Modelling root demography in heterogeneous mountain forests and applications for slope stability analysis

Abstract

Background and aims Plant roots provide mechanical cohesion (cr) to soil on slopes which are prone to shallow landslides. cr varies in heterogeneous natural forests due to the spatial, inter- and intra-annual dynamics of root demography. Characterizing root initiation density and mortality, as well as how root growth is influenced by abiotic and biotic factors is essential for exploring a root system's capacity to reinforce soil. Methods In this study, root demography data were monitored using field rhizotrons during 1.5 years in two naturally regenerated mixed forests in the French Alps. These forests are composed of trees growing in groups (tree islands) with large gaps between the islands. Three categories of driving variables were measured: (i) spatial factors: altitude (1,400 m, 1,700 m), ecological patch (gap, tree island), soil depth (0.0-1.0 m divided into five layers of 0.2 m); (ii) temporal factors: month (12 months from March 2010 to February 2011), winter (winter of 2009-2010 and 2010-2011); (iii) biological factors: root diameter classes (]0, 1] mm, ]1, 2] mm, ]2, 5] mm (according to the international standard ISO 31-11, ]x, y] denotes a left half-open interval fromx (excluded) to y (included)). Two types of two-part models, a Hurdle model (H) and a Zero-inflated model (ZI) were used to fit root data with a high zero population, i.e. if root initiation or mortality was zero during a given time period, or if roots were not present at all points throughout a soil profile. Results Root initiation quantity decreased with increasing soil depth, as well as being lower in tree islands. Both soil depth and ecological patch interacted strongly with altitude. Root dynamics were significantly less active with a lower net production and cr increment in winter and spring than in summer and autumn. Roots which were ]1, 2] mm in diameter contributed the most to cr compared to other diameter classes, as they had a high production but a low mortality. With regard to model selection, both H and ZI demonstrated similar outcomes and underestimated extreme values of root demography data. Conclusion All factors contributed towards explaining the variability of root demography and cr. We suggest taking into consideration the seasonality of root dynamics when studying root reinforcement. (Résumé d'auteur

Ecological mitigation of hillslope instability: ten key issues facing researchers and practitioners

“…One of the biggest challenges in model development is to appropriately take into account the temporal and spatial heterogeneity of soil properties, root and water distribution along a slope. The use of root demography and water flux data in 3D and four dimensions (4D, i.e., considering temporal variation) as model inputs is still largely unexplored (Mao et al 2013). New technologies for including the 3D spatial distribution of root and soil properties in models with appropriate computation times are urgently required.…”

“…This delay in attaining adequate strength by the vegetation is an inherent weakness of soft engineering structures. Similarly, intra-annual variations in root demography (Mao et al 2013) and soil moisture (Pollen 2007), result in periods of the year when slope stability is reduced and these inter-and intra-annual windows of susceptibility should be better defined and quantified. Fig.…”

Observations of “coarse” root development in young trees of nine exotic species from a New Zealand plot trial

“…However, while it is acknowledged that vegetation imparts additional strength to soil via its reinforcing root network, the amount of information recording the development and growth of a species' root system is sparse, particularly for larger trees (e.g. Mao et al 2013). This paucity of quantitative data is largely because obtaining belowground plant information is difficult, time-consuming, and expensive.…”

Inter-annual variability in flowering of orchids: lessons learned from 8 years of monitoring in a Mediterranean region of France

“…On the contrary, in woodland, light availability is low, but the microclimate is more regulated than in open habitat. For example, because of the tree canopy closure, the seasonal variation of air and soil temperature tend to be less contrasted under tree clusters than in open areas (Morecroft et al 1998;Mao et al 2013). Therefore, a trade-off effect between microclimate and light availability may exist in both grassland and woodland, thus resulting in higher numbers of years needed to observe 100% of the species (≥ 3 years).…”