Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Content
    • Ahead of Print
    • Current Issue
    • Special Issues
    • All Issues
  • Contribute
    • Submit to AUF
    • Author Guidelines
    • Reviewer Guidelines
  • About
    • Overview
    • Editorial Board
    • Journal Metrics
    • International Society of Arboriculture
  • More
    • Contact
    • Feedback
  • Alerts

User menu

  • Log in

Search

  • Advanced search
Arboriculture & Urban Forestry
  • Log in
Arboriculture & Urban Forestry

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Content
    • Ahead of Print
    • Current Issue
    • Special Issues
    • All Issues
  • Contribute
    • Submit to AUF
    • Author Guidelines
    • Reviewer Guidelines
  • About
    • Overview
    • Editorial Board
    • Journal Metrics
    • International Society of Arboriculture
  • More
    • Contact
    • Feedback
  • Alerts
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • YouTube
  • LinkedIn
Research ArticleArticles

Soil Moisture and Absorption of Water by Tree Roots

T. T. Kozlowski
Arboriculture & Urban Forestry (AUF) February 1987, 13 (2) 39-46; DOI: https://doi.org/10.48044/jauf.1987.007
T. T. Kozlowski
Department of Forestry, University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin 53706
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • References
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

Listen

Shade trees undergo periodic dehydration because the rate of absorption of soil water lags behind the rate of transpirational water loss from tree crowns. The rate of absorption of water from wet, warm, and well-aerated soil is controlled largely by the rate of transpiration. However, absorption of water often is impeded by low soil moisture content, a small or slow-growing root system, poor soil aeration, low soil temperature, a high concentration of the soil solution, or combinations of these. As the soil dries down from field capacity, the rate of absorption of water is reduced because of increased resistance to water movement in the soil and within the tree as well as loss of soil-root contact. Poor soil aeration in compacted or flooded soils decreases water absorption by inhibiting root growth, inducing decay of roots, and suppressing development of mycorrhizae. Low soil temperature reduces absorption of water by decreasing the permeability of roots, increasing the viscosity of water, and inhibiting root growth. High concentrations of deicing salts and fertilizers in the soil solution may reduce absorption of water by osmotic effects.

Shade trees are so constructed that they tend to lose a great deal of water. They expose a very large leaf surface area that is perforated by numerous microscopic pores (stomata) through which water evaporates from the leaf interior to the atmosphere in a process called transpiration. When environmental conditions favor high transpiration rates, tree crowns often dehydrate which decreases their growth and survival. Water deficits in leaves occur not only during droughts, but also develop periodically to some degree even when the soil is well watered. This is because the water balance of a tree is controlled by the relative rate of transpiration from the tree crown and the rate of absorption of water by the roots. During the day the rate of transpiration is higher than the rate of absorption. As a result, trees tend to dehydrate during the day, particularly on hot, sunny days. During the night, however, when the rates of both transpiration and absorption are low, the rate of absorption of soil water is higher than the rate of transpiration. Hence trees tend to refill with water during the night (Fig. 1). The lag of absorption behind transpiration during the day occurs because of the resistance to water movement present in the soil, roots, and leaves (41). In healthy trees there is little, resistance to water movement in the stem. However, in some diseased trees (e.g., those with oak wilt or Dutch elm disease) water movement is inhibited by blocking of the water-conducting vessels (36). Upward water movement may be impeded in stems of cuttings by blocking of the water-conducting vessels with tyloses in broadleaved trees or by blocking of bordered pits in the water-conducting tracheids of conifers (23).

When environmental conditions favor high rates of transpirational water loss, the roots function primarily as passive absorbing organs and the rate of absorption of water is controlled largely by the rate of transpiration. This is especially true when the soil is wet (but not waterlogged), warm, and well aerated. Often, however, absorption of water is impeded by a low soil moisture content, a small root system, poor soil aeration, low soil temperature, or a high concentration of the soil solution. Such adverse conditions, which characterize many urban soils (12, 32), cause an increase in the lag of water absorption behind transpiration, thus inducing dehydration of tree crowns.

Availability of Soil Moisture

Listen

Trees obtain most of their water from the soil. However, under some conditions other sources also are important, though usually to a lesser degree. For example, atmospheric moisture in the form of dew or fog may prevent or postpone dehydration of tree crowns. The water requirements of tree crowns may also be partly fulfilled by water stored in leaves, stems, roots, and fruits. In addition, trees may obtain some water from adjacent trees through root grafts. Nevertheless, the very large amount of water required to sustain tree growth is obtained primarily from the soil (29).

