2022
DOI: 10.1016/j.iswcr.2022.01.008
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Root tensile strength of terrace hedgerow plants in the karst trough valleys of SW China: Relation with root morphology and fiber content

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

0
7
0

Year Published

2023
2023
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 13 publications
(7 citation statements)
references
References 45 publications
0
7
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The three Ficus species were found to have tree trunk diameters of more than 50 cm such as F. benjamina, F. callosa, and F. variegata with deep roots. The root system of Ficus can maintain the integrity of the slope so that it can act as erosion control (Vannoppen et al 2017;Chen et al 2022).…”
Section: Resortmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The three Ficus species were found to have tree trunk diameters of more than 50 cm such as F. benjamina, F. callosa, and F. variegata with deep roots. The root system of Ficus can maintain the integrity of the slope so that it can act as erosion control (Vannoppen et al 2017;Chen et al 2022).…”
Section: Resortmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Plants with more branches in the root system have better soil reinforcement abilities when resisting external forces 8 . Additionally, chemical components such as cellulose and lignin affect tensile strength 9 , 10 . On the other hand, the external environment is essential in determining the tensile properties of the root system.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This may reduce the net repulsive forces in soil particles, thereby enhancing the integrity of the aggregates [27,28]. Root diameters showed a negative power relationship with tensile strength, while showing a positive power relationship with the tensile force of herbs on the Loess Plateau [29,30]. However, the relationship between root traits and soil aggregate stability has shown inconsistent conclusions.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%