2021
DOI: 10.1007/s11104-021-05094-6
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Electrical capacitance estimates crop root traits best under dry conditions—a case study in cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.)

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

2
12
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 14 publications
(14 citation statements)
references
References 52 publications
2
12
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Furthermore, these fits were weaker for each cultivar and year than for the regressions between C R * and flag-leaf parameters (R 2 : 0.33–0.74) or GM (R 2 : 0.55–0.70), providing further evidence of the influence of the root system on the measured capacitance. This confirms previous reports that AC is able to penetrate to deeper roots, particularly when the soil is much drier than the field capacity and the roots offer a more favorable current path [ 13 , 37 ]. It should be noted that though C R * values are associated with water-saturated soil, the capacitance measurements in the present study were always taken in considerably drier soil (θ rel from 0.18 to 0.42 vs. θ rel of 0.65 at field capacity).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 91%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Furthermore, these fits were weaker for each cultivar and year than for the regressions between C R * and flag-leaf parameters (R 2 : 0.33–0.74) or GM (R 2 : 0.55–0.70), providing further evidence of the influence of the root system on the measured capacitance. This confirms previous reports that AC is able to penetrate to deeper roots, particularly when the soil is much drier than the field capacity and the roots offer a more favorable current path [ 13 , 37 ]. It should be noted that though C R * values are associated with water-saturated soil, the capacitance measurements in the present study were always taken in considerably drier soil (θ rel from 0.18 to 0.42 vs. θ rel of 0.65 at field capacity).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 91%
“…A root excision experiment in potted maize partially resolved the conflicting findings, demonstrating that C R was mainly determined by the roots in the soil, but was also influenced by the size-dependent capacitance of the stem base (which was responsible for 31–39% of the total capacitance) [ 12 ]. Furthermore, roots make the greatest contribution to the capacitance when the surrounding soil is dry and, therefore, less electrically conductive than the roots [ 13 ]. A generally accepted advantage is that, as C R depends not only on root size but also on root tissue characteristics (e.g., maturation and suberization), the method provides related information on root functionality [ 6 , 8 , 10 , 14 ].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Furthermore, C R * was unaffected by the reduction in SDM, implying that the capacitance is more or less determined by the root traits and not merely by the root-neck and stem-base properties. This corroborates previous ndings byGu et al (2021), who reported poorer correlations between stem diameter and C R under relatively dry soil conditions when the current used for…”
supporting
confidence: 92%
“…It is commonly agreed that, as root current pathways are affected by root water content, tissue density and suberization, the C R values represent not only the geometrical size but also the functional activity of the root system (Dalton 1995 (Chloupek et al 2006;Středa et al 2012). Variation in soil water content (SWC) has a marked effect on C R due to changes in soil-ground electrode contact (Ellis et al 2013) and in the root to soil conductance ratio (Gu et al 2021). A close positive relationship between C R and the SWC of the root zone was previously shown for several species (Cseresnyés et al 2018(Cseresnyés et al , 2020a.…”
Section: ; Cabal Et Al 2021)mentioning
confidence: 96%
See 1 more Smart Citation