Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 369

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 85 of the 85 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Reviews and syntheses: Isotopic approaches to quantify root water uptake: a review and comparison of methods

Open access
Rothfuss, Youri, Javaux, Mathieu·2017·Biogeosciences

Abstract

Abstract. Plant root water uptake (RWU) has been documented for the past five decades from water stable isotopic analysis. By comparing the (hydrogen or oxygen) stable isotopic compositions of plant xylem water to those of potential contributive water sources (e.g., water from different soil layers, groundwater, water from recent precipitation or from a nearby stream), studies were able to determine the relative contributions of these water sources to RWU. In this paper, the different methods used for locating/quantifying relative contributions of water sources to RWU (i.e., graphical inference, statistical (e.g., Bayesian) multi-source linear mixing models) are reviewed with emphasis on their respective advantages and drawbacks. The graphical and statistical methods are tested against a physically based analytical RWU model during a series of virtual experiments differing in the depth of the groundwater table, the soil surface water status, and the plant transpiration rate value. The benchmarking of these methods illustrates the limitations of the graphical and statistical methods while it underlines the performance of one Bayesian mixing model. The simplest two-end-member mixing model is also successfully tested when all possible sources in the soil can be identified to define the two end-members and compute their isotopic compositions. Finally, the authors call for a development of approaches coupling physically based RWU models with controlled condition experimental setups.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.5194/bg-14-2199-2017

Cites

85 of 85 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 85 references

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Rothfuss, Y., & Javaux, M.
Venue
Biogeosciences
Published
2017-05-02
Volume
14
Issue
8
Pages
2199-2224
ISSN
  • 1726-4170 (ISSN-L)
  • 1726-4189
OpenAlex
W2610828627
Cited by
369
References
85
FWCI
23.26
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
gold

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Reviews and syntheses: Isotopic approaches to quantify root water uptake: a review and comparison of methods. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.5194/bg-14-2199-2017
The paper
Rothfuss, Y., & Javaux, M. (2017). Reviews and syntheses: Isotopic approaches to quantify root water uptake: a review and comparison of methods. Biogeosciences. https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-14-2199-2017

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.