HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Figures Only Full Text Free Full Text (PDF) Free Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Dudley, L. M. Articles by Shani, U. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by Dudley, L. M. Articles by Shani, U. GeoRef GeoRef Citation Agricola Articles by Dudley, L. M. Articles by Shani, U. Related Collections Water Stress Plant and Soil Interactions Root Growth/Water Uptake Models

ORIGINAL RESEARCH PAPERS

Modeling Plant Response to Drought and Salt Stress

Reformulation of the Root-Sink Term

^a Dep. of Plants, Soils, and Biometeorology, 4820 Old Main Hill, Utah State Univ., Logan, UT 84322-4820
^b Dep. of Soil and Water Sci., Faculty of Agricultural, Food, and Environmental Sci., POB 12, Rehovot 76100, Israel
^* Corresponding author (ldud{at}cc.usu.edu)

Received 19 December 2002.

Because transpiration is often the largest component of the water budget in arid systems, the efficacy of computer simulation models as predictors of water and salt movement is predicated on their ability to predict transpiration. The objective of this study was to improve the root-sink term for water extraction and thus improve predictions of transpiration. The root-sink terms often use either a transpiration-apportioning (TA) empirical function for the plant response to the soil matric and osmotic potential or a potential-flow (PF) function. Three root-sink terms, a TA formulation, a PF formulation, and a combination of the two (PFTA, a TA function for computing water uptake in response to salinity and a PF function for computing water uptake in response to water availability) were coded into a simulation model, and model predictions were compared with field-collected data. When predicted and measured relative yields (yield/yield_max) were compared, the PF produced the poorest agreement with data (y = 0.8741x + 0.0251), the TA gave better agreement (y = 0.9283x + 0.0476), and PFTA provided the best agreement (y = 0.9909x + 0.0430). The plant and plant–soil based formulation predicted the salinity profile at the end of the field experiment under conditions of high salinity (EC irrigation water = 6.0 dS m^-1) and irrigation equal to potential evaporation. The plant–soil formulation was the better predictor under the same salinity condition with irrigation at 40% of potential evaporation. The simulated evolution of the water content and salinity profile across time was also examined.

Abbreviations: PF, potential-flow function • PFTA, combination of potential-flow and transition-apportioning functions • TA, transpiration-apportioning function

This article has been cited by other articles:

				L. M. Dudley, A. Ben-Gal, and N. Lazarovitch Drainage Water Reuse: Biological, Physical, and Technological Considerations for System Management J. Environ. Qual., September 2, 2008; 37(5_Supplement): S-25 - S-35. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				E. Segal, T. Kushnir, Y. Mualem, and U. Shani Water Uptake and Hydraulics of the Root Hair Rhizosphere Vadose Zone J., August 1, 2008; 7(3): 1027 - 1034. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				L. M. Dudley, A. Ben-Gal, and U. Shani Influence of Plant, Soil, and Water on the Leaching Fraction Vadose Zone J., April 14, 2008; 7(2): 420 - 425. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				H. Fujimaki, Y. Ando, Y. Cui, and M. Inoue Parameter Estimation of a Root Water Uptake Model under Salinity Stress Vadose Zone J., January 23, 2008; 7(1): 31 - 38. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				T. H. Skaggs, P. J. Shouse, and J. A. Poss Irrigating Forage Crops with Saline Waters: 2. Modeling Root Uptake and Drainage Vadose Zone J., June 21, 2006; 5(3): 824 - 837. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				U. Shani, A. Ben-Gal, and L. M. Dudley Environmental Implications of Adopting a Dominant Factor Approach to Salinity Management J. Environ. Qual., August 9, 2005; 34(5): 1455 - 1460. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]