Abstracts
Using an edaphic model that describes the extraction of soil water by plant roots, the occurrence of depletion zones dose to plant roots is demonstrated. These depletion zones affect the root water potential that is needed to maintain a certain transpiration rate. The results show how the critical soil water content depends on soil's hydraulic properties, transpiration rate and root density.
Critical soil water content; soil water extraction; soil water dynamics
Através de am modelo edáfico que descreve a extração de água do solo por raízes, é comprovada a ocorrência de zonas de esgotamento de água próximo as raízes, influenciando no potencial necessário nas raízes para manter uma determinada taxa de transpiração. Em função dos resultados demonstrase como a umidade crítica de um solo é função de suas propriedades hídricas, da taxa de transpiração e da densidade do sistema radicular.
umidade critica; extração da água do solo; dinâmica da água no solo
ARTICLES
The critical soil water content and its relation to soil water dynamics
A umidade crítica e sua relação com a dinâmica da água no solo
Q. de Jong Van Uer^{I,}^{ II}
^{I}Depto. de SolosFA/UFRGS, C. P. 776, CEP: 90001970  Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil
^{I}Bolsista do CNPq
ABSTRACT
Using an edaphic model that describes the extraction of soil water by plant roots, the occurrence of depletion zones dose to plant roots is demonstrated. These depletion zones affect the root water potential that is needed to maintain a certain transpiration rate. The results show how the critical soil water content depends on soil's hydraulic properties, transpiration rate and root density.
Key Words: Critical soil water content, soil water extraction, soil water dynamics
RESUMO
Através de am modelo edáfico que descreve a extração de água do solo por raízes, é comprovada a ocorrência de zonas de esgotamento de água próximo as raízes, influenciando no potencial necessário nas raízes para manter uma determinada taxa de transpiração. Em função dos resultados demonstrase como a umidade crítica de um solo é função de suas propriedades hídricas, da taxa de transpiração e da densidade do sistema radicular.
Descritores: umidade critica, extração da água do solo, dinâmica da água no solo
INTRODUCTION
The need of intake of carbon dioxide through stomata, the watervapor saturated conditions inside of these and the usual lower relative humidity of the surrounding air make that plants loose water by transpiration. Supply of soil water to plant roots should compensate for this loss. Water potentials in root and shoot are adjusted to meet uptake requirements. As the soil water content reduces, matric potentials and hydraulic conductivities diminish, making necessary increasing differences of water potential between soil and root in order to maintain a satisfactory water flux. Water potentials within plant roots may decrease down to 500 kPa (Adeoye & Rawlins, 1981), but at some moment before this, the soilroot water flux becomes insufficient and the plant closes its stomata. The soil water content at the moment of the first reduction in stomata opening is called the critical soil water content. Doorenbos et al. (1980) described the critical soil water content as a function of plant sensibility to drought and evapotranspiration demand, not taking into account the soil's hydraulic properties. However, many authors confirmed that the movement of water from soil to root surface is the most limiting step in the overall process of water flux from soil to atmosphere (Gardner & Ehlig, 1962; Macklon & Weatherley, 1965; Carbon, 1973; Zur et al., 1982; Hulugalle & Willatt, 1983; Hainsworth & Aylmore, 1986,1989; Tardieu et al., 1992). This paper aims to show the importance of the hydraulic properties of the depletion zone on determining the critical soil moisture content. The influence of root density and soil hydraulic properties are elucidated, applying a physical model that describes soil water extraction by plant roots.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
The value of the matric potential at any place within the depletion zone of a single root can be related to parameters of the plant, the atmosphere and the soil, by the following equation (Jong van Lier, 1994):
where T (m^{3}.m^{2}.s^{1}) is the transpiration rate, A (m^{2}) is the ground area occupied by the plant, 1 (m) is the total root length, r (m) is the uniform root radius, x (m) is the distance from the root, y_{s } is the matric potential outside the depletion zone and R (m) is the distance the drying front advanced at time t. This model was used to perform simulations for an entire hypothetical root system of a plant with a ground area of 0.01 m^{2}, extending to a depth z of 0.3 m, having mean and regular distances (d, m) between roots. It can be deduced that, in this case, the total root length 1 equals
We simulated for transpiration rates of 5 and 10 mm.day^{1} and for distances between roots of 0.1, 0.05, 0.03, 0.01 and 0.001m, considering the initial soil water content to be equal to the soil water content at matric potential 10 kPa.
