Second International Symposium on Plant Growth Modeling, Simulation, Visualization and Applications

Analysis of 3D structural root architecture data of trees grown on slopes

Frdric Danjon1, David H. Barker2, Michael Drexhage3, Alexia Stokes4

1
INRA, BIOGECO, 33612 Gazinet Cedex, France. fred@pierroton.inra.fr
2
Prima Subur Sdn Bhd, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
3
INRA, LERFOB, 54280 Champenoux, France
4
INRA, AMAP, 34398 Montpellier Cedex 5, France

Abstract crossing plane, (4) mean root length to the previous

The root architecture of two Quercus alba growing
on sloping ground was measured using 3D digitizing in
situ. These detailed data were then incorporated into
models of slope stability, showing how such data can
be used to determine root reinforcement potential.
Keywords: 3D digitizing, coarse root architecture, root
area ratio, slope reinforcement, landslide
branch and (5) total root length after the intersection
point (Wu, 1995). However, existing slope stability
models generally use only the mean root area ratio
(RAR) and tensile strength (see [1] for a complete
review).
This study aims at providing a chain of tools useful
for determining the contribution of tree roots to slope
reinforcement.

1. Introduction 2. Materials and methods

One dominant (tree D) and one suppressed (tree S)
The fixation of soil by plant roots is of primary
Quercus alba trees were sampled in two nearby similar
importance for reducing landslide occurrence in natural
mixed stands, 5 km from Athens, Georgia, USA. Soils
or man-made slopes. The reinforcement of a potential
were well drained nutrient depleted regolithic
clays derived from granite and mica gneiss
bedrock. Slope inclination was 12 for tree D
and 18 for tree S. Measurements and analysis
were made according to [2] with the following
additions:
1) Excavation: The two root systems were
progressively excavated using high velocity
air-lances to loosen and remove soil.

Figure 1: Vertical distributions of parameters of

roots intersecting planes parallel to the slope at
10 cm intervals. Upslope and downslope profile
for each tree. CSA : total cross sectional area, f
: mean cumulative root length after the impact.

Soil was driven downslope and either directly

landslide plane by a woody root is mainly a function of
(1) its tensile strength and of the following
characteristics at the point of intersection: (2) root
cross sectional area (CSA), (3) root angle towards the
lifted out using hand-tools or blown out of the
resulting excavation through a trench
progressively dug out of its lower side.
To maintain the root systems exactly in
their original position they were held by suspending
major roots from wooden planks spanning from the
stump to the edges of the excavation.
2) Measurement of root architecture: The root

