% 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”.

@INPROCEEDINGS{Schnepf:829877,
      author       = {Schnepf, Andrea and Vanderborght, Jan and Javaux, Mathieu},
      title        = {{C}omparing root architectural models},
      reportid     = {FZJ-2017-03493},
      year         = {2017},
      abstract     = {Plant roots play an important role in several soil
                      processes (Gregory 2006). Root architecture development
                      determines the sites in soil where roots provide input of
                      carbon and energy and take up water and solutes. However,
                      root architecture is difficult to determine experimentally
                      when grown in opaque soil. Thus, root architectural models
                      have been widely used and been further developed into
                      functional-structural models that are able to simulate the
                      fate of water and solutes in the soil-root system (Dunbabin
                      et al. 2013). Still, a systematic comparison of the
                      different root architectural models is missing. In this
                      work, we focus on discrete root architecture models where
                      roots are described by connected line segments. These models
                      differ (a) in their model concepts, such as the description
                      of distance between branches based on a prescribed distance
                      (inter-nodal distance) or based on a prescribed time
                      interval. Furthermore, these models differ (b) in the
                      implementation of the same concept, such as the time step
                      size, the spatial discretization along the root axes or the
                      way stochasticity of parameters such as root growth
                      direction, growth rate, branch spacing, branching angles are
                      treated. Based on the example of two such different root
                      models, the root growth module of R-SWMS and RootBox, we
                      show the impact of these differences on simulated root
                      architecture and aggregated information computed from this
                      detailed simulation results, taking into account the
                      stochastic nature of those models. ReferencesDunbabin, V.M.,
                      Postma, J.A., Schnepf, A., Pagès, L., Javaux, M., Wu, L.,
                      Leitner, D., Chen, Y.L., Rengel, Z., Diggle, A.J. Modelling
                      root-soil interactions using three-dimensional models of
                      root growth, architecture and function (2013) Plant and
                      Soil, 372 (1-2), pp. 93 – 124.Gregory (2006) Roots,
                      rhizosphere and soil: the route to a better understanding of
                      soil science? European Journal of Soil Science 57: 2-12.},
      month         = {Apr},
      date          = {2017-04-23},
      organization  = {European Geosciences Union General
                       Assembly 2017, Vienna (Austria), 23 Apr
                       2017 - 28 Apr 2017},
      subtyp        = {After Call},
      cin          = {IBG-3},
      cid          = {I:(DE-Juel1)IBG-3-20101118},
      pnm          = {255 - Terrestrial Systems: From Observation to Prediction
                      (POF3-255)},
      pid          = {G:(DE-HGF)POF3-255},
      typ          = {PUB:(DE-HGF)6},
      url          = {https://juser.fz-juelich.de/record/829877},
}