Abstract
In a maize field, one inter-row out of two was compacted two years down to 30-cm depth. This compacted inter-row (CIR) had a low root density down to 85-cm depth, while the soil below the row and the non compacted inter-row (NCIR) was densely rooted. Soil water status was monitored in each of these three compartments using tensiometers, neutron probe and gravimetric measurements. Both years, the rate of water extraction was about one half in the CIR compared with the row and the NCIR. As a consequence, appreciable differences in soil water potential were observed between colonized and sparsely colonized zones of each layer. These horizontal gradients were steeper than the vertical gradient between layers. This calls into question the suitability of one-dimensional models of water extraction for non-regular root systems, which are common in the field.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Aya L M, Blake G R and Farrel D A 1975 A field study of soil water depletion patterns in presence of growing soybeans roots. III. Rooting characteristics and root extraction of soil water. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. Proc. 79, 437–444.
Bertuzzi P, Bruckler L, Gabilly Y and Gaudu J C 1987 Calibration, field testing and error analysis of a gamma-ray probe forin situ measurements of dry bulk density. Soil Sci. 144, 425–436.
Curmi P 1987 Comportement physique de mottes à macroporosité différente.In Soil compaction and Regeneration. Eds. G Monnier and M Goss, pp 53–58. Balkema, Rotterdam.
Dunham R J and Nye P H 1973 The influence of water content on the uptake of ions by roots. I. Soil water content gradient near a plane of onion roots. J. Appl. Ecol. 10, 585–598.
Gardner W R 1964 Dynamic aspects of water availability to plants. Soil Sci. 89, 63–73.
Gardner W R 1964 Relation of root distribution to water uptake and availability. Agron. J. 56, 35–41.
Molz F J 1981 Models of water transport in the soil-plant system: A review. Water Resources Res. 5, 1245–1260.
Molz F J and Remson I 1970 Extraction term models of soil moisture use by transpiring plants. Water Resources Res. 6, 1346–1356.
Newman E I 1969 Resistance to water flow in soil and plant. I. Soil resistance in relation to amounts of root: Theoretical estimates. J. Appl. Ecol. 6, 1–12. II. A review of experimental evidence on the rhizosphere resistance. J. Appl. Ecol. 6, 261–272.
Manichon H 1987 Observation morphologique de l'état structural et mise en évidence j'effet de compactage des horizons travaillés.In Soil compaction and Regeneration. Eds. G Monier and M Goss. pp 39–52. Balkema, Rotterdam.
Reicosky D C and Ritchie J T 1976. Relative importance of soil resistance and plant resistance in root water absorption. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 40, 293–297.
Soane B D, Dickson J W and Campbell D J 1982 Compaction by agricultural vehicles: A review. III. Incidence and control of compaction in crop production. Soil Tillage Res. 2, 3–36.
Tardieu F 1988 Etat structural, enracinement et alimentation hydrique du maïs. III. Disponibilité des réserves en eau du sol. Agronomie 7, 279–288.
Tardieu F 1988 Analysis of the spatial variability of maize root density. I. Effect of discontinuous wheel compactions on spatial arrangement of roots. Plant and Soil 107, 259–266.
Tardieu F 1988 Analysis of the spatial variability of maize root density. II. Distances between roots. Plant and Soil 107, 267–272.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Tardieu, F. Analysis of the spatial variability in maize root density. Plant Soil 109, 257–262 (1988). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02202092
Received:
Revised:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02202092