Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Eco-geotechnics for human sustainability

  • Review
  • Published:
Science China Technological Sciences Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

As a result of climate change and increasing engineering activities, soil-related disasters such as slope failures and sandstorms have become more frequent worldwide. These disasters have caused not only loss of life, but also have led to serious economic losses as well as ecological and environmental damage. To sustain mankind, a new discipline, eco-geotechnics, has rapidly become established and developed in recent years. It integrates scientific knowledge from soil mechanics, rock mechanics, ecology, biology, and atmospheric science to develop cross-disciplinary theories and carry out experiments to tackle grand world challenges such as the effects of climate change. Through the development of eco-geotechnics, various eco-friendly technologies have been developed to mitigate sandstorms and to improve the performance of earthen structures such as embankments, slopes and landfill covers. This state-of-the-art review introduces and discusses the important advances in the field of eco-geotechnics, covering theoretical developments, laboratory testing, centrifuge modelling, field monitoring and engineering applications. Finally, the research gaps and future needs of eco-geotechnics are highlighted and discussed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Dixit M K, Fernández-Solís J L, Lavy S, et al. Identification of parameters for embodied energy measurement: A literature review. Energy Build, 2010, 42: 1238–1247

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Kibert C J. Sustainable Construction: Green Building Design and Delivery. New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons, 2016

    Google Scholar 

  3. Jefferis S A. Moving towards sustainability in geotechnical engineering. In: Proceedings of the Geo Congress 2008. New Orleans, 2008. 844–851

  4. Hulme M, Barrow E M, Arnell N W, et al. Relative impacts of human-induced climate change and natural climate variability. Nature, 1999, 397: 688–691

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. IPCC. Summary for policymakers. In: Pörtner H O, Roberts D C, Tignor M, et al, eds. Climate Change 2022: Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2022

    Google Scholar 

  6. Garg A, Ng C W W. Investigation of soil density effect on suction induced due to root water uptake by Schefflera heptaphylla. J Plant Nutr Soil Sci, 2015, 178: 586–591

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Ng C W W, Leung A K, Ni J. Plant-soil Slope Interaction. Florida: CRC Press of Taylor & Francis Group, 2019

    Book  Google Scholar 

  8. Ng C W W, Ni J J, Leung A K. Effects of plant growth and spacing on soil hydrological changes: A field study. Géotechnique, 2020, 70: 867–881

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Leung A K, Garg A, Ng C W W. Effects of plant roots on soil-water retention and induced suction in vegetated soil. Eng Geol, 2015, 193: 183–197

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Kamchoom V, Leung A K, Ng C W W. Effects of root geometry and transpiration on pull-out resistance. Géotechnique Lett, 2014, 4: 330–336

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Leung F T Y, Yan W M, Hau B C H, et al. Root systems of native shrubs and trees in Hong Kong and their effects on enhancing slope stability. Catena, 2015, 125: 102–110

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Ng C W W, Pang Y W. Influence of stress state on soil-water characteristics and slope stability. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng, 2000, 126: 157–166

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Ng C W W, Menzies B. Advanced Unsaturated Soil Mechanics and Engineering. London: Taylor & Francis, 2007

    Google Scholar 

  14. Zou X K, Zhai P M. Relationship between vegetation coverage and spring dust storms over northern China. J Geophys Res, 2004, 109: D03104

    Google Scholar 

  15. van der Bij A U, Weijters M J, Bobbink R, et al. Facilitating ecosystem assembly: Plant-soil interactions as a restoration tool. Biol Conserv, 2018, 220: 272–279

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Bordoloi S, Ng C W W. The effects of vegetation traits and their stability functions in bio-engineered slopes: A perspective review. Eng Geol, 2020, 275: 105742

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Irish J L, Augustin L N, Balsmeirer G E, et al. Wave dynamics in coastal wetlands: A state-of-knowledge review with emphasis on wetland functionality for storm damage reduction. Shore Beach, 2008, 76: 52–56

    Google Scholar 

  18. Koch E W, Barbier E B, Silliman B R, et al. Non-linearity in ecosystem services: Temporal and spatial variability in coastal protection. Front Ecol Environ, 2009, 7: 29–37

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Manis J E, Garvis S K, Jachec S M, et al. Wave attenuation experiments over living shorelines over time: A wave tank study to assess recreational boating pressures. J Coast Conserv, 2015, 19: 1–11

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Feagin R A, Irish J L, Möller I, et al. Short communication: Engineering properties of wetland plants with application to wave attenuation. Coast Eng, 2011, 58: 251–255

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. White P J, Brown P H. Plant nutrition for sustainable development and global health. Ann Bot, 2010, 105: 1073–1080

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Blight G E. The rankine lecture. Géotechnique, 1997, 47: 713–767

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Ng C W W. Atmosphere-plant-soil interaction (Huang Wen-Xi Lecture). Chin J Geotech Eng, 2017, 39: 1–47

    Google Scholar 

  24. McElrone A J, Choat B, Gambetta G A, et al. Water uptake and transport in vascular plants. Nat Edu Knowl, 2013, 4: 6

    Google Scholar 

  25. Gardner W R. Dynamic aspects of soil-water availability to plants. Annu Rev Plant Physiol, 1965, 16: 323–342

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Schimel D S. Terrestrial ecosystems and the carbon cycle. Glob Change Biol, 1995, 1: 77–91

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Ontl T A, Schulte L A. Soil carbon storage. Nat Edu Knowl, 2012, 3: 35

    Google Scholar 

  28. Moran L A, Horton R A, Scrimgeour G, et al. Principles of Biochemistry. New Jersey: Pearson Prentice-Hall, 2012

    Google Scholar 

  29. Galloway J N, Townsend A R, Erisman J W, et al. Transformation of the nitrogen cycle: Recent trends, questions, and potential solutions. Science, 2008, 320: 889–892

