% 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{Couvreur:873311,
author = {Couvreur, Valentin and Rothfuss, Youri and Meunier,
Félicien and Bariac, Thierry and Biron, Philippe and
Durand, Jean-Louis and Richard, Patricia and Javaux,
Mathieu},
title = {{D}isentangling temporal and population variability in
plant root water uptake from stable isotopic analysis: a
labeling study},
journal = {Hydrology and earth system sciences discussions},
volume = {},
issn = {1812-2108},
address = {Katlenburg-Lindau},
publisher = {Soc.},
reportid = {FZJ-2020-00629},
pages = {543},
year = {2019},
abstract = {<p><strong>Abstract.</strong> Isotopic labeling techniques
have the potential to minimize the uncertainty of plant root
water uptake (RWU) profiles estimated through multi-source
(statistical) modeling, by artificially enhancing soil water
isotopic gradient. Furthermore, physical models can account
for hydrodynamic constraints to RWU if simultaneous soil and
plant water status data is available.</p> <p>In this study,
a population of tall fescue (<i>Festuca arundinacae</i> cv
Soni) was grown in a macro-rhizotron setup under
semi-controlled conditions to monitor such variables for a
34-hours long period following the oxygen stable isotopic
(<sup>18</sup>O) labeling of deep soil water. Aboveground
variables included tiller and leaf water oxygen isotopic
compositions as well as leaf water potential
$(<i>\ψ</i><sub>leaf</sub>),$ relative humidity, and
transpiration rate. Belowground profiles of root length
density (RLD), soil water content and isotopic composition
were also sampled. While there were strong correlations
between hydraulic variables as well as between isotopic
variables, the experimental results underlined the
discrepancy between variations of hydraulic and isotopic
variables.</p> <p>In order to dissect the problem, we
reproduced both types of observations with a one-dimensional
physical model of water flow in the soil-plant domain, for
60 different realistic RLD profiles. While simulated
$<i>\ψ</i><sub>leaf</sub>$ followed clear temporal
variations with little differences across plants as if they
were $\“on$ board of the same $rollercoaster\”,$
simulated $<i>\δ</i><sub>tiller</sub>$ values within
the plant population were rather heterogeneous
$(\“swarm-like\”)$ with relatively little
temporal variation and a strong sensitivity to rooting
depth. The physical model thus suggested that the
discrepancy between isotopic and hydraulic observations was
logical, as the variability captured by the former was
spatial and may not correlate with the temporal dynamics of
the latter.</p> <p>For comparison purposes a Bayesian
statistical model was also used to simulate RWU. While they
predicted relatively similar cumulative RWU profiles, the
physical model could differentiate spatial from temporal
dynamics of the isotopic signature, and supported that the
local increase of soil water content and formation of a peak
of labelled water observed overnight were due to hydraulic
lift.</p>},
cin = {IBG-3},
ddc = {550},
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)16},
doi = {10.5194/hess-2019-543},
url = {https://juser.fz-juelich.de/record/873311},
}