The amount of water in the soil varies widely over time and almost never is ideal for maximum absorption by roots. Usually there is too much or too little water in the soil, and mostly the latter. The major sources of water for shade trees are rainfall and irrigation water. However, a portion of this water is lost by surface runoff and some evaporates before it can percolate into the soil. The amount that is lost by evaporation varies with atmospheric conditions and with soil texture, color, and porosity.

The water in the soil consists of:

  1. Gravitational water, which occupies the large soil pores and drains away under the influence of gravity.

  2. Capillary water, the most important source of water for plants, which is held by surface forces as films around particles, in angles between them, and in capillary pores.

  3. Hygroscopic water, the water in air-dry soils which is held so firmly by the soil particles that it can move only as vapor and is generally unavailable to plants.

  4. Water vapor, which occurs in the soil atmosphere and is not used directly by plants.

Although gravitational water is available to trees it usually drains away too fast in soils with good drainage to be important. The rate of drainage decreases quite rapidly with time and, after a few days, water movement appears to stop. This cessation of drainage has led to the concept of “field capacity” or the water content at which downward water drainage is negligible (16). At field capacity, which is considered the upper limit of available soil water, capillary movement of water is very slow. The lower limit of available soil water is usually considered to be the “wilting percentage,” the soil water content below which many plants cannot extract enough water for good growth. Both the field capacity and wilting percentage are higher in fine soils than in coarse soils. Also, the range between field capacity and wilting percentage is greater in fine-textured than in coarse soils (Fig. 2). As soil dries from the field capacity to the wilting percentage, water is released more gradually from fine than from coarse soils.

Figure 1.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Figure 1.

Diurnal variations in rates of transpiration and absorption of water by loblolly pine (Pinus taeda) and white ash (Fraxinus americana) trees. From Kramer (37).

If a small amount of water is applied to a large volume of air-dry soil of uniform texture and good drainage the soil will be wetted uniformly to a certain depth after equilibrium has been attained. The gravitational water occupying the large pores will drain downward, leaving only capillary water in the zone of wetted soil. The water content of this wet layer of soil will then be rather uniform throughout and the boundary at the base of the wet layer will be quite distinct, with air-dry soil immediately below it. The layer of wet soil may now be considered to be at field capacity. In the example cited, a fine-textured soil, which holds more capillary water than a coarse soil does, would be wetted to only a few inches whereas a coarse, sandy soil might be wetted to a depth of a foot or more. The moisture content of clayey soil at field capacity might be as high as 30%; of a very sandy soil perhaps only 5%. A second addition of water equal to the amount previously applied to this soil will only briefly increase the moisture content of the surface layer, which was at field capacity shortly after the first application. The second increment of water will flow through the wet layer of soil into the dry soil below it and, after equilibrium is attained, the depth of the soil layer at field capacity will be approximately doubled.

As a soil dries the rate of absorption of water by tree roots decreases. Resistance of wet soil to water movement is low because only small forces are necessary to move water through water-filled pores. However, as the soil dries down appreciably the resistance to water movement increases. Considerable soil resistance results from a loss of soil-root contact because of root shrinkage (22, 65). The resistance in the tree to water transport also increases as the soil dries, partly as a result of increased tension on the water in the conducting elements in stems (45). Changes in plant resistance to water movement may also occur in the roots as the soil dries because of suberization of roots and loss in root viability (38).

Size and Growth of the Root System

Listen

Water in the portion of the soil that is not permeated by roots is largely unavailable for absorption by tree roots. Capillary movement of soil water from wet to dry regions in soil with a moisture content at or below field capacity is very slow. Furthermore, the soil immediately surrounding the absorbing roots dries rapidly. Hence, continuous root extension into zones of wet soil is important for sufficient absorption of water to replace the water lost by transpiration and thereby prevent dehydration of leaves (40). For these reasons trees with deeply penetrating, highly branched, and rapidly growing roots absorb water most efficiently. A high root-shoot ratio (indicative of relatively high capacity for absorption of water and low capacity for transpirational water loss) is particularly important for growth and survival of trees, especially under drought conditions. For example, Eucalyptus socialis trees grew better than E. incrassata trees on dry sites because of the higher root-shoot ratio of the former (50). Mortality of transplanted Pseudotsuga menziesii seedlings with low root-shoot ratios was high (20). Many transplanted Pinus palustris trees died because the needles lost water faster than their roots could replace it by absorption (3). Pruning of needles to a 5-inch length resulted in a 30% decrease in water loss and a 30% increase in survival. Clipping of needles was most beneficial on good sites and in years of average rainfall. Clipping of needles may also decrease tree growth by reducing the photosynthetic surface, but this is much less important than survival of transplants (35).