As the analytical solution of equation 1 is not possible, because of the dependence of K_{x} on y_{x}, a software was developed to perform a discrete integration with distance increments (dx) of 10^{5}m. Water potential distribution in the depletion zone was calculated for any root water potential between 10 and 1000 kPa (entire numbers only) by the equation
where y_{x1} is the matric potential in the circumference one increment closer to the root than y_{x}. The first value of y_{x1} was taken equal to y_{root}. The simulation was stopped when y_{x} equaled y_{s}. Then, x was considered to be equal to R_{t}. The time needed to reach the correspondent root potential was calculated by
where q_{x} and q_{s} were calculated by the Van Genuchten (1980) equation, based on y_{x} and y_{s}.
Data of water retention and hydraulic conductivity of the surface horizon of two distinct soils from the township of Piracicaba, Brazil, were used for the simulations: a medium textured redyellow oxisol (RY), and a very clayey red oxisol (RD). The relation y(q) was described by the Van Genuchten (1980) equation, while K(q) was calculated using the equation proposed by Reichardt & Libardi (1974):
The empirical parameters of these equations, determined by Jong van Lier (1994) for these two soils, are shown in TABLE 1.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Simulation results show that differences between rooting densities decrease when rooting density increases (Figures 1 and 2). These figures also show that differences between mean distances of 0.01 and 0.001 m appeared to be very small for both soils and transpiration rates, indicating that, as far as water extraction concerns, there is little advantage for a plant to have smaller distances between adjacent roots than 0.01 m. Comparing between the two soils, soil RY, with a higher hydraulic conductivity, allows plants to extract soil water with less negative root water potentials for a longer time. To illustrate the efficiency of soil water extraction in different situations, TABLE 2 shows the mean matric potential within both soils at both transpiration rates and for different distances between roots, when the root water potential attains 500 kPa. In the case of total efficiency, this potential should be 500 kPa, as occurs in all situations with distance between roots of 0.001 m. In the case of no efficiency at all, the potential should be 10 kPa, the initial soil water potential. Values very close to 10 kPa are obtained with a root distance of 0.1 m, especially in soil RD. This tendency can be confirmed in Figures 1 and 2, where the 0.1 mcurves for soil RD rapidly show very negative root potentials.
On varying distances between roots from 0.01 to 0.05 m, at a transpiration rate of 5 mm.day^{1}, the mean matric potential in soil RY passes from 72 kPa to 455 kPa (TABLE 2). This tendency can be confirmed in Figure 3 which shows the matric potential in the depletion zone of soil RY as a function of distance from root surface, when the root surface potential attains 500 kPa at a transpiration rate of 5 mm. day^{1}, for distances between roots of 0.01 and 0.05 m. This indicates that different critical soil moisture contents have to be taken into account when plants with different root densities are considered, or when roots are not equally distributed within the soil, which often happens due to the tendency of roots to follow preexisting channels (Tardieu & Manichon, 1986; Wang et al., 1986).
At a root distance of 0.01 m and a transpiration rate of 5 mmday^{1}, the mean matric potential is 364 kPa in soil RD and 455 kPa in soil RY at the moment that the root surface potential attains 500 kPa. Figure 4 illustrates this situation. In TABLE 2 it can be seen that the differences between the two soils increase when transpiration rates increase. This shows that transpiration rates have to be considered when estimating the critical soil moisture content. However, they cannot be seen apart from soil hydraulic conductivity. In Figure 5, the influence of transpiration rates is illustrated once more. At high transpiration rates, potential gradients must be higher, resulting in a less efficient extraction of water between plant roots. Mean matric potential for soil RY with a root distance of 0.01 m is 455 kPa at a transpiration rate of 5 mm.day^{1}, and 401 kPa at a rate of 10 mm. day^{1}.
CONCLUSIONS
Simulation results allow to conclude that depletion zones do occur close to root surfaces, when the distance between neighboring roots exceeds 0.001 m. Therefore, on determining the critical soil water content the soil's hydraulic properties should be taken into account, as well as the transpiration rate and the root density. The proposed model allows to do so, and can be used to evaluate the way in which the involved parameters interfere.
Recebido para publicação em 02.05.97
Aceito para publicação em 10.05.97
 ADEOYE, K.B.; RAWLINS, S.L. A splitroot technique for measuring root water potential. Plant Physiology, v.68,p.4447,1981
 CARBON, B.A. Diurnal water stress in plants grown on a course soil. Australian Journal of Soil Research, v.l 1:3342,1973
 DOORENBOS, J.; KASSAN, A.H.; BENTVELSEN, C.L.M.; BRANSCHEID, V.; PLUSJÉ, J.M.G.A.; SMITH, M.; UTTTENBOGAARD, G.O.; VAN DER W AL, H.K. Yield response to water. Rome, FAO, 1979,193p. (Irrigation and Drainage paper 33).
 GARDNER, W.R.; EHLIG, C.F. Some observations on the movement of water to plant roots. Agronomy Journal, v.54,p.453456,1962.
 HAINSWORTH, J.M.; AYLMORE, L.A.G. Water extraction by single plant roots. Sou Science Society of America Journal v.50,p 841848,1986.
 HAINSWORTH, J.M.; AYLMORE, L.A.G. Nonuniform soil water extraction by plant roots. Plant and Soil, v.l 13, p.121124,1989.
 HULUGALLE, N.R.; WILLATT, S.T. The role of soil resistance in determining water uptake by plant root systems. Australian Journal of Soil Research, v.21,p.571574,1983.
 JONG VAN LIER, Q. de Extração da água do solo por plantas: desenvolvimento e validação de um modelo. Piracicaba, 1994. 96p. (Tese) Doutorado  Escola Superior de Agricultura "Luiz de Queiroz", Universidade de São Paulo.
 MACKLON, A.E.S.; WEATHERLEY, P.E. Controlled environment studies of the nature and origins of water deficits in plants. New Phytologist, v.64, p.414427, 1965.
 REICHARDT, K.; LIBARDI, P.L. A new equation to estimate soilwater difiusivfty. Isotope and Radiation Techniques in Soil Physics and Irrigation Studies 1973, Viena, (International Atomic Energy Agency), p.4551, 1974
 TARDIEU, F.; BRUCKLER, L; LAFOLIE, F. Root clumping may affect the root water potential and the resistance to soilroot water transport Plant and Soil, v. 140, p.291301,1992.
 TARDIEU, F.; MANICHON, H. Caractérisation en tant que capteur d'eau de 1'enracinement du maís en parcelle cuhivée. 2. Une méthode d'étude de la repartition verticale et horizontale des racines. Agronomic, v.6, p.415425,1986.
 VAN GENUCHTEN, M.Th. A closedform equation for predicting the hydraulic conductivity of unsaturated soils. Soil Science Society of America Journal, v.44, p.892897,1980.
 WANG, J.; HESKETH, J.D.; WOOLLEY, J.T. Preexisting channels and soybean rooting patterns. Soil Science, v.141, p.432437,1986.
 ZUR, B.; JONES, J.W.; BOOTE, K.J.; HAMMOND, L.C. Total resistance to water flow in field soybeans: II. Limiting soil moisture. Agronomy Journal, v.74, p.99105,1982.
Publication Dates

Publication in this collection
31 May 2005 
Date of issue
June 1997
History

Accepted
10 May 1997 
Received
02 May 1997