Erratum to “Construction of Minirhizotron Facilities for Investigating Root Zone Processes” and “Parameterization of Root Water Uptake Models Considering Dynamic Root Distributions and Water Uptake Compensation”

Abstract

Root length in the images analyzed by Rootfly (5) was converted from pixels to millimeters by that PPMM value. Before calibration, the PPMM value was 397.8, and after calibration it was 314.9. Therefore, all our published root length values that were obtained using Rootfly need to be corrected according to the new PPMM. Therefore, a factor of 0.8 was used to correct RLD and total root length under a horizontal unit soil surface in 2. The corrections are conducted in corresponding places in the two published papers below. “A digital camera with a visible frame of 13.5 mm (vertical) by 18 mm (horizontal) was used to capture the root images from both the left and right sides of the rhizotubes” should be replaced by “A digital camera with a visible frame of 16.5 mm (vertical) by 23.5 mm (horizontal) was used to capture the root images from both the left and right sides of the rhizotubes.” The phrase “roots were counted in 120 13.5- by 18-mm images” should be replaced by “roots were counted in 120 16.5- by 23.5-mm images.” “The SEM is around 0.06 counts cm−2 in the upper facility …” should be replaced by “The SEM is around 0.04 counts cm−2 in the upper facility …”. “the SEM was larger and reached up to 0.12 counts cm−2 at the 60- and 80-cm depth” should be replaced by “the SEM was larger and reached up to 0.07 counts cm−2 at the 60- and 80-cm depth.” “around 0.75 counts cm−2 in the sheltered and rainfed plots and 1.1 counts cm−2 in the irrigated plot” should be replaced by “around 0.45 counts cm−2 in the sheltered and rainfed plots and 0.66 counts cm−2 in the irrigated plot.” The values of root density in Fig. 8, 10 (left), and 11 should be rescaled by 0.6, whereas the values in Fig. 9 should be rescaled by 0.62 (0.36) according to the definition of a variogram. “The images with a size of 13.5 by 18 mm were analyzed by Rootfly” should be replaced by “The images with a size of 16.5 by 23.5 mm were analyzed by Rootfly.” Total root length under a unit horizontal surface was obtained based on RLD values and the given rooting depth. Thus, the total root length has to be corrected according to the corrected RLD′ values. Therefore, “the calculated total root length per plant in Week 8 when roots were first observed at 80 cm was 47.20 and 5.77 m from observed lengths and observed impacts, respectively” should be replaced by “the calculated total root length per plant in Week 8 when roots were first observed at 80 cm was 37.76 and 4.62 m from observed lengths and observed impacts, respectively”, and “the root hydraulic conductance per unit root length was 1.23 × 10−8 and 1.01 × 10−7 cm h−1 for Week 8” should be replaced by “the root hydraulic conductance per unit root length was 1.54 × 10−8 and 1.26 × 10−7 cm h−1 for Week 8.” Because normalized RLD was used in both the Feddes and Couvreur models, there was no effect on the inverse modeling and the simulation of root water uptake.