This paper provides an update on the fast‐evolving field of the induced polarization method applied to biogeophysics. It emphasizes recent advances in the understanding of the induced polarization signals stemming from biological materials and their activity, points out new developments and applications, and identifies existing knowledge gaps. The focus of this review is on the application of induced polarization to study living organisms: soil microorganisms and plants (both roots and stems). We first discuss observed links between the induced polarization signal and microbial cell structure, activity and biofilm formation. We provide an up‐to‐date conceptual model of the electrical behaviour of the microbial cells and biofilms under the influence of an external electrical field. We also review the latest biogeophysical studies, including work on hydrocarbon biodegradation, contaminant sequestration, soil strengthening and peatland characterization. We then elaborate on the induced polarization signature of the plant‐root zone, relying on a conceptual model for the generation of biogeophysical signals from a plant‐root cell. First laboratory experiments show that single roots and root system are highly polarizable. They also present encouraging results for imaging root systems embedded in a medium, and gaining information on the mass density distribution, the structure or the physiological characteristics of root systems. In addition, we highlight the application of induced polarization to characterize wood and tree structures through tomography of the stem. Finally, we discuss up‐ and down‐scaling between laboratory and field studies, as well as joint interpretation of induced polarization and other environmental data. We emphasize the need for intermediate‐scale studies and the benefits of using induced polarization as a time‐lapse monitoring method. We conclude with the promising integration of induced polarization in interdisciplinary mechanistic models to better understand and quantify subsurface biogeochemical processes.

Thorough knowledge of root system functioning is essential to understand the feedback loops between plants, soil, and climate. In situ characterization of root systems is challenging due to the inaccessibility of roots and the complexity of root zone processes. Electrical methods have been proposed to overcome these difficulties. Electrical conduction and polarization occur in and around roots, but the mechanisms are not yet fully understood. We review the potential and limitations of low‐frequency electrical techniques for root zone investigation, discuss the mechanisms behind electrical conduction and polarization in the soil–root continuum, and address knowledge gaps. A range of electrical methods for root investigation is available. Reported methods using current injection in the plant stem to assess the extension of the root system lack robustness. Multi‐electrode measurements are increasingly used to quantify root zone processes through soil moisture changes. They often neglect the influence of root biomass on the electrical signal, probably because it is yet to be well understood. Recent research highlights the potential of frequency‐dependent impedance measurements. These methods target both surface and volumetric properties by activating and quantifying polarization mechanisms occurring at the root segment and cell scale at specific frequencies. The spectroscopic approach opens up a range of applications. Nevertheless, understanding electrical signatures at the field scale requires significant understanding of small‐scale polarization and conduction mechanisms. Improved mechanistic soil–root electrical models, validated with small‐scale electrical measurements on root systems, are necessary to make further progress in ramping up the precision and accuracy of multi‐electrode tomographic techniques for root zone investigation.

The impact of roots on bulk electrical conductivity was studied using a modeling approach. The presence of roots affects petrophysical relations. The effect of roots is more pronounced in sandy soil than in loamy soil. Root surface and soil–root electrical contrast affect ERT measurements the most. Electrical resistivity tomography (ERT) has become an important tool for studying root‐zone soil water fluxes under field conditions. The results of ERT translate to water content via empirical pedophysical relations, usually ignoring the impact of roots; however, studies in the literature have shown that roots in soils may actually play a non‐negligible role in the bulk electrical conductivity (σ) of the soil–root continuum, but we do not completely understand the impact of root segments on ERT measurements. In this numerical study, we coupled an electrical model with a plant–soil water flow model to investigate the impact of roots on virtual ERT measurements. The coupled model can produce three‐dimensional simulations of root growth and development, water flow in soil and root systems, and electrical transfer in the soil–root continuum. Our electrical simulation illustrates that in rooted soils, for every 1% increase in the root/sand volume ratio, there can be a 4 to 18% increase in the uncertainty of σ computed via the model, caused by the presence of root segments; the uncertainty in a loam medium is 0.2 to 1.5%. The influence of root segments on ERT measurements depends on the root surface area (r = ∼0.6) and the σ contrast between roots and the soil (r = ∼0.9), as revealed by correlation analysis. This study is important in the context of accurate water content predictions for automated irrigation systems in sandy soil.

19Electrical Resistivity Tomography (ERT) has become an important tool to study soil water fluxes processes. We see a greater anisotropy in a sandy medium when compared to a loamy medium. 33We find that the water uptake process dominates the bulk electrical properties. The Gauss-Newton 34 type ERT inversion of virtual rhizotron data demonstrate that, when root-soil electrical 35 conductivity contrasts are high, it can lead to error in water content estimates since the electrical 36 conductivity is partly due to root. Thus, incorporating the impact of root in the pedophysical 37 relations is very important to interpret ERT results directly as water content.