Evergreens that are transplanted with bare roots, or even with a root ball of soil, undergo a physiological shock because their capacity for absorbing water is suddenly greatly reduced at a time when high rates of water loss by transpiration continue. During lifting and handling of transplants many of the small absorbing roots are lost, disrupting the previous close contact of the root system with a large volume of water-supplying soil. Such loss of roots often is associated with dehydration of transplanted trees because they usually lose water faster than they can replace it by absorption.

Watson and Himelick (69) reported that the roots of a typical undisturbed shade tree with a 4-inch stem diameter were absorbing water and mineral nutrients from about 20 cubic meters of soil. After this tree was dug with a spade and transplanted, the soil volume containing the roots was only 0.35 of a cubic meter (the volume of the root ball). This amounted to only 2% of the soil volume from which the roots absorbed water before the tree was transplanted. Hence transplanting success will depend largely on the capacity of roots to begin growing rapidly and establish intimate contact with the soil beyond the root ball so as to absorb adequate amounts of water. Woods (71) attributed the high survival rate of Pinus caribaea transplants to rapid initiation of root growth. In dry regions it is especially important to confine transplanting to the time of year when high capacity for root growth occurs. In areas of high rainfall the adjustment of planting schedules is less important (28).

Figure 2.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Figure 2.

Relative amounts of available and unavailable water in soils of different textural grades. The amounts are given as percentages of soil volume and as centimeters of water per centimeter of soil. From Cassell (9).

Root growth potential (RGP)

Considerable attention has been given to factors influencing root growth potential (RGP), a measure of the capacity of planting stock to rapidly grow new roots. RGP varies seasonally, and also differs with climate, cultural practices, and cold storage environments.

RGP is closely associated with bud dormancy and is highest when the chilling requirement for dormancy release is fulfilled. The magnitude of the root growth response is influenced by availability of stored carbohydrates. Hence RGP increases during the winter, reaches a maximum in late winter or early spring, and decreases rapidly just before the -buds open. It follows that RGP is strongly influenced by the time of year when planting stock is lifted and placed in cold storage.

If the nursery climate varies from year to year, the date on which RGP is highest will also vary. In California, the seasonal peak in RGP was controlled by the number of hours that seedlings in the nursery were exposed to low air temperature.

Undercutting, wrenching, and root pruning have been used to condition nursery seedlings for planting. Such preparation involves drawing a sharp blade under the nursery bed at a 10-15 cm depth to sever the root systems (undercutting), and then drawing a dull blade at an angle beneath the undercut seedlings to prevent deep penetration of new roots and to increase soil aeration (wrenching). These practices lead to inhibition of shoot growth, induction of dormancy by increasing water deficits, and accelerated branching of roots. The end result is a seedling with a high rootshoot ratio (4, 51, 52, 60). On Vancouver Island, Pseudotsuga menziesii seedlings in their second year of growth that were wrenched in the nursery, lifted in October, and stored at 2°C until May, showed a 25% higher survival rate than unwrenched trees one year after planting (67). RGP can also be increased by water stress in late summer. For example, RGP was higher in seedlings exposed to drought for 6 weeks before lifting than in seedlings that were watered regularly. The increase was attributed to more favorable water balance resulting from better stomatal control in the stressed seedlings (53, 54).

Cold storage of nursery stock

Because storage temperatures slightly above 0°C are adequate to break bud dormancy, seedlings that have not received enough chilling when they are lifted in the nursery will continue to release bud dormancy in cold storage and RGP will be increased. By comparison, seedlings with buds that are not physiologically dormant at the time of lifting, or those that have been exposed to enough chilling in the nursery to break bud dormancy, will have their RGP decreased while in cold storage. In addition, high storage temperatures will maintain high respiration rates of planting stock, thereby reducing stored carbohydrates, further lowering RGP.

Successful cold storage of nursery stock depends on several factors. Seedlings must be dormant to withstand prolonged storage. With nursery stock lifted early in the autumn or late in the spring, survival may decrease with prolonged storage. To prevent dehydration in storage, nursery stock should be packed in moisture-proof film, or stacked bundles should be covered with a moisture-proof envelope. To prevent molding the temperature should be kept constant and low. Storage between -2°C and -5°C has given good results with most conifers, provided they are dormant. Finally stock should be lifted from the nursery when the foliage is dry; roots should be kept moist; and small, diseased, and injured stock should be culled (21). Ritchie and Dunlap (51) have an excellent discussion of the physiology of RGP and practical methods of controlling it.

Transplanting practices

All of the work of developing planting stock with high capacity for rapid root growth may be meaningless if good transplanting procedures are not followed (27, 35). Descriptions of methods of transplanting shade trees are beyond the scope of this paper. For excellent discussions of recommended techniques of transplanting shade trees, the reader is referred to Himelick (19), Whitcomb (70), and Watson (68).