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Lu M, Yang Y, Luo Y, et al. Responses of ecosystem nitrogen cycle to nitrogen addition: A meta-analysis. New Phytol, 2011, 189: 1040–1050

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Schachtman D P, Reid R J, Ayling S M. Phosphorus uptake by plants: From soil to cell. Plant Physiol, 1998, 116: 447–453

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Kellogg W W, Cadle R D, Allen E R, et al. The sulfur cycle. Science, 1972, 175: 587–596

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Jørgensen B B. The sulfur cycle of a coastal marine sediment (Limfjorden, Denmark). Limnol Oceanogr, 1977, 22: 814–832

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Caird M A, Richards J H, Donovan L A. Nighttime stomatal conductance and transpiration in C3 and C4 plants. Plant Physiol, 2007, 143: 4–10

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Dawson T E, Burgess S S O, Tu K P, et al. Nighttime transpiration in woody plants from contrasting ecosystems. Tree Physiol, 2007, 27: 561–575

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. McCully M E. Roots in soil: Unearthing the complexities of roots and their rhizospheres. Annu Rev Plant Physiol Plant Mol Biol, 1999, 50: 695–718

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Steudle E. Water uptake by plant roots: An integration of views. Plant Soil, 2000, 226: 45–56

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Maurel C, Verdoucq L, Luu D T, et al. Plant aquaporins: Membrane channels with multiple integrated functions. Annu Rev Plant Biol, 2008, 59: 595–624

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Maurel C, Chrispeels M J. Aquaporins. A molecular entry into plant water relations. Plant Physiol, 2001, 125: 135–138

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Sack L, Tyree M T. Leaf hydraulics and its implications in plant structure and function. In: Holbrook N M, Zwieniecki M A, eds. Vascular Transport in Plants, Physiological Ecology. London: Academic Press, 2005. 93–114

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  41. Wheeler T D, Stroock A D. The transpiration of water at negative pressures in a synthetic tree. Nature, 2008, 455: 208–212

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Nobel P S. Physicochemical and Environmental Plant Physiology. London: Academic Press, 2009

    Google Scholar 

  43. Leverett M C. Capillary behavior in porous solids. Trans AIME, 1941, 142: 152–169

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Tyree M T, Sperry J S. Vulnerability of xylem to cavitation and embolism. Annu Rev Plant Physiol Plant Mol Biol, 1989, 40: 19–36

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Hacke U G, Stiller V, Sperry J S, et al. Cavitation fatigue. Embolism and refilling cycles can weaken the cavitation resistance of xylem. Plant Physiol, 2001, 125: 779–786

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Brodersen C R, McElrone A J, Choat B, et al. The dynamics of embolism repair in xylem: In vivo visualizations using high-resolution computed tomography. Plant Physiol, 2010, 154: 1088–1095

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Steudle E, Heydt H. An artificial osmotic cell: A model system for simulating osmotic processes and for studying phenomena of negative pressure in plants. Plant Cell Environ, 1988, 11: 629–637

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Fredlund D G, Rahardjo H. Soil Mechanics for Unsaturated Soils. New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons, 1993

    Book  Google Scholar 

  49. Ng C W W, Zhou C, Chiu C F. Constitutive modelling of state-dependent behaviour of unsaturated soils: An overview. Acta Geotech, 2020, 15: 2705–2725

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Penman H L. Natural evaporation from open water, bare soil and grass. Proc R Soc Lond A, 1948, 193: 120–145

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Ladekarl U L, Nørnberg P, Rasmussen K R, et al. Effects of a heather beetle attack on soil moisture and water balance at a Danish heath-land. Plant Soil, 2001, 229: 147–158

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Blight G E. Desiccation of a clay by grass, bushes and trees. Geotech Geol Eng, 2005, 23: 697–720

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Saha S, Strazisar T M, Menges E S, et al. Linking the patterns in soil moisture to leaf water potential, stomatal conductance, growth, and mortality of dominant shrubs in the Florida scrub ecosystem. Plant Soil, 2008, 313: 113–127

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Ng C W W, Garg A, Leung A K, et al. Relationships between leaf and root area indices and soil suction induced during drying-wetting cycles. Ecol Eng, 2016, 91: 113–118

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Ng C W W, Ni J J, Leung A K, et al. Effects of planting density on tree growth and induced soil suction. Géotechnique, 2016, 66: 711–724

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Rasband W S. Image J. Bethesda: United State National Institutes of Health, 2011, http://imagej.nih.gov/ij

  57. Garg A, Leung A K, Ng C W W. Comparisons of soil suction induced by evapotranspiration and transpiration of S. heptaphylla. Can Geotech J, 2015, 52: 2149–2155

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. Jackson R B, Mooney H A, Schulze E D. A global budget for fine root biomass, surface area, and nutrient contents. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA, 1997, 94: 7362–7366

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Segal E, Kushnir T, Mualem Y, et al. Water uptake and hydraulics of the root hair rhizosphere. Vadose Zone J, 2008, 7: 1027–1034

    Article  Google Scholar 

  60. Smucker A J M, McBurney S L, Srivastava A K. Quantitative separation ofroots from compacted soil profiles by the hydropneumatic elutriation system. Agron J, 1982, 74: 500–503

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. López B, Sabaté S, Gracia C A. Vertical distribution of fine root density, length density, area index and mean diameter in a Quercus ilex forest. Tree Physiol, 2001, 21: 555–560

    Article  Google Scholar 

  62. Gray D H, Leiser A. Biotechnical Slope Protection and Erosion Control. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold Company Inc., 1982

    Google Scholar 

  63. McNaught A D, Wilkinson A. Compendium of Chemical Terminology. Oxford: Blackwell Science, 1997

    Google Scholar 

  64. Kirschbaum M U F. Direct and indirect climate change effects on photosynthesis and transpiration. Plant Biol, 2004, 6: 242–253

