Improved scaling of minirhizotron data using an empirically-derived depth of field and correcting for the underestimation of root diameters


Background and aims

Accurate data on the standing crop, production, and turnover of fine roots is essential to our understanding of major terrestrial ecological processes. Minirhizotrons offer a unique opportunity to study the dynamic processes of root systems, but are susceptible to several measurement biases.


We use roots extracted from minirhizotron tube surfaces to calculate the depth of field of a minirhizotron image and present a model to correct for the underestimation of root diameters obscured by soil in minirhizotron images.


Non-linear regression analysis resulted in an estimated depth of field of 0.78 mm for minirhizotron images. Unadjusted minirhizotron data underestimated root net primary production and fine root standing crop by 61 % when compared to adjusted data using our depth of field and root diameter corrections. Changes in depth of field accounted for >99 % of standing crop adjustments with root diameter corrections accounting for <1 %.


Our results represent the first effort to empirically derive depth of field for minirhizotron images. This work may explain the commonly reported underestimation of fine roots using minirhizotrons, and stands to improve the ability of researchers to accurately scale minirhizotron data to large soil volumes.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3


  1. Arthur M, Fahey T (1992) Biomass and nutrients in an engelmann spruce—sub-alpine fir forest in north central Colorado—pools, annual production, and internal cycling. Can J For Res 22:315–325

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Bernier PY, Robitaille G (2004) A plane intersect method for estimating fine root productivity of trees from minirhizotron images. Plant Soil 265:165–173

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Boehm W (1974) Mini-Rhizotrons for root observations under field conditions. Z Acker Pflanzenbau 140:282–287

    Google Scholar 

  4. Bragg P, Govi G, Cannell R (1983) A comparison of methods, including angled and vertical minirhizotrons, for studying root growth and distribution in oat crop. Plant Soil 73:435–440

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Brown ALP, Day FP, Stover DB (2009) Fine root biomass estimates from minirhizotron imagery in a shrub ecosystem exposed to elevated CO2. Plant Soil 317:145–153

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Cox T, Harris W, Ausmus B, Edwards N (1978) The role of roots in biogeochemical cycles in an eastern deciduous forest. Pedobiologia 18:264–271

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Day FP, Schroeder RE, Stover DB, Brown ALP, Butnor JR, Dilustro J, Hungate BA, Dijkstra P, Duval BD, Seiler TJ et al (2013) The effects of 11 yr of CO2 enrichment on roots in a Florida scrub-oak ecosystem. New Phytol. doi:10.1111/nhp.12246

    Google Scholar 

  8. Hendricks JJ, Hendrick RL, Wilson CA, Mitchell RJ, Pecot SD, Guo D (2006) Assessing the patterns and controls of fine root dynamics: an empirical test and methodological review. J Ecol 94:40–57

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Iversen CM, Murphy MT, Allen MF, Childs J, Eissenstat DM, Lilleskov EA, Sarjala TM, Sloan VL, Sullivan PF (2011) Advancing the use of minirhizotrons in wetlands. Plant Soil 352:23–39

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Jackson R, Mooney H, Schulze E (1997) A global budget for fine root biomass, surface area, and nutrient contents. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 94:7362–7366

    CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Jackson RB, Cook CW, Pippen JS, Palmer SM (2009) Increased belowground biomass and soil CO2 fluxes after a decade of carbon dioxide enrichment in a warm-temperate forest. Ecology 90:3352–3366

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Johnson MG, Tingey DT, Phillips DL, Storm MJ (2001) Advancing fine root research with minirhizotrons. Environ Exp Bot 45:263–289

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Majdi H (1996) Root sampling methods-applications and limitations of the minirhizotron technique. Plant Soil 185:255–258

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  14. McCarthy HR, Oren R, Johnsen KH, Gallet-Budynek A, Pritchard SG, Cook CW, Ladeau SL, Jackson RB, Finzi AC (2010) Re-assessment of plant carbon dynamics at the Duke free-air CO2 enrichment site: interactions of atmospheric [CO2] with nitrogen and water availability over stand development. New Phytol 185:514–528

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  15. McMichael B, Taylor H (1987) Applications and limitations of rhizotrons and minirhizotrons. In: Taylor H (ed) Minirhizotron observation tubes: Methods and applications for measuring rhizosphere dynamics. American Society of Agronomy, Madison, pp 1–13