Soil Aeration

Listen

Poor soil aeration in compacted or flooded soils often decreases the capacity of roots for absorbing water by causing decay of roots and inhibiting root formation and elongation. The decay of roots in poorly aerated soil is associated with weakening of the host tree, capacity of root-rotting fungi to tolerate low oxygen contents, and attraction of zoospores to root exudates (31, 32, 34). Because root growth often is decreased more than leaf growth by poor soil aeration, the small root system cannot absorb water fast enough to replenish the water lost in transpiration, causing dehydration of tree crowns (30, 31, 33).

The effects of soil compaction and soil flooding in reducing root growth have been well documented (1, 14, 30, 31, 33, 34, 35). Root penetration and establishment of Pinus rigida, P. nigra, and Picea abies trees were greatly reduced in compacted silt loam and sandy loam soils (73). Whereas Ailanthus altissima seedlings in a noncompacted soil had deeply penetrating root systems, the growth of roots in a compacted soil was confined to the soil surface layer (49). When downward growth of Pseudotsuga menziesii roots was restricted in a compacted soil most roots grew laterally in the uncompacted surface layer of soil (18).

Drastic reductions in root growth of flooded trees have been reported for many species including Malus (10), Citrus (58, 59), Fraxinus pennsylvanica (56), Platanus occidentalis (62), Quercus macrocarpa (63), Betula papyrifera (61), Ulmus americana (47), Pinus halepensis (57), Pinus strobus and Pinus resinosa (64). All the woody roots of Pinus contorta seedlings survived flooding whereas all the non-woody roots died (11).

Some species of flood tolerant trees have the capacity to produce adventitious roots which can compensate physiologically for loss of much of the original root system. For example, the flood-tolerant Betula nigra produced many adventitious roots when flooded, whereas the flood-intolerant B. papyrifera did not (48). The absorption of water by flooded Fraxinus pennsylvanica was much higher in seedlings with adventitious roots than in those from which such flood-induced roots were severed (56). Removal of flood-induced adventitious roots from Platanus occidentalis seedlings reduced their growth, further emphasizing the importance of such replacement roots (66).

The root systems of many trees are modified by development of mycorrhizae, formed as a result of invasion of young roots by hyphae of certain fungi. The mycorrhizal association is one in which the tree supplies carbohydrates and other metabolites that benefit the fungus. In turn the fungus increases absorption of water and mineral nutrients. Mycorrhizae increase the absorbing surface of the root system (5). In fact the volume of soil exploited by a mycorrhizal root may be up to 10 times that of a non-mycorrhizal root (6). Some evidence shows that drought tolerance of woody plants in arid regions is increased by mycorrhizae (2, 43). Mycorrhizae are particularly advantageous to trees growing in low fertility soils (44).

Poor soil aeration decreases the capacity of roots for absorbing water and mineral nutrients by inhibiting development of mycorrhizae. Mycorrhizal fungi are strongly aerobic; hence poor soil aeration reduces mycorrhizal associations in trees (13, 15). In compacted soils mycorrhizae may be found only in the uppermost layers whereas in uncompacted soil they occur to much greater depths (26).

Soil Temperature

Listen

When atmospheric conditions are conducive to high rates of transpiration and water absorption is impeded because the soil temperature is low, tree crowns tend to dehydrate. In California orange trees wilted during the winter because of slow absorption of water from cold soils (8). Low soil temperatures reduce absorption of water directly by decreasing the permeability of roots to water and indirectly by increasing the viscosity of water. As the soil temperature decreases from 25 to 5°C, the resistance to water flow through the roots is approximately doubled. Low soil temperatures also limit absorption of water by inhibiting root extension (41). Nambiar et al. (46) attributed dehydration of Pinus radiata transplants to the inhibitory effect of low soil temperature on root regeneration.

Much winter injury to evergreen shrubs and trees results from dehydration of leaves rather than from direct thermal injury (32). Such injury occurs largely because absorption of water cannot replenish the water lost by transpiration from the leaves. Because the soil water is cold or frozen the rate of absorption of water is negligible during sunny winter days when appreciable amounts of water evaporate from the leaves (24, 25). Furthermore, when the temperature of tree stems drops to a few degrees below 0°C, the water in the conducting xylem elements may freeze, preventing water movement to the crown even if some of the roots are in unfrozen soil (17, 72). The results of these conditions are dehydration of tree crowns, and scorching, killing, and shedding of leaves. The extent of winter desiccation injury is influenced by the time of soil freezing, depth of frozen soil, depth of snow, air humidity, and wind velocity (28).