    Article  Google Scholar 

  65. Wu T H, McKinnell III W P, Swanston D N. Strength of tree roots and landslides on Prince of Wales Island, Alaska. Can Geotech J, 1979, 16: 19–33

    Article  Google Scholar 

  66. Simon A, Collison A J C. Quantifying the mechanical and hydrologic effects of riparian vegetation on streambank stability. Earth Surf Process Landf, 2002, 27: 527–546

    Article  Google Scholar 

  67. Cornelissen J H C, Lavorel S, Garnier E, et al. A handbook of protocols for standardised and easy measurement of plant functional traits worldwide. Aust J Bot, 2003, 51: 335

    Article  Google Scholar 

  68. Feddes R A, Kowalik P, Kolinska-Malinka K, et al. Simulation of field water uptake by plants using a soil water dependent root extraction function. J Hydrol, 1976, 31: 13–26

    Article  Google Scholar 

  69. Indraratna B, Fatahi B, Khabbaz H. Numerical analysis of matric suction effects of tree roots. P I Civil Eng-Geotech, 2006, 159: 77–90

    Article  Google Scholar 

  70. Volkmar K M. A comparison of minirhizotron techniques for estimating root length density in soils of different bulk densities. Plant Soil, 1993, 157: 239–245

    Article  Google Scholar 

  71. Samson B K, Sinclair T R. Soil core and minirhizotron comparison for the determination of root length density. Plant Soil, 1994, 161: 225–232

    Article  Google Scholar 

  72. Ng C W W, Wang Z J, Ni J J. Effects of plant morphology on root-soil hydraulic interactions of Schefflera heptaphylla. Can Geotech J, 2021, 58: 666–681

    Article  Google Scholar 

  73. Doussan C. Modelling of the hydraulic architecture of root systems: An integrated approach to water absorption-model description. Ann Bot, 1998, 81: 213–223

    Article  Google Scholar 

  74. Doussan C, Pierret A, Garrigues E, et al. Water uptake by plant roots: II-Modelling of water transfer in the soil root-system with explicit account of flow within the root system-Comparison with experiments. Plant Soil, 2006, 283: 99–117

    Article  Google Scholar 

  75. Roose T, Fowler A C. A model for water uptake by plant roots. J Theor Biol, 2004, 228: 155–171

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  76. Woodman N D, Smethurst J A, Roose T, et al. Mathematical and computational modelling of vegetated soil incorporating hydraulically-driven finite strain deformation. Comput Geotech, 2020, 127: 103754

    Article  Google Scholar 

  77. Doussan C, Vercambre G, Pagès L. Water uptake by two contrasting root systems (maize, peach tree): Results from a model of hydraulic architecture. Agronomie, 1999, 19: 255–263

    Article  Google Scholar 

  78. Ng C W W, Zhang Q, Ni J, et al. A new three-dimensional theoretical model for analysing the stability of vegetated slopes with different root architectures and planting patterns. Comput Geotech, 2021, 130: 103912

    Article  Google Scholar 

  79. Ng C W W, Ni J J, Leung A K, et al. A new and simple water retention model for root-permeated soils. Géotech Lett, 2016, 6: 106–111

    Article  Google Scholar 

  80. Zhou C, Ng C W W. A new and simple stress-dependent water retention model for unsaturated soil. Comput Geotech, 2014, 62: 216–222

    Article  Google Scholar 

  81. Ni J J, Leung A K, Ng C W W. Modelling effects of root growth and decay on soil water retention and permeability. Can Geotech J, 2019, 56: 1049–1055

    Article  Google Scholar 

  82. Ng C W W, Guo H, Ni J, et al. Effects of soil-plant-biochar interactions on water retention and slope stability under various rainfall patterns. Landslides, 2022, 19: 1379–1390

    Article  Google Scholar 

  83. Waldron L J. The shear resistance of root-permeated homogeneous and stratified soil. Soil Sci Soc Am J, 1977, 41: 843–849

    Article  Google Scholar 

  84. Wu T H. Root reinforcement of soil: Review of analytical models, test results, and applications to design. Can Geotech J, 2013, 50: 259–274

    Article  Google Scholar 

  85. Pollen N, Simon A. Estimating the mechanical effects of riparian vegetation on stream bank stability using a fiber bundle model. Water Resour Res, 2005, 41: 07025

    Article  Google Scholar 

  86. Switala B M, Wu W. Numerical modelling of rainfall-induced instability of vegetated slopes. Géotechnique, 2018, 68: 481–491

    Article  Google Scholar 

  87. Switala B M, Askarinejad A, Wu W, et al. Experimental validation of a coupled hydro-mechanical model for vegetated soil. Géotechnique, 2018, 68: 375–385

    Article  Google Scholar 

  88. Switala B M, Wu W, Wang S. Implementation of a coupled hydromechanical model for root-reinforced soils in finite element code. Comput Geotech, 2019, 112: 197–203

    Article  Google Scholar 

  89. Witala B M, Wu W. Simulation of rainfall-induced landslide of the vegetated slope. In: Wu W, ed. Recent Advances in Geotechnical Research. Cham: Springer, 2018

    Google Scholar 

  90. Li X S, Dafalias Y F. Dilatancy for cohesionless soils. Géotechnique, 2000, 50: 449–460

    Article  Google Scholar 

  91. Been K, Jefferies M G. A state parameter for sands. Géotechnique, 1985, 35: 99–112

    Article  Google Scholar 

  92. Meijer G J, Muir Wood D, Knappett J A, et al. Root reinforcement: Continuum framework for constitutive modelling. Géotechnique, 2022, 1–14

  93. Sawicki A. Engineering mechanics of elasto-plastic composites. Mech Mater, 1983, 2: 217–231

    Article  Google Scholar 

  94. Lynch J. Root architecture and plant productivity. Plant Physiol, 1995, 109: 7–13

    Article  Google Scholar 

  95. Ghestem M, Sidle R C, Stokes A. The influence of plant root systems on subsurface flow: Implications for slope stability. BioScience, 2011, 61: 869–879

    Article  Google Scholar 

  96. Leung A K, Garg A, Coo J L, et al. Effects of the roots of Cynodon dactylon and Schefflera heptaphylla on water infiltration rate and soil hydraulic conductivity. Hydrol Process, 2015, 29: 3342–3354

    Article  Google Scholar 

  97. Feddes R A, Kowalik P J, Zaradny H. Simulation of Field Water Use and Crop Yield. Wageningen: Centre for Agricultural Publishing and Documentation, 1978

    Google Scholar 

  98. Prasad R. A linear root water uptake model. J Hydrol, 1988, 99: 297–306

    Article  Google Scholar 

  99. Raats P A C. Steady flows of water and salt in uniform soil profiles with plant roots. Soil Sci Soc Am J, 1974, 38: 717–722

    Article  Google Scholar 

  100. Ng C W W, Liu H W, Feng S. Analytical solutions for calculating pore-water pressure in an infinite unsaturated slope with different root architectures. Can Geotech J, 2015, 52: 1981–1992

    Article  Google Scholar 

  101. Yuan F, Lu Z. Analytical solutions for vertical flow in unsaturated, rooted soils with variable surface fluxes. Vadose Zone J, 2005, 4: 1210–1218

    Article  Google Scholar 

  102. Rahardjo H, Santoso V A, Leong E C, et al. Performance of an instrumented slope covered by a capillary barrier system. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng, 2012, 138: 481–490

    Article  Google Scholar 

  103. Ng C W W, Coo J L, Chen Z K, et al. Water infiltration into a new three-layer landfill cover system. J Environ Eng, 2016, 142: 04016007

    Article  Google Scholar 

  104. Liu H W, Feng S, Garg A, et al. Analytical solutions of pore-water pressure distributions in a vegetated multi-layered slope considering the effects of roots on water permeability. Comput Geotech, 2018, 102: 252–261

    Article  Google Scholar 

  105. Feng S, Liu H W, Ng C W W. Analytical solutions for one-dimensional water flow in vegetated layered soil. Int J Geomech, 2019, 19: 04018191

    Article  Google Scholar 

  106. Liu H W, Feng S, Ng C W W. Analytical analysis of hydraulic effect of vegetation on shallow slope stability with different root architectures. Comput Geotech, 2016, 80: 115–120

    Article  Google Scholar 

  107. Feng S, Liu H W, Ng C W W. Analytical analysis of the mechanical and hydrological effects of vegetation on shallow slope stability. Comput Geotech, 2020, 118: 103335

    Article  Google Scholar 

  108. Feng S, Leung A K, Ng C W W, et al. Theoretical analysis of coupled effects of microbe and root architecture on methane oxidation in vegetated landfill covers. Sci Total Environ, 2017, 599–600: 1954–1964

    Article  Google Scholar 

  109. Bohn S, Brunke P, Gebert J, et al. Improving the aeration of critical fine-grained landfill top cover material by vegetation to increase the microbial methane oxidation efficiency. Waste Manage, 2011, 31: 854–863

    Article  Google Scholar 

  110. Reichenauer T G, Watzinger A, Riesing J, et al. Impact of different plants on the gas profile of a landfill cover. Waste Manage, 2011, 31: 843–853

    Article  Google Scholar 

  111. Zhang H, Yan X, Cai Z, et al. Effect of rainfall on the diurnal variations of CH4, CO2, and N2O fluxes from a municipal solid waste landfill. Sci Total Environ, 2013, 442: 73–76

    Article  Google Scholar 

  112. Tanthachoon N, Chiemchaisri C, Chiemchaisri W, et al. Methane oxidation in compost-based landfill cover with vegetation during wet and dry conditions in the tropics. J Air Waste Manage Assoc, 2008, 58: 603–612

    Article  Google Scholar 

  113. Abichou T, Mahieu K, Chanton J, et al. Scaling methane oxidation: From laboratory incubation experiments to landfill cover field conditions. Waste Manage, 2011, 31: 978–986

    Article  Google Scholar 

  114. Ng C W W, Tasnim R, Coo J L. Effects of atmospheric CO2 concentration on soil-water retention and induced suction in vegetated soil. Eng Geol, 2018, 242: 108–120

    Article  Google Scholar 

  115. Ng C W W, Tasnim R, Wong J T F. Coupled effects of atmospheric CO2 concentration and nutrients on plant-induced soil suction. Plant Soil, 2019, 439: 393–404

    Article  Google Scholar 

  116. Liao D, Niu J, Kang S, et al. Effects of elevated CO2 on the evapotranspiration over the agricultural land in Northwest China. J Hydrol, 2021, 593: 125858

    Article  Google Scholar 

  117. Lenka N K, Lenka S, Thakur J K, et al. Carbon dioxide and temperature elevation effects on crop evapotranspiration and water use efficiency in soybean as affected by different nitrogen levels. Agric Water Manage, 2020, 230: 105936

    Article  Google Scholar 

  118. Dugas W A, Polley H W, Mayeux H S, et al. Acclimation of whole-plant Acacia farnesiana transpiration to carbon dioxide concentration. Tree Physiol, 2001, 21: 771–773

    Article  Google Scholar 

  119. Wu D, Wang G, Bai Y, et al. Response of growth and water use efficiency of spring wheat to whole season CO2 enrichment and drought. Acta Bot Sin, 2002, 44: 1477–1483

    Google Scholar 

  120. Apple M E, Olszyk D M, Ormrod D P, et al. Morphology and stomatal function of douglas fir needles exposed to climate change: Elevated CO2 and temperature. Int J Plant Sci, 2000, 161: 127–132

    Article  Google Scholar 

  121. Lewis J D, Lucash M, Olszyk D M, et al. Stomatal responses of Douglas-fir seedlings to elevated carbon dioxide and temperature during the third and fourth years of exposure. Plant Cell Environ, 2002, 25: 1411–1421

    Article  Google Scholar 

  122. Bucher-Wallin I K, Sonnleitner M A, Egli P, et al. Effects of elevated CO2, increased nitrogen deposition and soil on evapotranspiration and water use efficiency of spruce-beech model ecosystems. In: Kraigher H, Grill D, Huttunen S, eds. Phyton (Austria) Special Issue: “Root-soil interaction”. 2000, 40. 49–60

  123. Grünzweig J M, Körner C. Growth, water and nitrogen relations in grassland model ecosystems of the semi-arid Negev of Israel exposed to elevated CO2. Oecologia, 2001, 128: 251–262

    Article  Google Scholar 

  124. Neugart S, Schreiner M. UVB and UVA as eustressors in horticultural and agricultural crops. Sci Hortic, 2018, 234: 370–381

    Article  Google Scholar 

  125. Chen Y, Li T, Yang Q, et al. UVA radiation is beneficial for yield and quality of indoor cultivated lettuce. Front Plant Sci, 2019, 10: 1563

    Article  Google Scholar 

  126. Zhang Y, Kaiser E, Zhang Y, et al. UVA radiation promotes tomato growth through morphological adaptation leading to increased light interception. Environ Exp Bot, 2020, 176: 104073

    Article  Google Scholar 

  127. Wang Y. An Investigation of CO2 and UV Radiation for Quality Growth of Pseudostellaria Heterophylla in Biochar-amended Soils. Hong Kong: The Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, 2022

    Google Scholar 

  128. Darawsheh M K, Khah E M, Aivalakis G, et al. Cotton row spacing and plant density cropping systems I. Effects on accumulation and partitioning of dry mass and LAI. J Food Agric Environ, 2009, 7: 258–261

    Google Scholar 

  129. Green D S, Kruger E L, Stanosz G R, et al. Light-use efficiency of native and hybrid poplar genotypes at high levels of intracanopy competition. Can J For Res, 2001, 31: 1030–1037

    Article  Google Scholar 

  130. Benomar L, DesRochers A, Larocque G R. The effects of spacing on growth, morphology and biomass production and allocation in two hybrid poplar clones growing in the boreal region of Canada. Trees, 2012, 26: 939–949

    Article  Google Scholar 

  131. Hunter J J. Plant spacing implications for grafted grapevine I. Soil characteristics, root growth, dry matter partitioning, dry matter composition and soil utilisation. South African J Enol Vitic, 1998, 19: 25–34

    Google Scholar 

  132. Ni J J, Leung A K, Ng C W W, et al. Investigation of plant growth and transpiration-induced matric suction under mixed grass-tree conditions. Can Geotech J, 2017, 54: 561–573

    Article  Google Scholar 

  133. Stokes A, Atger C, Bengough A G, et al. Desirable plant root traits for protecting natural and engineered slopes against landslides. Plant Soil, 2009, 324: 1–30

    Article  Google Scholar 

  134. Arredondo J T, Johnson D A. Root architecture and biomass allocation of three range grasses in response to nonuniform supply of nutrients and shoot defoliation. New Phytol, 1999, 143: 373–385

    Article  Google Scholar 

  135. Eamus D, Huete A, Yu Q. Vegetation Dynamics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2016

    Google Scholar 

  136. Zhang H, Forde B G. An Arabidopsis MADS box gene that controls nutrient-induced changes in root architecture. Science, 1998, 279: 407–409

    Article  Google Scholar 

  137. Ng C W W, Tasnim R, Capobianco V, et al. Influence of soil nutrients on plant characteristics and soil hydrological responses. Géotech Lett, 2018, 8: 19–24

    Article  Google Scholar 

  138. Jones D L, Hodge A, Kuzyakov Y. Plant and mycorrhizal regulation of rhizodeposition. New Phytol, 2004, 163: 459–480

    Article  Google Scholar 

  139. Baronti S, Vaccari F P, Miglietta F, et al. Impact of biochar application on plant water relations in Vitis vinifera (L.). Eur J Agron, 2014, 53: 38–44

    Article  Google Scholar 

  140. Amendola C, Montagnoli A, Terzaghi M, et al. Short-term effects of biochar on grapevine fine root dynamics and arbuscular mycorrhizae production. Agr Ecosyst Environ, 2017, 239: 236–245

    Article  Google Scholar 

  141. Zheng H, Wang X, Luo X, et al. Biochar-induced negative carbon mineralization priming effects in a coastal wetland soil: Roles of soil aggregation and microbial modulation. Sci Total Environ, 2018, 610–611: 951–960

    Article  Google Scholar 

  142. Ni J J, Chen X W, Ng C W W, et al. Effects of biochar on water retention and matric suction of vegetated soil. Géotech Lett, 2018, 8: 124–129

    Article  Google Scholar 

  143. Ni J J, Bordoloi S, Shao W, et al. Two-year evaluation of hydraulic properties of biochar-amended vegetated soil for application in landfill cover system. Sci Total Environ, 2020, 712: 136486

    Article  Google Scholar 

  144. Hussain R, Ravi K. Investigating unsaturated hydraulic conductivity and water retention characteristics of compacted biochar-amended soils for potential application in bioengineered structures. J Hydrol, 2021, 603: 127040

    Article  Google Scholar 

  145. Ng C W W, Liao J X, Bordoloi S. Relationship between matric suction and leaf indices of Schefflera arboricola in biochar amended soil. Can Geotech J, 2022, 59: 191–202

    Article  Google Scholar 

  146. Wang W, Lai D, Abid A, et al. Effects of steel slag and biochar incorporation on active soil organic carbon pools in a subtropical paddy field. Agronomy, 2018, 8: 135

    Article  Google Scholar 

  147. Ng C W W, Chowdhury N, Wong J T F. Effects of ground granulated blast-furnace slag (GGBS) on hydrological responses of Cd-contaminated soil planted with a herbal medicinal plant (Pinellia ternata). Can Geotech J, 2020, 57: 673–682

    Article  Google Scholar 

  148. Ng C W W, Leung A K, Woon K X. Effects of soil density on grass-induced suction distributions in compacted soil subjected to rainfall. Can Geotech J, 2014, 51: 311–321

    Article  Google Scholar 

  149. Bengough A G, Mullins C E. Mechanical impedance to root growth: A review of experimental techniques and root growth responses. J Soil Sci, 1990, 41: 341–358

    Article  Google Scholar 

  150. Lipiec J, Håkansson I. Influences of degree of compactness and matric water tension on some important plant growth factors. Soil Tillage Res, 2000, 53: 87–94

    Article  Google Scholar 

  151. Boldrin D, Leung A K, Bengough A G. Root biomechanical properties during establishment of woody perennials. Ecol Eng, 2017, 109: 196–206

    Article  Google Scholar 

  152. Kamchoom V, Boldrin D, Leung A K, et al. Biomechanical properties of the growing and decaying roots of Cynodon dactylon. Plant Soil, 2022, 471: 193–210

    Article  Google Scholar 

  153. Likitlersuang S, Phan T N, Boldrin D, et al. Influence of growth media on the biomechanical properties of the fibrous roots of two contrasting vetiver grass species. Ecol Eng, 2022, 178: 106574

    Article  Google Scholar 

  154. Chen X W, Kang Y, So P S, et al. Arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi increase the proportion of cellulose and hemicellulose in the root stele of vetiver grass. Plant Soil, 2018, 425: 309–319

    Article  Google Scholar 

  155. Leung F T Y. Native shrubs and trees as an integrated element in local slope upgrading. Dissertation of Doctoral Degree. Hong Kong: The University of Hong Kong, 2014

    Book  Google Scholar 

  156. Pollen N. Temporal and spatial variability in root reinforcement of streambanks: Accounting for soil shear strength and moisture. Catena, 2007, 69: 197–205

    Article  Google Scholar 

  157. Mickovski S B, Bengough A G, Bransby M F, et al. Material stiffness, branching pattern and soil matric potential affect the pullout resistance of model root systems. Eur J Soil Sci, 2007, 58: 1471–1481

    Article  Google Scholar 

  158. Schwarz M, Cohen D, Or D. Pullout tests of root analogs and natural root bundles in soil: Experiments and modeling. J Geophys Res, 2011, 116: F02007

    Google Scholar 

  159. Giadrossich F, Schwarz M, Cohen D, et al. Mechanical interactions between neighbouring roots during pullout tests. Plant Soil, 2013, 367: 391–406

    Article  Google Scholar 

  160. Fan C C, Lu J Z, Chen H H. The pullout resistance of plant roots in the field at different soil water conditions and root geometries. CATENA, 2021, 207: 105593

    Article  Google Scholar 

  161. Taylor R N. Geotechnical Centrifuge Technology. Florida: CRC Press of Taylor & Francis Group, 1995

    Book  Google Scholar 

  162. Ng C W W. The state-of-the-art centrifuge modelling of geotechnical problems at HKUST. J Zheijang Univ Sci, 2014, 15: 1–21

    Article  Google Scholar 

  163. Sonnenberg R, Bransby M F, Hallett P D, et al. Centrifuge modelling of soil slopes reinforced with vegetation. Can Geotech J, 2010, 47: 1415–1430

    Article  Google Scholar 

  164. Liang T, Bengough A G, Knappett J A, et al. Scaling of the reinforcement of soil slopes by living plants in a geotechnical centrifuge. Ecol Eng, 2017, 109: 207–227

    Article  Google Scholar 

  165. Liang T, Knappett J A, Bengough A G, et al. Small-scale modelling of plant root systems using 3D printing, with applications to investigate the role of vegetation on earthquake-induced landslides. Landslides, 2017, 14: 1747–1765

    Article  Google Scholar 

  166. Danjon F, Barker D H, Drexhage M, et al. Using three-dimensional plant root architecture in models of shallow-slope stability. Ann Bot, 2007, 101: 1281–1293

    Article  Google Scholar 

  167. Ng C W W, Leung A K, Kamchoom V, et al. A novel root system for simulating transpiration-induced soil suction in centrifuge. Geotech Test J, 2014, 37: 20130116

    Article  Google Scholar 

  168. Ng C W W, Yu R. A novel technique to model water uptake by plants in geotechnical centrifuge. Géotech Lett, 2014, 4: 244–249

    Article  Google Scholar 

  169. Ng C W W, Kamchoom V, Leung A K. Centrifuge modelling of the effects of root geometry on transpiration-induced suction and stability of vegetated slopes. Landslides, 2016, 13: 925–938

    Article  Google Scholar 

  170. Leung A K, Kamchoom V, Ng C W W. Influences of root-induced soil suction and root geometry on slope stability: A centrifuge study. Can Geotech J, 2017, 54: 291–303

    Article  Google Scholar 

  171. Ng C W W, Leung A K, Yu R, et al. Hydrological effects of live poles on transient seepage in an unsaturated soil slope: centrifuge and numerical study. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng, 2017, 143

  172. Dell’Avanzi E, Zornberg J G, Cabral A R. Suction profiles and scale factors for unsaturated flow under increased gravitational field. Soils Found, 2004, 44: 79–89

    Article  Google Scholar 

  173. Eab K H, Takahashi A, Likitlersuang S. Centrifuge modelling of root-reinforced soil slope subjected to rainfall infiltration. Géotech Lett, 2014, 4: 211–216

    Article  Google Scholar 

  174. Askarinejad A, Springman S M. Centrifuge modelling of the effects of vegetation on the response of a silty sand slope subjected to rainfall. In: Computer Methods and Recent Advances in Geomechanics: Proceedings of the 14th International Conference of International Association for Computer Methods and Recent Advances in Geomechanics. Leiden, 2015. 1339–1344

  175. Sonnenberg R, Bransby M F, Bengough A G, et al. Centrifuge modelling of soil slopes containing model plant roots. Can Geotech J, 2012, 49: 1–17

    Article  Google Scholar 

  176. Liang T, Knappett J A, Duckett N. Modelling the seismic performance of rooted slopes from individual root-soil interaction to global slope behaviour. Géotechnique, 2015, 65: 995–1009

    Article  Google Scholar 

  177. Liang T, Knappett J A. Centrifuge modelling of the influence of slope height on the seismic performance of rooted slopes. Géotechnique, 2017, 67: 855–869

    Article  Google Scholar 

  178. Ng C W W, Zhan L T. Comparative study of rainfall infiltration into a bare and a grassed unsaturated expansive soil slope. Soils Found, 2007, 47: 207–217

    Article  Google Scholar 

  179. Rahardjo H, Satyanaga A, Leong E C, et al. Performance of an instrumented slope covered with shrubs and deep-rooted grass. Soils Found, 2014, 54: 417–425

    Article  Google Scholar 

  180. Boldrin D, Leung A K, Bengough A G. Hydro-mechanical reinforcement of contrasting woody species: A full-scale investigation of a field slope. Géotechnique, 2021, 71: 970–984

    Article  Google Scholar 

  181. Smethurst J A, Clarke D, Powrie W. Seasonal changes in pore water pressure in a grass-covered cut slope in London Clay. Géotechnique, 2006, 56: 523–537

    Article  Google Scholar 

  182. Smethurst J A, Clarke D, Powrie W. Factors controlling the seasonal variation in soil water content and pore water pressures within a lightly vegetated clay slope. Géotechnique, 2012, 62: 429–446

    Article  Google Scholar 

  183. Clarke D, Smith M, El-Askari K. New software for crop water requirements and irrigation scheduling. Irrig Drain, 1998, 47: 45–58

    Google Scholar 

  184. Smethurst J A, Briggs K M, Powrie W, et al. Mechanical and hydrological impacts of tree removal on a clay fill railway embankment. Géotechnique, 2015, 65: 869–882

    Article  Google Scholar 

  185. Ng C W W, Guo H, Ni J, et al. Long-term field performance of non-vegetated and vegetated three-layer landfill cover systems using construction waste without geomembrane. Géotechnique, 2022, 1–19

  186. US Environmental Protection Agency. Solid waste disposal facility criteria. Technical manual EPA530-R-93-017. Washington: Environmental Protection Agency, 1993

    Google Scholar 

  187. Barnswell K D, Dwyer D F. Two-year performance by evapotranspiration covers for municipal solid waste landfills in northwest Ohio. Waste Manage, 2012, 32: 2336–2341

    Article  Google Scholar 

  188. US Environmental Protection Agency. Global Anthropogenic Non-CO2 Greenhouse Gas Emissions: 1990–2030. 2012, http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/Downloads/EPAactivities/MAC Report 2013.pdf (accessed 2003.08.14)

  189. Zhou C, Huang H, Cao A, et al. Modeling the carbon cycle of the municipal solid waste management system for urban metabolism. Ecol Model, 2015, 318: 150–156

    Article  Google Scholar 

  190. Bogner J E. Anaerobic burial of refuse in landfills: Increased atmospheric methane and implications for increased carbon storage. Ecol Bull, 1992, 42: 98–108

    Google Scholar 

  191. Bian R, Xin D, Chai X. Methane emissions from landfill: Influence of vegetation and weather conditions. Environ Tech, 2019, 40: 2173–2181

    Article  Google Scholar 

  192. Ma Q, Fehmi J S, Zhang D, et al. Changes in wind erosion over a 25-year restoration chronosequence on the south edge of the Tengger Desert, China: Implications for preventing desertification. Environ Monit Assess, 2017, 189: 463

    Article  Google Scholar 

  193. Wu W, Zhang D, Tian L, et al. Aeolian activities and protective effects of artificial plants in re-vegetated sandy land of Qinghai Lake, China. Chin Geogr Sci, 2020, 30: 1129–1142

    Article  Google Scholar 

  194. Anselmucci F, Andó E, Viggiani G, et al. Use of X-ray tomography to investigate soil deformation around growing roots. Geotech Lett, 2021, 11: 96–102

    Google Scholar 

  195. Muthert L W F, Izzo L G, van Zanten M, et al. Root tropisms: Investigations on earth and in space to unravel plant growth direction. Front Plant Sci, 2020, 10: 1807

    Article  Google Scholar 

  196. Bengough A G, Mullins C E. Penetrometer resistance, root penetration resistance and root elongation rate in two sandy loam soils. Plant Soil, 1991, 131: 59–66

    Article  Google Scholar 

  197. Coelho M B, Mateos L, Villalobos F J. Influence of a compacted loam subsoil layer on growth and yield of irrigated cotton in Southern Spain. Soil Tillage Res, 2000, 57: 129–142

    Article  Google Scholar 

  198. Peng J, Lan H. Ecological geology and eco-geological environmental system. J Earth Sci Environ, 2022, 44: 1–17

    Google Scholar 

  199. Boldrin D, Leung A K, Bengough A G. Hydrologic reinforcement induced by contrasting woody species during summer and winter. Plant Soil, 2018, 427: 369–390

    Article  Google Scholar 

  200. Zhang C, Zhou X, Jiang J, et al. Root moisture content influence on root tensile tests of herbaceous plants. Catena, 2019, 172: 140–147