978-0-7695-2851-9/07
0-7695-2851-1/07 $20.00
$20.00
2007
2007
IEEEIEEE 74
DOI 10.1109/PMA.2006.54
systems were measured in situ, i.e. in the soil in their
original positions. The topology and XYZ coordinates
and diameters of all root origins and of all root
segment ends were measured with a 3D digitizer. The
positive X-axis was oriented horizontally upslope. For
tree D, all roots of size above an initial diameter of 10
mm were measured, this threshold was set to 5 mm for
tree S. The length of digitised segments often reached
40 cm. Each root system required one week for
exhumation and measurement.
3) Determination of root specific gravity: The mean
specific gravities of roots in five diameter classes (2, 5,
10 and 20 mm diameter limits) were determined from a
sample of roots by water displacement. Their values
were 0.48, 0.48, 0.54, 0.59 and 0.62, respectively. The
same method was used to compute root dry weight
from the root volume obtained by digitizing.
4) Spatial distribution: To compute spatial
distribution of root dry weight, all the measured root
segments were divided into 1 cm long virtual sub-
segments.
5) Axis rotation: To derive root characteristics as a
function of distance to the soil surface, and to compute
characteristics of root crossing planes parallel to the
slope, the root system data coordinates were rotated
around the Y axis.
6) Assessment of soil reinforcement: The potential
soil reinforcement by the roots was assessed by
computing several characteristics of roots crossing
planes parallel to the slope surface at any depths i.e.
potential sliding planes (fig. 1). The results were
displayed as multiple 2D graph on 4 planes parallel to
the slope at 30 cm depth intervals (fig. 2). Additional
soil cohesion due to the roots was computed using the
angle of roots crossing the horizontal planes ([3]):
S = RAR * Tr * K
where:
K = sin + cos * tan
RAR is root area ratio, is angle of shear distortion
of roots crossing the potential slip plane, is soil
internal friction angle. Tr is root tensile strength
computed from a generic equation ([4]):
Tr = 28.97x-0.52
where x is root diameter.
K is usually set to 1.2 regardless of the value of
[1].
7) Calculation of Factor of Safety (FOS): The FOS of
the slope can be computed using S as input in an
existing slope stability model, Slip4Ex [5].
3. Results
The two root systems had very different rooting
strategies. Tree D had no taproot and Tree S had a
75
large taproot which forked at 67 cm and possessed
about half the root biomass and length of tree D (Table
1). Tree D had a fairly homogeneous distribution of
root length i.e. nearly 25% root length in both up- and
downslope quarters and nearly 50% root length in the
sectors perpendicular to the slope. However, there was
more upslope reinforcement with regard to root dry
weight, but at the expense of the downslope quarter.
Therefore, Tree Ds roots were thicker upslope than
downslope. Both trees had a small inter-lateral length
downslope (Table 1). Order 2 axes encompassed more
than half of the root volume, being 60 and 84% of root
dry weight in tree D and S, respectively.
A more detailed assessment of root spatial distribution
is provided by the 1D distribution displayed in figure
1. Tree D possessed more root length between -40 and
-110 cm distance beneath the soil surface, both up- and
downslope. Conversely, Tree S had a discontinuity in
root length and volume distribution at around 60 cm
distance beneath the soil surface, which corresponded
to the limit between shallow horizontal roots and the
downslope root proliferation below the taproot fork.
Potential contribution to soil reinforcement
Three types of figures can be used to visualize the
spatial distribution of parameters of roots intersecting
planes parallel to the slope:
1) The vertical distribution of both upslope and
downslope means of parameters determining the
reinforcement potential are displayed in figure 1.
Tree S had a very low root CSA upslope whereas
for tree D, root CSA constantly decreased at 40 cm
depth and was two times larger upslope (600 cm2) than
downslope in shallow horizons. Mean angle toward the
planes parallel to the slope at impact point were around
-30 above 40 cm depth and around -45 below 40 cm
depth in both trees. These depths corresponded
respectively to the horizontal shallow roots and to the
intermediate and deep oblique and vertical roots
impacts. The mean length to the previous branch was
approximately constant (25 cm) between 30 and
110 cm depth whereas a linear decrease in the total
root length after impacts occurred between 40 and
120 cm depth in tree D.
 2) Multiple 2D impact maps on planes parallel to
the slope (fig. 2) provide an overview of the spatial
structure of root reinforcement. In tree D, the 30 cm
deep plane showed intersections of large roots within a
radial distance of 50 cm and few impacts of small roots
up to 180 cm radial distance.
3) For tree D, at 30 cm depth, RAR was around
10% within radial distances of 50 cm but was null or
very low in sectors situated at a radial distance between
100 and 200 cm (see [6]). Conversely, the 90 cm deep
plane was reinforced by a large amount of finer roots
evenly distributed within a radial distance of 1 m, RAR
ranging from 0.14% to 3.3% in this specific area.
S within a radial distance of 50 cm of the stem
decreased from about 30 KPa at 30 cm depth to about
3 KPa at 120 cm depth in the planes parallel to the soil
surface.
When = 40, K was approximately 1.26 in both
Figure 2: Multiple 2D distribution on 4 planes parallel to trees and at all depths used in figure 5. However K
the slope at 30 cm intervals, tree S. The (0,0) was close to 1.0 when = 20 and in tree D was 0.75
coordinates correspond to the line passing through the when = 0.
centre of the stump and perpendicular to the soil Depending on the position of the potential slip
surface. a) root impacts represented by a circle
proportional to their diameter. The scale is the same for
surface, the FOS for unrooted soil varied between 2.8
coordinates and for diameters. b) root area ratio (RAR) 3.7 and 1.8 2.0 for slopes with trees D and S,
given in forty surfaces of unequal size determined from respectively (Table 2). When the mean value for S
dividing each plane in eight 45 degrees radial sectors in of roots was included, the FOS increased, depending
each of the five 50 cm radial distance rings spanning on the quantity of roots present (Table 2). Where S
the 0-250 cm radial distance interval. Small dots are the was high and the potential slip surface deepest (1.2
limits between surfaces for which the RAR was m), FOS increased the most (Table 2).
computed. c) Soil cohesion

