understorey plants and mature trees. Plants produced more fine roots in soil patches with lower organic matter content, possibly as a functional response to increase acquisition of essential nutrients in more nutrient-depleted soils. Aboveground plant attributes were more important predictors of fine roots in the shallowest layer, while water availability was a stronger predictor of fine root biomass in deeper layers, likely reflecting the harsh climatic conditions prior to sampling. Fine roots represent an important gap in many ecosystem models despite being key for biogeochemical cycling. Here, we showed that the spatial patterns of fine root biomass can be inferred from soil and vegetation characteristics across remnant Australian Eucalyptus woodlands.


Fine roots Eucalyptus woodland Path analysis Soil properties 



The experimental site is part of a TERN Super-site facility. We thank Mr. John Hughes who contributed with sample collection and processing. We also thank Mingkai Jiang for useful and constructive comments on an early version of the draft. R.O.-H. is financially supported by a Ramón y Cajal Fellowship from MICIU (RYC-2017-22032).

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Supplementary material

11258_2019_990_MOESM1_ESM.docx (109 kb)
Supplementary file1 (DOCX 108 kb)


  1. Campbell BD, Grime JP, Mackey JML (1991) A trade-off between scale and precision in resource foraging. Oecologia 87:532–538. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Chen G, Hobbie SE, Reich PB, Yang Y, Robinson D (2019) Allometry of fine roots in forest ecosystems. Ecol Lett 22:322–331. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Eamus D, Chen X, Kelley G, Hutley LB (2002) Root biomass and root fractal analyses of an open Eucalyptus forest in a savanna of north Australia. Aust J Bot 50:31–41CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Ellsworth DS, Anderson IC, Crous KY, Cooke J, Drake JE, Gherlenda AN, Gimeno TE, Macdonald CA, Medlyn BE, Powell JR, Tjoelker MG, Reich PB (2017) Elevated CO2 does not increase eucalypt forest productivity on a low-phosphorus soil. Nat Clim Change 7:279CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Finér L, Laine J (1998) Root dynamics at drained peatland sites of different fertility in southern Finland. Plant Soil 201:27–36CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Finér L, Ohashi M, Noguchi K, Hirano Y (2011) Factors causing variation in fine root biomass in forest ecosystems. For Ecol Manage 261:265–277. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Gale MR, Grigal DF, Harding RB (1991) Soil productivity index: predictions of site quality for white spruce plantations. Soil Sci Soc Am J 55:1701–1708. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Gargaglione V, Peri PL, Rubio G (2010) Allometric relations for biomass partitioning of Nothofagus antarctica trees of different crown classes over a site quality gradient. For Ecol Manage 259:1118–1126. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Gonzalez M, Augusto L, Gallet-Budynek A, Xue J, Yauschew-Raguenes N, Guyon D, Trichet P, Delerue F, Niollet S, Andreasson F, Achat DL, Bakker MR (2013) Contribution of understory species to total ecosystem aboveground and belowground biomass in temperate Pinus pinaster Ait. forests. For Ecol Manage 289:38–47. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Grime JP, Mackey JML (2002) The role of plasticity in resource capture by plants. Evol Ecol 16:299–307. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Hasegawa S, Macdonald CA, Power SA (2016) Elevated carbon dioxide increases soil nitrogen and phosphorus availability in a phosphorus-limited Eucalyptus woodland. Glob Change Biol 22:1628–1643. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Hasegawa S, Piñeiro J, Ochoa-Hueso R, Haigh AM, Rymer PD, Barnett KL, Power SA (2018) Elevated CO2 concentrations reduce C4 cover and decrease diversity of understorey plant community in a Eucalyptus woodland. J Ecol. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Heaton RJ, Sims REH, Tungcul RO (2002) The root growth of Salix viminalis and Eucalyptus nitens in response to dairy farm pond effluent irrigation. Bioresour Technol 81:1–6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Helmisaari HS, Makkonen K, Kellomaki S, Valtonen E, Malkonen E (2002) Below- and above-ground biomass, production and nitrogen use in Scots pine stands in eastern Finland. For Ecol Manage 165:317–326. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hendrick RL, Pregitzer KS (1997) The relationship between fine root demography and the soil environment in northern hardwood forests. Ecoscience 4:99–105CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Jackson RB, Mooney HA, Schulze ED (1997) A global budget for fine root biomass, surface area, and nutrient contents. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 94:7362–7366CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Janos DP, Scott J, Bowman DMJS (2008) Temporal and spatial variation of fine roots in a northern Australian Eucalyptus tetrodonta savanna. J Trop Ecol 24:177–188CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Lefcheck JS (2015) piecewiseSEM: piecewise structural equation modelling in R for ecology, evolution, and systematics. Methods Ecol Evol. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Leuschner C, Hertel D, Schmid I, Koch O, Muhs A, Hölscher D (2004) Stand fine root biomass and fine root morphology in old-growth beech forests as a function of precipitation and soil fertility. Plant Soil 258:43–56. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Macinnis-Ng CMO, Fuentes S, O’Grady AP, Palmer AR, Taylor D, Whitley RJ, Yunusa I, Zeppel MJB, Eamus D (2009) Root biomass distribution and soil properties of an open woodland on a duplex soil. Plant Soil 327:377–388. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Mccormack ML, Dickie IA, Eissenstat DM, Fahey TJ, Fernandez CW, Guo D, Helmisaari HS, Hobbie EA, Iversen CM, Jackson RB, Leppälammi-Kujansuu J, Norby RJ, Phillips RP, Pregitzer KS, Pritchard SG, Rewald B, Zadworny M (2015) Redefining fine roots improves understanding of below-ground contributions to terrestrial biosphere processes. New Phytol 207:505–518. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Nadelhoffer KJ (2000) The potential effects of nitrogen deposition on fine-root production in forest ecosystems. New Phytol 147:131–139. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Ochoa-Hueso R, Hughes J, Delgado-Baquerizo M, Drake JE, Tjoelker MG, Piñeiro J, Power SA (2017) Rhizosphere-driven increase in nitrogen and phosphorus availability under elevated atmospheric CO2 in a mature Eucalyptus woodland. Plant Soil 416:283–295. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Ochoa-Hueso R, Pineiro J, Power SA (2019) Decoupling of nutrient cycles in a Eucalyptus woodland under elevated CO2. J Ecol. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Pinheiro J, Bates D, DebRoy S, Sarkar D, Authors E, Heisterkamp S, Van Willigen B (2017) Package “nlme”: linear and nonlinear mixed effects models. R Package Version 3.1-131Google Scholar
  26. Power SA, Barnett KL, Ochoa-Hueso R, Facey SL, Gibson-Forty EVJ, Hartley SE, Nielsen UN, Tissue DT, Johnson SN (2016) DRI-Grass: a new experimental platform for addressing grassland ecosystem responses to future precipitation scenarios in South-East Australia. Front Plant Sci 7:1373. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  27. Pregitzer KS, King JS, Burton AJ, Brown SE (2000) Responses of tree fine roots to temperature. New Phytol 147:105–115CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. R Core Team (2017) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, AustriaGoogle Scholar
  29. Raich JW, Nadelhoffer KJ (1989) Belowground carbon allocation in forest ecosystems: global trends. Ecology 70:1346–1354. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Schenk HJ, Jackson RB (2002) The global biogeography of roots. Ecol Monogr 72:311–328CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Schmidt MWII, Torn MS, Abiven S, Dittmar T, Guggenberger G, Janssens IA, Kleber M, Kögel-Knabner I, Lehmann J, Manning DACC, Nannipieri P, Rasse DP, Weiner S, Trumbore SE (2011) Persistence of soil organic matter as an ecosystem property. Nature 478:49–56. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Shipley B (2009) Confirmatory path analysis in a generalized multilevel context. Ecology 90:363–368. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. Vogt KA, Grier CC, Gower ST, Sprugel DG, Vogt DJ (1986) Overestimation of net root production: a real or imaginary problem? Ecology 67:577. CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Hawkesbury Institute for the EnvironmentWestern Sydney UniversityPenrithAustralia
  2. 2.Department of BiologyIVAGRO, Campus de Excelencia Internacional Agroalimentario (CeiA3), University of CádizCádizSpain

Personalised recommendations