Concentration of Salts in the Soil Water

Listen

Sudden exposure of tree roots to high concentrations of deicing salts or fertilizers in the soil water may lead to dehydration of tree crowns. This response often is attributed to reduced water absorption because of the osmotic effects of the salts. Hence, a tree may be subjected to physiological drought even if the soil water is at field capacity (42). However, this response is an oversimplification because when plant roots are transferred from dilute to more concentrated solutions, the plants usually wilt at first but recover after a day or two as they gradually absorb salts and undergo osmotic adjustment. Plants with roots exposed to gradually increasing concentrations of salt do not dehydrate as rapidly as those with roots suddenly exposed to very concentrated salt solutions. Reduced absorption of water in saline soils may also be associated with a decrease in root permeability caused by dehydration, increased suberization, and inhibition of root growth (39). High salt concentrations in the soil may also injure young feeder roots, especially those of trees growing on sandy soils, further decreasing absorption of water (41).

Footnotes

Listen
  • ↵1. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the International Society of Arboriculture, San Antonio, Texas, August 12, 1986.

  • © 1987, International Society of Arboriculture. All rights reserved.

Literature Cited

Listen
  1. 1.↵
    1. Alberty, C. A.,
    2. H. M. Pellett, and
    3. D. H. Taylor
    . 1984. Characterization of soil compaction at construction sites and woody plant responses. J. Environ. Hort. 2:48–53.
    OpenUrl
  2. 2.↵
    1. Aldon, E. F.
    1975. Endomycorrhizae enhance survival and growth of four-wing saltbush on coal mine spoils. USDA. For. Serv. Res. Note RM-294. Rocky Mt. Forest and Range Expt. Sta. Fort Collins, Colorado.
  3. 3.↵
    1. Allen, R. M.
    1955. Foliage treatments improve survival of longleaf pine plantings. J. For. 53:724–727.
    OpenUrl
  4. 4.↵
    1. Bacon, G. J., and
    2. E. P. Bachelard
    . 1978. The influence of nursery conditioning treatments on some physiological responses of recently transplanted seedlings of Pinus caribaea Mor. var hondurensis B. & G. Austral. J. For. Res. 8:171–183.
    OpenUrl
  5. 5.↵
    1. G. C. Marks and
    2. T. T. Kozlowski
    1. Bowen, G. D.
    1973. Mineral nutrition of mycorrhizae. p. 151–205. In G. C. Marks and T. T. Kozlowski (eds.) Ectomycorrhizae. Academic Press, New York.
  6. 6.↵
    1. Bowen, G. D., and
    2. C. Theodorou
    . 1967. Studies on phosphate uptake by mycorrhizas. Proc. Int. Union Forest Res. Organ, 14th. Vol. 5:116.
    OpenUrl
  7. 7.
    1. Brady, N. C.
    1974. The Nature and Properties of Soils. MacMillan, New York, New York.
  8. 8.↵
    1. Cameron, S. H.
    1941. The influence of soil temperature on the rate of transpiration of young orange trees. Proc. Am. Soc. Hort. Sci. 38:75–79.
    OpenUrl
  9. 9.↵
    1. C. D. Raper, Jr. and
    2. P. J. Kramer
    1. Cassell, D. K.
    1983. Effects of soil characteristics and tillage practices on water storage and its availability to plant roots, p. 167–186 In C. D. Raper, Jr. and P. J. Kramer (eds.) Crop Reactions to Water and Temperature Stresses in Humid, Temperate Climates. Westview Press, Boulder, Colorado.
  10. 10.↵
    1. Childers, N. F., and
    2. D. G. White
    . 1942. Influence of submersion of roots on transpiration, apparent photosynthesis, and respiration of young apple trees. Plant Physiol. 17:603–618.
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  11. 11.↵
    1. Coutts, M. P.
    1982. The tolerance of tree roots to waterlogging. V. Growth of woody roots of Sitka spruce and Lodgepole pine in waterlogged soil. New Phytol. 90:467–476.
    OpenUrl
  12. 12.↵
    1. Craul, P. J.
    1985. A description of urban soils and their desired characteristics. J. Arboric. 11:330–339.
    OpenUrl
  13. 13.↵
    1. Filer, T. H.
    1975. Mycorrhizae and soil microflora on a green tree reservoir. For. Sci. 24:36–39.
    OpenUrl
  14. 14.↵
    1. Foil, R. R., and
    2. C. W. Ralston
    . 1967. The establishment and growth of loblolly pine seedlings on compacted soil. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. Proc. 31:565–568.
    OpenUrl
  15. 15.↵
    1. Gadgil, P. D.
    1972. Effect of waterlogging on mycorrhizas of radiata pine and Douglas fir. New Zealand J. For. Sci. 2:222–226.
    OpenUrl
  16. 16.↵
    1. T. T. Kozlowski
    1. Gardner, W. R.
    1968. Availability and measurement of soil moisture, p. 107–135 In T. T. Kozlowski (ed.), Water Deficits and Plant Growth. Vol. I. Academic Press, New York.
    OpenUrl
  17. 17.↵
    1. Havis, J. R.
    1971. Water movement in stems during freezing. Cryobiology 8:581–585.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  18. 18.↵
    1. Heilman, P.
    1981. Root penetration of Douglas-fir seedlings into compacted soil. For. Sci. 27:660–666.
    OpenUrl
  19. 19.↵
    1. Himelick, E. B.