    Google Scholar 

  16. Milchunas DG (2012) Biases and errors associated with different root production methods and their effects on field estimates of belowground net primary production. In: Mancuso S (ed) Measuring roots. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp 303–339

    Google Scholar 

  17. O’Connell KEB, Gower ST, Norman JM (2003) Comparison of net primary production and light-use dynamics of two boreal black spruce forest communities. Ecosystems 6:236–247

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Parker C, Carr M, Jarvis N, Puplampu B, Lee V (1991) An evaluation of the minirhizotron technique for estimating root distribution in potatoes. J Agric Sci 116:341–350

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Pritchard SG, Strand AE, McCormack ML, Davis MA, Finzi AC, Jackson RB, Matamala R, Rogers HH, Oren R (2008) Fine root dynamics in a loblolly pine forest are influenced by free-air-CO2-enrichment: a six-year-minirhizotron study. Global Change Biol 14:588–602

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Pritchard SG, Maier CA, Johnsen KH, Grabman AJ, Chalmers AP, Burke MK (2010) Soil incorporation of logging residue affects fine-root and mycorrhizal root-tip dynamics of young loblolly pine clones. Tree Physiol 30:1299–1310

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  21. R Core Team (2012) R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria.

  22. Rewald B, Ephrath J (2013) Minirhizotron technique. In: Eshel A, Beeckman T (eds) Plant roots: The hidden half. CRC Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  23. Rytter R, Rytter L (2012) Quantitative estimates of root densities at minirhizotrons differ from those in the bulk soil. Plant Soil 350:205–220

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Samson BK, Sinclair TR (1994) Soil core and minirhizotron comparison for the determination of root length density. Plant Soil 161:225–232

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Sanders JL, Brown DA (1978) A new fiber optic technique for measuring root growth of soybean under field conditions. Agron J 70:1073–1076

    Google Scholar 

  26. Taylor HM, Huck MG, Klepper B, Lund ZF (1970) Measurement of soil-grown roots in a rhizotron. Agron J 62:807–809

    Google Scholar 

  27. Taylor BN, Beidler KV, Cooper ER, Strand AE, Pritchard SG (2013) Sampling volume in root studies: the pitfalls of under-sampling exposed using accumulation curves. Ecol Lett 16:862–869

    Google Scholar 

  28. Tingey DT, Phillips DL, Johnson MG, Rygiewicz PT, Beedlow PA, Hogsett WE (2005) Estimates of Douglas-fir fine root production and mortality from minirhizotrons. For Ecol Manag 204:359–370

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Upchurch D, Ritchie J (1983) Root observations using a video recording system in minirhizotrons. Agron J 75:1009–1015

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Vamerali T, Bandiera M, Mosca G (2012) Minirhizotrons in modern root studies. In: Mancuso S (ed) Measuring roots. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, pp 341–361

    Google Scholar 

  31. Waddington J (1971) Observation of plant roots in situ. Can J Bot 49:1850–1852

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Yuan ZY, Chen HYH (2012) Indirect methods produce higher estimates of fine root production and turnover rates than direct methods. PLoS ONE 7:e48989

    CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

Download references


The NC and SC experimental sites used in this work were maintained from the Office of Science (BER), U.S. Department of Energy, Grant No. DE-FG02-95ER62083 and Mead Westvaco, respectively. Funding for this research came from the National Science Foundation, award number DE-FC02-06ER64156.

Author information



Corresponding author

Correspondence to Benton N. Taylor.

Additional information

Responsible Editor: Alexia Stokes.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplemental Figure 1

The number of publications using minirhizotrons published in each year for the period 1988–2011. Publication numbers are the result of a search of the term “minirhizotron” on Web of Science. (DOCX 26 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Taylor, B.N., Beidler, K.V., Strand, A.E. et al. Improved scaling of minirhizotron data using an empirically-derived depth of field and correcting for the underestimation of root diameters. Plant Soil 374, 941–948 (2014).

Download citation


  • Depth of field
  • Fine root
  • Minirhizotron
  • Root diameter
  • Root method
  • Root net primary production
  • Standing crop