% IMPORTANT: The following is UTF-8 encoded.  This means that in the presence
% of non-ASCII characters, it will not work with BibTeX 0.99 or older.
% Instead, you should use an up-to-date BibTeX implementation like “bibtex8” or
% “biber”.

@ARTICLE{Leitner:1041117,
      author       = {Leitner, Daniel and Schnepf, Andrea and Vanderborght, Jan},
      title        = {{F}rom hydraulic root architecture models to efficient
                      macroscopic sink terms including perirhizal resistance:
                      quantifying accuracy and computational speed},
      journal      = {Hydrology and earth system sciences},
      volume       = {29},
      number       = {6},
      issn         = {1027-5606},
      address      = {Munich},
      publisher    = {EGU},
      reportid     = {FZJ-2025-02151},
      pages        = {1759 - 1782},
      year         = {2025},
      abstract     = {Root water uptake strongly affects soil water balance and
                      plant development. It can be described by mechanistic models
                      of soil–root hydraulics based on soil water content, soil
                      and root hydraulic properties, and the dynamic development
                      of the root architecture. Recently, novel upscaling methods
                      have emerged, which enable the application of detailed
                      mechanistic models on a larger scale, particularly for land
                      surface and crop models, by using mathematical upscaling.In
                      this study, we explore the underlying assumptions and the
                      mathematical fundamentals of different upscaling approaches.
                      Our analysis rigorously investigates the errors introduced
                      in each step during the transition from fine-scale
                      mechanistic models, which considers the nonlinear perirhizal
                      resistance around each root, to more macroscopic
                      representations. Upscaling steps simplify the representation
                      of the root architecture, the perirhizal geometry, and the
                      soil spatial dimension and thus introduces errors compared
                      to the full complex 3D simulations. In order to investigate
                      the extent of these errors, we perform simulation case
                      studies, spring barley as a representative non-row crop and
                      maize as a representative row crop, using three different
                      soils.We show that the error introduced by the upscaling
                      steps strongly differs, depending on root architecture and
                      soil type. Furthermore, we identify the individual steps and
                      assumptions that lead to the most important losses in
                      accuracy. An analysis of the trade-off between model
                      complexity and accuracy provides valuable guidance for
                      selecting the most suitable approach for specific
                      applications.},
      cin          = {IBG-3},
      ddc          = {550},
      cid          = {I:(DE-Juel1)IBG-3-20101118},
      pnm          = {2173 - Agro-biogeosystems: controls, feedbacks and impact
                      (POF4-217)},
      pid          = {G:(DE-HGF)POF4-2173},
      typ          = {PUB:(DE-HGF)16},
      UT           = {WOS:001454622300001},
      doi          = {10.5194/hess-29-1759-2025},
      url          = {https://juser.fz-juelich.de/record/1041117},
}