My experience is that these kinds of containment diagrams are not graphically robust. For large numbers of requirements they become very difficult to manage. Typical graphical problems include:

• If one moves a parent (owner) the children do not move with it
• One has to use tedious multi-selects to move sub-trees.
• The children graphically expand sideways to cover other unrelated elements or become visually
  aligned under unrelated parents (see for example Braking under Eco-Friendliness)

For alternatives consider non-standard SysML strategies such as:

• EITHER wrap requirements parasitically in UML Components that logically and graphically group elements
• OR apply <<requirement>> stereotypes to UML Components instead of Class elements

These alternatives are illustrated in the following diagrams.

Image: