Back

Root Age Structure Governs Long-Term Architecture and Hydraulic Function in Perennial Plants: a Modelling Framework

Giraud, M.; Fichtl, L.; Leitner, D.; Schnepf, A.; Steng, K.; Friedel, M.

2026-10-06 plant biology
10.64898/2026.10.03.756415 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Background and aims: Perennial root systems develop over decades and exhibit continuous turnover of structural and absorptive components, yet most root architecture models treat woody roots as permanent and neglect root age structure. We developed an empirically constrained modelling framework that explicitly represents age-structured demography, growth regulation and dormancy in perennial root systems. Methods: We extended the functional-structural plant model CPlantBox to simulate perennial root development over decades by integrating age-dependent survival, secondary radial growth and climate-driven dormancy. The model was parameterised using unique three-dimensional root system data from young and mature grapevines, together with dendrochronological root age measurements, and coupled to root hydraulic properties. Key results: Empirical analyses revealed multi-cohort age distributions and substantial turnover of lignified structural roots, contradicting the assumption of a static woody scaffold. The model reproduced age distributions, order-specific survival probabilities and fine-to-structural root length ratios, and generated realistic, genotype-specific three-dimensional architectures. Simulated uptake profiles and hydraulic scenarios showed strong age- and architecture-driven effects. Conclusions: Explicitly representing woody root age distributions and age-dependent processes may fundamentally change predictions of perennial root system architecture and function. The framework advances root modelling beyond annual paradigms and provides a transferable tool for analysing long-term architectural and hydraulic consequences of genotype x climate interactions in perennial crops.

Matching journals

The top 3 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"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.