Back

Modelling the influence of rhizodeposits on root water uptake

Mair, A.; Gomez Peral, E.; Ptashnyk, M.; Dupuy, L. X.

2025-04-02 systems biology
10.1101/2025.03.28.645940 bioRxiv
Show abstract

The chemical compounds produced by plant roots, referred to generally as rhizodeposits, affect several soil hydraulic properties. For example, the surface tension of soil water, and the contact angle between menisci and the pore surface. What remains less clear is how these effects manifest when considering soil water infiltration and retention, and the consequent impact on the availability of water for uptake by plant roots. By modifying the Richards equation, a novel model for soil water transport was developed which incorporates the influences of rhizodeposits. The finite-element method was used for simulations of model equations and calibration against experimental data was achieved through Bayesian optimisation. Numerical simulations from the calibrated model were used to investigate the effects of rhizodeposits on root water uptake under various precipitation regimes. It was found that the impact of rhizodeposits on the availability of water to the roots can be either positive or negative depending on precipitation regime and root system maturity. This, therefore, suggests that rhizodeposit characteristics require careful consideration when developing crops for improved water use efficiency and stress-resilience.

Matching journals

The top 9 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
in silico Plants
◐ 27 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
19.0%
Similar papers in this journal
2
Frontiers in Plant Science
○ 256 papers in training set
Top 1%
6.4%
Similar papers in this journal
3
Plant and Soil
○ 18 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
5.3%
Similar papers in this journal
4
Journal of Experimental Botany
◐ 219 papers in training set
Top 1%
5.3%
Similar papers in this journal
5
Ecological Modelling
○ 28 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
4.2%
Similar papers in this journal
6
Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology
○ 98 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
3.3%
7
PLOS ONE
● 5266 papers in training set
Top 35%
3.3%
8
Scientific Reports
○ 3612 papers in training set
Top 39%
2.5%
9
GeoHealth
● 12 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
2.5%
50% of probability mass above
10
Phytobiomes Journal
● 27 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
2.2%
11
Tree Physiology
◐ 24 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
2.2%
12
Royal Society Open Science
● 214 papers in training set
Top 3%
2.0%
13
Plant Direct
○ 95 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.8%
14
Plant, Cell & Environment
○ 78 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.8%
15
eLife
● 5828 papers in training set
Top 50%
1.7%
16
Frontiers in Systems Biology
○ 10 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
1.7%
17
Plant Physiology
◐ 238 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.5%
18
Journal of Mathematical Biology
○ 40 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.5%
19
PeerJ
◐ 308 papers in training set
Top 7%
1.2%
20
Ecology and Evolution
○ 267 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.2%
21
Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment
○ 15 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.2%
22
Bioinformatics
◐ 1204 papers in training set
Top 7%
1.2%
23
Methods in Ecology and Evolution
○ 176 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.1%
24
Global Change Biology
○ 78 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.1%
25
iScience
○ 1154 papers in training set
Top 29%
1.1%
26
Journal of The Royal Society Interface
● 235 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.0%
27
PLOS Computational Biology
● 1863 papers in training set
Top 18%
1.0%
28
Heliyon
○ 152 papers in training set
Top 7%
0.9%
29
Bulletin of Mathematical Biology
○ 92 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.9%
30
Frontiers in Microbiology
○ 427 papers in training set
Top 8%
0.9%

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.