    1981. Tree and Shrub Transplanting Manual. International Society of Arboriculture. Urbana, Illinois.
  20. 20.↵
    1. Hermann, R. K.
    1964. Importance of top-root ratios for survival of Douglas-fir seedlings. Tree Planters Notes No. 64.
  21. 21.↵
    1. Hocking, D., and
    2. R. D. Nyland
    . 1971. Cold storage of coniferous seedlings. Applied Forestry Research Institute Res. Rept. No. 6: State University College of Forestry, Syracuse, New York.
  22. 22.↵
    1. Huck, M. G.,
    2. B. Klepper, and
    3. H. M. Taylor
    . 1970. Diurnal variations in root diameter. Plant Physiol. 45:529–530.
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  23. 23.↵
    1. Ikeda, T., and
    2. T. Suzaki
    . 1986. Influence of hydraulic conductance of xylem on water status in cuttings. Can. J. For. Res. 16:98–102.
    OpenUrl
  24. 24.↵
    1. Kozlowski, T. T.
    1968. Water balance in shade trees. Proc. 44th Int. Shade Tree Conf. 29–42.
  25. 25.↵
    1. Kozlowski, T. T.
    1970. Role of environment in plant propagation. Water relations. Proc. Int. Plant Propagators Soc. Ann. Meeting: 123–129.
  26. 26.↵
    1. Kozlowski, T. T.
    1971. Growth and Development of Trees. Vol. II. Cambial Growth, Root Growth, and Reproductive Growth. Academic Press, New York.
  27. 27.↵
    1. Kozlowski, T. T.
    1975. Effects of transplanting and site on water relations of trees. Am. Nurseryman 141 (9):84–94.
    OpenUrl
  28. 28.↵
    1. F. S. Santamour,
    2. H. Gerhold, and
    3. S. Little
    1. Kozlowski, T. T.
    1976. Drought resistance and transplantability of shade trees, p. 77–90 In F. S. Santamour, H. Gerhold, and S. Little (eds.), Better Trees for Metropolitan Landscapes. USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rept. NE-22.
  29. 29.↵
    1. Kozlowski, T. T.
    1982a. Water supply and tree growth. Part I. Water deficits. For. Abstr. 43:57–95.
    OpenUrl
  30. 30.↵
    1. Kozlowski, T. T.
    1982b. Water supply and tree growth. Part II. Flooding. For. Abstr. 43:145–161.
    OpenUrl
  31. 31.↵
    1. T. T. Kozlowski
    1. Kozlowski, T. T.
    1984. Responses of woody plants to flooding, p. 129–163. In T. T. Kozlowski (ed.), Flooding and Plant Growth. Academic Press, New York.
  32. 32.↵
    1. Kozlowski, T. T.
    1985a. Tree growth in response to environmental stresses. J. Arboric. 11:97–111.
    OpenUrl
  33. 33.↵
    1. Kozlowski, T. T.
    1985b. Soil aeration, flooding, and tree growth. J. Arboric. 11:85–96.
    OpenUrl
  34. 34.↵
    1. Kozlowski, T. T.
    1986. Soil aeration and growth of forest trees (Review article). Scand. J. For. Res. 1:113–123.
    OpenUrl
  35. 35.↵
    1. Kozlowski, T. T., and
    2. W. J. Davies
    . 1975. Control of water balance in transplanted trees. J. Arboric. 1:1–10.
    OpenUrl
  36. 36.↵
    1. Kozlowski, T. T.,
    2. J. E. Kuntz, and
    3. C. H. Winget
    . 1962. Effect of oak wilt on cambial activity. J. For. 60:558–561.
    OpenUrl
  37. 37.↵
    1. Kramer, P. J.
    1937. The relation between rate of transpiration and rate of absorption of water in plants. Am. J. Bot. 24:10–15.
    OpenUrl
  38. 38.↵
    1. Kramer, P. J.
    1950. Effect of wilting on the subsequent intake of water by plants. Am. J. Bot. 37:280–284.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  39. 39.↵
    1. Kramer, P. J.
    1983. Water Relations of Plants. Academic Press, New York.
  40. 40.↵
    1. Kramer, P. J., and
    2. T. S. Coile
    . 1940. An estimate of the volume of water made available by root extension. Plant Physiol. 15:743–747.
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  41. 41.↵
    1. Kramer, P. J., and
    2. T. T. Kozlowski
    . 1979. Physiology of Woody Plants. Academic Press, New York.
  42. 42.↵
    1. Levitt, J.
    1980. Responses of Plants to Environmental Stresses. II. Water, Radiation, Salt and Other Stresses. Academic Press, New York.
  43. 43.↵
    1. Lindsey, D. L.,
    2. W. A. Cress, and
    3. E. F. Aldon
    . 1977. The effects of endomycorrhizae on growth of rabbit brush, fourwing salt bush, and corn in coal mine spoil material. USDA For. Serv. Res. Note RM-343. Rocky Mt. Forest and Range Expt. Sta., Fort Collins, Colorado.
  44. 44.↵
    1. Maronek, D. M.,
    2. J. W. Hendrix, and
    3. J. Kiernan
    . 1981. Mycorrhizal fungi and their importance in horticultural crop production. Hort. Rev. 3:172–213.
    OpenUrl
  45. 45.↵
    1. Milburn, J. A., and
    2. R.P.C. Johnson
    . 1966. The conduction of sap. II. Detection of vibrations produced by sap cavitation in Ricinus xylem. Planta 69:43–52.
    OpenUrl
  46. 46.↵
    1. Nambiar, E.K.S.,
    2. G. D. Bowen, and
    3. R. Sands
    . 1979. Root regeneration and plant water status of Pinus radiata D. Don seedlings transplanted to different soil temperatures. J. Exptl. Bot. 30:1119–1131.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  47. 47.↵
    1. Newsome, R. D.,
    2. T. T. Kozlowski, and
    3. Z. C. Tang
    . 1982. Responses of Ulmus americana seedlings to flooding of soil. Can. J. Bot. 60:1688–1695.
    OpenUrl
  48. 48.↵
    1. Norby, R. J., and
    2. T. T. Kozlowski
    . 1983. Flooding and SO2-stress interaction in Betula papyrifera and B. nigra seedlings. For. Sci. 29:739–750.
    OpenUrl
  49. 49.↵
    1. Pan, E., and
    2. N. Bassuk
    . 1985. Effects of soil type and compaction on the growth of Ailanthus altissima seedlings. J. Environ. Hort. 3:158–162.
    OpenUrl
  50. 50.↵
    1. Parsons, R. F.
    1969. Physiological and ecological tolerance of Eucalyptus incrassata and E. socialis to edaphic factors. Ecology 50:386–390.
    OpenUrl
  51. 51.↵
    1. Ritchie, G. A., and
    2. J. R. Dunlap
    . 1980. Root growth potential: its development and expression in forest tree seedlings. New Zealand J. For. Sci. 10:218–248.
    OpenUrl
  52. 52.↵
    1. Rook, D. A.
    1969. Water relations of wrenched and unwrenched Pinus radiata seedlings on being transplanted into conditions of water stress. New Zealand J. For. 14:50–58.
    OpenUrl
  53. 53.↵
    1. Rook, D. A.
    1971. Effect of undercutting and wrenching on growth of Pinus radiata D. Don seedlings. J. Appl. Ecol. 8:477–490.
    OpenUrl
  54. 54.↵
    1. Rook, D. A.
    1973. Conditioning radiata pine seedlings to transplanting by restricted watering. New Zealand J. For. Sci. 3:54–69.
    OpenUrl
  55. 55.
    1. Ruark, G. A.,
    2. D. L. Mader, and
    3. T. A. Tartar
    . 1982. The influence of soil compaction and aeration on the root growth and vigor of trees—A literature review. Part 1. Arboricultural J. 6:251–265.
    OpenUrl
  56. 56.↵
    1. Sena Gomes, A. R., and
    2. T. T. Kozlowski
    . 1930a. Growth responses and adaptations of Fraxinus pennsylvanica seedlings to flooding. Physiol. Plant. 49:373–377.
    OpenUrl
  57. 57.↵
    1. Sena Gomes, A. R., and
    2. T. T. Kozlowski
    . 1980b. Responses of Pinus halepensis seedlings to flooding. Can. J. For. Res. 10:308–311.
    OpenUrl
  58. 58.↵
    1. Stolzy, L. H.,
    2. J. Letey,
    3. L.J. Klotz, and
    4. T. T. DeWolfe
    . 1965a. Soil aeration and root rotting fungi as factors in decay of citrus feeder roots. Soil Sci. 99:403–406.
    OpenUrl
  59. 59.↵
    1. Stolzy, L. H.,
    2. J. Letey,
    3. L. J. Klotz, and
    4. C. K. Labanauskas
    . 1965b. Water and aeration as factors in root decay of Citrus sinensis. Phytopathology 55:270–275.
    OpenUrl
  60. 60.↵
    1. Tanaka, Y.,
    2. J. D. Walstad, and
    3. J. E. Borreco
    . 1976. The effect of wrenching on morphology and field performance of Douglas-fir and loblolly pine seedlings. Can. J. For. Res. 6:453–458.
    OpenUrl
  61. 61.↵
    1. Tang, Z. C., and
    2. T. T. Kozlowski
    . 1982a. Some physiological and growth responses of Betula papyrifera seedlings to flooding. Physiol. Plant. 55:415–420.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  62. 62.↵
    1. Tang, Z. C., and
    2. T. T. Kozlowski
    . 1982b. Physiological, morphological, and growth responses of Platanus occidentalis seedlings to flooding. Plant and Soil 66:243–255.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  63. 63.↵
    1. Tang, Z. C., and
    2. T. T. Kozlowski
    . 1982c. Some physiological and morphological responses of Quercus macrocarpa seedlings to flooding. Can. J. For. Res. 12:196–202.
    OpenUrl
  64. 64.↵
    1. Tang, Z. C., and
    2. T. T. Kozlowski
    . 1983. Responses of Pinus banksiana and P. resinosa seedlings to flooding. Can. J. For. Res. 13:633–639.
    OpenUrl
  65. 65.↵
    1. Taylor, H. M., and
    2. B. Klepper
    . 1975. Water uptake by cotton root system: An examination of assumptions in the single root model. Soil Sci. 120:57–67.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  66. 66.↵
    1. Tsukahara, H., and
    2. T. T. Kozlowski
    . 1985. Importance of adventitious roots to growth of flooded Platanus occidentalis seedlings. Plant and Soil 88:123–132.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  67. 67.↵
    1. van den Driessche, R.
    1983. Growth, survival, and physiology of Douglas-fir seedlings following root wrenching and fertilization. Can. J. For. Res. 37:13:270–278.
    OpenUrl
  68. 68.↵
    1. Watson, G. W.
    1986. Cultural practices can influence root development for better transplanting success. J. Environ. Hort. 4:32–34.
    OpenUrl
  69. 69.↵
    1. Watson, G. W., and
    2. E. B. Himelick
    . 1982. Root distribution of nursery trees and its relationship to transplanting success. J. Arboric. 8:225–229.
    OpenUrl
  70. 70.↵
    1. Whitcomb, C. E.
    1984. Reducing stress and accelerating growth of landscape plants. J. Arboric. 10:5–6.
    OpenUrl
  71. 71.↵
    1. Woods, F. W.
    1959. Slash pine roots start growth soon after planting. J. For. 57:209.
    OpenUrl
  72. 72.↵
    1. Zimmermann, M. H.
    1964. Effect of low temperature on ascent of sap in trees. Plant Physiol. 39:568–572.
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  73. 73.↵
    1. Zisa, R. P.,
    2. H. G. Halverson, and
    3. B. J. Stout
    . 1980. Establishment and early growth of conifers on compact soils in urban areas. U.S. Forest Service, Res. Paper NE-451.
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

Arboriculture & Urban Forestry (AUF)
Vol. 13, Issue 2
February 1987
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
Print
Download PDF
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on Arboriculture & Urban Forestry.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Soil Moisture and Absorption of Water by Tree Roots
(Your Name) has sent you a message from Arboriculture & Urban Forestry
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the Arboriculture & Urban Forestry web site.
Citation Tools
Soil Moisture and Absorption of Water by Tree Roots
T. T. Kozlowski
Arboriculture & Urban Forestry (AUF) Feb 1987, 13 (2) 39-46; DOI: 10.48044/jauf.1987.007

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
Soil Moisture and Absorption of Water by Tree Roots
T. T. Kozlowski
Arboriculture & Urban Forestry (AUF) Feb 1987, 13 (2) 39-46; DOI: 10.48044/jauf.1987.007
del.icio.us logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One
Bookmark this article

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Availability of Soil Moisture
    • Size and Growth of the Root System
    • Soil Aeration
    • Soil Temperature
    • Concentration of Salts in the Soil Water
    • Footnotes
    • Literature Cited
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • References
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • No related articles found.
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • No citing articles found.
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • Urban Trees and Cooling: A Review of the Recent Literature (2018 to 2024)
  • Aerial Imagery as a Tool for Monitoring Urban Tree Retention: Applications, Strengths and Challenges for Backyard Tree Planting Programs
  • Contribution of Urban Trees to Ecosystem Services in Lisbon: A Comparative Study Between Gardens and Street Trees
Show more Articles

Similar Articles

© 2025 International Society of Arboriculture

Powered by HighWire