{"title":"改进根拉伸强度-直径关系的幂律拟合","authors":"G. J. Meijer","doi":"10.1007/s11104-024-07007-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Purpose</h3><p>The relationship between root tensile strengths and diameters is often fitted using power law curves. More accurate fitting methodologies were developed, investigating a) the validity of least-squares regression assumptions underlying existing methods, b) how to best quantify intra-diameter variation, and c) whether to fit in terms of tensile strength or tensile force at failure.</p><h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Methods</h3><p>Regression and maximum likelihood estimation were used to fit various power law models. 6461 tensile strength measurements from 153 existing datasets, covering 103 different plant species, were used to compare models.</p><h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Results</h3><p>The intra-diameter variation in root strength is proportional to the average strength at each diameter, and is best described using a gamma distribution. When using linear regression on log-transformed measurements, a mathematical correction must be used to avoid underestimating the actual strength (18% on average). Compared to fitting tensile strengths, fitting in terms of root forces at failure was less reliable; the extra emphasis this method places on the effect of large diameters roots was not appropriate because of the typical abundance of thin roots in the field relative to those tested in tension. Average power law fits were proposed for broadleaved trees, conifers, shrubs, grasses and forbs.</p><h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Conclusion</h3><p>Power law curves should be fitted in terms of root strength rather than root forces at failure, using the newly developed fitting methods that simultaneously fit both the inter-diameter (power law) and intra-diameter variation and can account for fitting bias. This will increase the reliability of future root reinforcement predictions.</p>","PeriodicalId":20223,"journal":{"name":"Plant and Soil","volume":"70 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Improving power law fitting of root tensile strength–diameter relationships\",\"authors\":\"G. J. Meijer\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s11104-024-07007-9\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<h3 data-test=\\\"abstract-sub-heading\\\">Purpose</h3><p>The relationship between root tensile strengths and diameters is often fitted using power law curves. More accurate fitting methodologies were developed, investigating a) the validity of least-squares regression assumptions underlying existing methods, b) how to best quantify intra-diameter variation, and c) whether to fit in terms of tensile strength or tensile force at failure.</p><h3 data-test=\\\"abstract-sub-heading\\\">Methods</h3><p>Regression and maximum likelihood estimation were used to fit various power law models. 6461 tensile strength measurements from 153 existing datasets, covering 103 different plant species, were used to compare models.</p><h3 data-test=\\\"abstract-sub-heading\\\">Results</h3><p>The intra-diameter variation in root strength is proportional to the average strength at each diameter, and is best described using a gamma distribution. When using linear regression on log-transformed measurements, a mathematical correction must be used to avoid underestimating the actual strength (18% on average). Compared to fitting tensile strengths, fitting in terms of root forces at failure was less reliable; the extra emphasis this method places on the effect of large diameters roots was not appropriate because of the typical abundance of thin roots in the field relative to those tested in tension. Average power law fits were proposed for broadleaved trees, conifers, shrubs, grasses and forbs.</p><h3 data-test=\\\"abstract-sub-heading\\\">Conclusion</h3><p>Power law curves should be fitted in terms of root strength rather than root forces at failure, using the newly developed fitting methods that simultaneously fit both the inter-diameter (power law) and intra-diameter variation and can account for fitting bias. This will increase the reliability of future root reinforcement predictions.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":20223,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Plant and Soil\",\"volume\":\"70 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Plant and Soil\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"97\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11104-024-07007-9\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"农林科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"AGRONOMY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Plant and Soil","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11104-024-07007-9","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"AGRONOMY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
目的 根部抗拉强度和直径之间的关系通常使用幂律曲线拟合。我们开发了更精确的拟合方法,研究了 a) 现有方法所依据的最小二乘回归假设的有效性;b) 如何最好地量化直径内的变化;c) 是以抗拉强度还是以破坏时的拉力进行拟合。结果根系强度的直径内变化与每个直径的平均强度成正比,用伽马分布来描述最为恰当。在对对数变换测量值进行线性回归时,必须使用数学修正,以避免低估实际强度(平均 18%)。与拉伸强度拟合相比,以破坏时的根力进行拟合的可靠性较低;这种方法额外强调了大直径根的影响,但并不合适,因为与拉伸测试的根相比,现场通常存在大量细根。结论 应使用新开发的拟合方法,同时拟合直径间变化(幂律)和直径内变化,并考虑拟合偏差,根据根系强度而不是破坏时的根力拟合幂律曲线。这将提高未来根部加固预测的可靠性。
Improving power law fitting of root tensile strength–diameter relationships
Purpose
The relationship between root tensile strengths and diameters is often fitted using power law curves. More accurate fitting methodologies were developed, investigating a) the validity of least-squares regression assumptions underlying existing methods, b) how to best quantify intra-diameter variation, and c) whether to fit in terms of tensile strength or tensile force at failure.
Methods
Regression and maximum likelihood estimation were used to fit various power law models. 6461 tensile strength measurements from 153 existing datasets, covering 103 different plant species, were used to compare models.
Results
The intra-diameter variation in root strength is proportional to the average strength at each diameter, and is best described using a gamma distribution. When using linear regression on log-transformed measurements, a mathematical correction must be used to avoid underestimating the actual strength (18% on average). Compared to fitting tensile strengths, fitting in terms of root forces at failure was less reliable; the extra emphasis this method places on the effect of large diameters roots was not appropriate because of the typical abundance of thin roots in the field relative to those tested in tension. Average power law fits were proposed for broadleaved trees, conifers, shrubs, grasses and forbs.
Conclusion
Power law curves should be fitted in terms of root strength rather than root forces at failure, using the newly developed fitting methods that simultaneously fit both the inter-diameter (power law) and intra-diameter variation and can account for fitting bias. This will increase the reliability of future root reinforcement predictions.
期刊介绍:
Plant and Soil publishes original papers and review articles exploring the interface of plant biology and soil sciences, and that enhance our mechanistic understanding of plant-soil interactions. We focus on the interface of plant biology and soil sciences, and seek those manuscripts with a strong mechanistic component which develop and test hypotheses aimed at understanding underlying mechanisms of plant-soil interactions. Manuscripts can include both fundamental and applied aspects of mineral nutrition, plant water relations, symbiotic and pathogenic plant-microbe interactions, root anatomy and morphology, soil biology, ecology, agrochemistry and agrophysics, as long as they are hypothesis-driven and enhance our mechanistic understanding. Articles including a major molecular or modelling component also fall within the scope of the journal. All contributions appear in the English language, with consistent spelling, using either American or British English.