    Article  Google Scholar 

  201. Zhang C, Liu Y, Li D, et al. Influence of soil moisture content on pullout properties of Hippophae rhamnoides Linn. roots. J Mt Sci, 2020, 17: 2816–2826

    Article  Google Scholar 

  202. Schwarz M, Cohen D, Or D. Root-soil mechanical interactions during pullout and failure of root bundles. J Geophys Res, 2010, 115: F04035

    Google Scholar 

  203. Chen R, Huang J W, Chen Z K, et al. Effect of root density of wheat and okra on hydraulic properties of an unsaturated compacted loam. Eur J Soil Sci, 2019, 70: 493–506

    Article  Google Scholar 

  204. Campbell S D G, Shaw R, Sewell R J, et al. Guidelines for soil bioengineering applications on natural terrain landslide scars. GEO Report No. 227. Geotechnical Engineering Office, Civil Engineering and Development Department, The Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, 2008, 162p

  205. Alburquerque J A, Salazar P, Barrón V, et al. Enhanced wheat yield by biochar addition under different mineral fertilization levels. Agron Sustain Dev, 2013, 33: 475–484

    Article  Google Scholar 

  206. Coskun D, Britto D T, Shi W, et al. Nitrogen transformations in modern agriculture and the role of biological nitrification inhibition. Nat Plants, 2017, 3: 17074

    Article  Google Scholar 

  207. Williams A P, Abatzoglou J T, Gershunov A, et al. Observed impacts of anthropogenic climate change on wildfire in California. Earths Future, 2019, 7: 892–910

    Article  Google Scholar 

  208. Nolan R H, Boer M M, Collins L, et al. Causes and consequences of eastern Australia’s 2019–20 season of mega-fires. Glob Change Biol, 2020, 26: 1039–1041

    Article  Google Scholar 

  209. Konrad J M, Samson M. Hydraulic conductivity of kaolinite-silt mixtures subjected to closed-system freezing and thaw consolidation. Can Geotech J, 2000, 37: 857–869

    Article  Google Scholar 

  210. Qi J, Vermeer P A, Cheng G. A review of the influence of freeze-thaw cycles on soil geotechnical properties. Permafrost Periglac Process, 2006, 17: 245–252

    Article  Google Scholar 

  211. Yamamoto Y, Springman S M. Triaxial stress path tests on artificially prepared analogue alpine permafrost soil. Can Geotech J, 2019, 56: 1448–1460

    Article  Google Scholar 

  212. Li J H, Li L, Chen R, et al. Cracking and vertical preferential flow through landfill clay liners. Eng Geol, 2016, 206: 33–41

    Article  Google Scholar 

  213. Song L, Li J H, Zhou T, et al. Experimental study on unsaturated hydraulic properties of vegetated soil. Ecol Eng, 2017, 103: 207–216

    Article  Google Scholar 

  214. Bordoloi S, Hussain R, Gadi V K, et al. Monitoring soil cracking and plant parameters for a mixed grass species. Géotech Lett, 2018, 8: 49–55

    Article  Google Scholar 

  215. Li J H, Zhang L M, Wang Y, et al. Permeability tensor and representative elementary volume of saturated cracked soil. Can Geotech J, 2009, 46: 928–942

    Article  Google Scholar 

  216. Li J H, Zhang L M, Li X. Soil-water characteristic curve and permeability function for unsaturated cracked soil. Can Geotech J, 2011, 48: 1010–1031

    Article  Google Scholar 

  217. Xia J, Liu S, Liang S, et al. Spatio-temporal patterns and climate variables controlling of biomass carbon stock of global grassland ecosystems from 1982 to 2006. Remote Sens, 2014, 6: 1783–1802

    Article  Google Scholar 

  218. Feng P, Wang B, Liu D L, et al. Machine learning-based integration of remotely-sensed drought factors can improve the estimation of agricultural drought in South-Eastern Australia. Agric Syst, 2019, 173: 303–316

    Article  Google Scholar 

  219. Zhang Z, Xin Q, Li W. Machine learning-based modeling of vegetation leaf area index and gross primary productivity across North America and comparison with a process-based model. J Adv Model Earth Syst, 2021, 13: e02802

    Article  Google Scholar 

  220. Li X, Yuan W, Dong W. A machine learning method for predicting vegetation indices in China. Remote Sens, 2021, 13: 1147

    Article  Google Scholar 

  221. Fu T, Li X, Jia R, et al. A novel integrated method based on a machine learning model for estimating evapotranspiration in dryland. J Hydrol, 2021, 603: 126881

    Article  Google Scholar 

  222. Boldrin D, Leung A K, Bengough A G, et al. Potential of thermal imaging in soil bioengineering to assess plant ability for soil water removal and air cooling. Ecol Eng, 2019, 141: 105599

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, The Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, Hong Kong, 999077, China

    Charles Wang Wai Ng & Qi Zhang

  2. Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong, 999077, China

    Chao Zhou

  3. School of Transportation, Southeast University, Nanjing, 211189, China

    JunJun Ni

Authors
  1. Charles Wang Wai Ng
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Qi Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Chao Zhou
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. JunJun Ni
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to JunJun Ni.

Additional information

This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No. U20A20320), the Environment and Conservation Fund (Grant No. ECWW19EG01), and the Research Grants Council of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, China (Grant Nos. AoE/E-603/18, 16209522, 16210420, 16207819, 16212218). The corresponding author also thanks the support by the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities (Grant No. 3221002220A1) and the State Key Laboratory of Subtropical Building Science in South China University of Technology (Grant No. 2022ZC01).

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ng, C.W.W., Zhang, Q., Zhou, C. et al. Eco-geotechnics for human sustainability. Sci. China Technol. Sci. 65, 2809–2845 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11431-022-2174-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11431-022-2174-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation