4.7 Article

Root distribution of a Mediterranean shrubland in Portugal

Journal

PLANT AND SOIL
Volume 255, Issue 2, Pages 529-540

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1023/A:1026029031005

Keywords

Erica; maximum rooting depth; Mediterranean shrubland; root biomass; root distribution; root length

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The distribution of roots of an Erica (Erica scoparia and Erica lusitanica) dominated Mediterranean maquis was studied using three different approaches: root counts on trench walls (down to 120 cm), estimation of the maximum rooting depth using an allometric relationship and estimation of fine root biomass and fine root length using soil cores (down to 100 cm). Roots were classified according to diameter (fine, less than or equal to1.0 mm; small, 1.1-5.0 mm; medium, 5.1-10.0 mm; coarse, >10.0 mm) and species (Erica sp., Pteridium aquilinum, Rubus ulmifolius and Ulex jussiaei). The depth corresponding to 50% of all roots (D-50) was determined by fitting a new model to the cumulative root distribution. Fine roots represented 96% of root counts. Root counts of Erica represented 59%, Ulex 34%, Rubus 6% and Pteridium 1%. Overall root counts showed a D-50 of 26 cm. D-50 was higher for Ulex (40 cm) and Erica (22 cm), than for Pteridium (9 cm) and Rubus (3 cm). D-50 for fine roots was 27 cm, for small roots 11 cm, for medium roots 6 cm and for coarse roots 4 cm. The estimated average maximum rooting depth of the 28 deepest Erica roots was 222 cm. The deepest Erica root was estimated to reach 329 cm. A total of 82% of roots growing deeper than 125 cm were not reaching more than 175 cm. The overall fine root length density ranged from 4.6 cm/cm(3) at 10 cm to 0.8 cm/cm(3) at 80 cm. The overall fine root biomass ranged from 7.7 mg/cm(3) at 10 cm to 0.6 mg/cm(3) at 40 cm. D-50 for root biomass was 12 cm and D-50 for root length was 14 cm. Fine root biomass was estimated as 1.6 kg/m(2) and the respective root length as 18.7 km/m(2).

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available