76
 Depth of Factor of Safety function of age and forest type, and could provide as
potential Slope Slope + Slope Slope + output all quantitative characteristics needed for the
slip Tree D Tree D Tree S Tree S evaluation of slope reinforcement by vegetation.
surface
(m) Acknowledgments
0.3 2.85 11.36 1.87 8.20
0.6 2.95 7.04 1.76 3.73 We thank L. Burnel (INRA), D. Porterfield, R. Hendrick and
0.9 3.26 4.81 1.91 2.38 L. Ogden (Warnell School of Forest Resources) for technical
1.2 3.66 3.96 2.03 2.13 support and J. Greenwood (Nottingham Trent University) for
assistance with Slip4Ex. Funding was provided by The Royal
Table 2: Factor of Safety (FOS) for unrooted and rooted soil Academy of Engineers, the Warnell School of Forest
on slopes with trees D and S. The FOS of unrooted soil Resources, UGA, CEG, Pittsburgh and the EU project Eco-
increased when the potential slip surface was deeper, but was Slopes QLK5-2001-00289.
reduced as root additional cohesion decreased with depth in
rooted soil. References

Conclusions [1] Reubens B, Poesen J, Danjon F, Geudens G, Muys B

The chain of tools developed will enable a more
accurate description and use of root architectural
parameters in standard slope stability analyses. Root
architecture for the same species in a given stand can
be highly variable [2], as for the two trees in our study.
Therefore it is difficult to predict how a tree can
reinforce soil in a forest, depending on species only.
Tree D, having many oblique roots, but without any
central taproots, would be more useful for fixing soil at
the top or toe of a slope, where roots crossing the more
vertical slip surface would reinforce soil better. Tree S
however, with its long, central taproots would fix soil
better at the centre of the slope, where lateral roots are
less likely to traverse the slip surface. The functions
developed would be useful for comparing root systems
uprooted in a landslide, with intact root systems in an
undisturbed area. This kind of information would be
useful in determining how e.g. age, species and
planting history affect shallow slope stability.
Combined with spatial/temporal models of root
growth, such tools could also be used to forecast the
development of root architecture on a slope as a
2007 The role of fine and coarse roots in shallow slope
stability and soil erosion control with a focus on root system
architecture: a review. Trees 21:385-402
[2] Danjon F, Fourcaud T, Bert D 2005 Root architecture and
wind-firmness of mature Pinus pinaster. New. Phytol.
168:387-400
[3] Wu TH 1995 Slope stabilization. In: R.P.C. Morgan and
R.J. Rickson (Eds), Slope stabilization and erosion control, a
bioengineering approach, Spon, London pp 221-264
[4] Genet M, Stokes A, Salin F, Mickovski SB, Fourcaud T,
Dumail J, van Beek LPH 2005 The influence of cellulose
content on tensile strength in tree roots. Plant Soil 278:1-9
[5] Greenwood J 2006 SLIP4EX - A program for routine
slope stability analysis to include the effects of vegetation,
reinforcement and hydrological changes. Geotech. Geol. Eng.
24: 449-46
[6] Danjon F, Barker D, Drexhage M, Stokes A 2007 Using
3D root architecture models of shallow slope stability. Ann.
Bot. In press.

Table 1. Root size and branching characteristics. Entire root systems and % or value in each slope oriented sector: upslope /
perpendicular to slope / downslope (respectively "up", "pp" and "do"), stump removed.
Variable unit Tree D Tree S
Sector total up pp do Total up pp do
Length m 432 24% 56% 21% 172 7.6% 45% 48%
External surface m2 0.17 30% 54% 17% 0.059 6.9% 41% 53%
Volume m3 0.13 39% 48% 13% 0.053 4.8% 28% 67%
Dry weight kg 79.6 39% 48% 13% 32.8 4.8% 28% 67%
Root number n 706 26% 58% 17% 347 6.3% 42% 52%
Mean inter-lateral length cm 10.2 11.1 10.8 6.84 10.7 13.2 11.8 9.6
Mean branching angle degree 46 46.1 46.3 44.9 44.8 51.2 39.9 47.9

77