Different types of heterogeneity and plant competition in monospecific stands

Oikos

Volumn 75, Issue 1, 1996, Pages 89-97

  Yastrebov, Andrey B ^a  

^a ST PETERSBURG STATE UNIVERSITY   (Russian Federation)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COMPETITION; ENVIRONMENTAL HETEROGENEITY; SCOTS PINE; SELF-THINNING; SIZE HETEROGENEITY; SPATIAL HETEROGENEITY;

PINUS SYLVESTRIS;

EID: 0029769235     PISSN: 00301299     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2307/3546325     Document Type: Article

References (40)

1. Aikman, D. P. and Watkinson, A. R. 1980. A model for growth and self-thinning in even-aged monocultures of plants. - Ann. Bot.45: 419-427.
2. Allison, J. C. S. 1964. Leaf area homeostasis in maize. - Nature 201: 215-216.
3. Bella, J. E. 1971. A new competition model for individual trees, - For. Sci. 17: 364-372.
4. Black, J. N. 1958. Competition between plants of different initial seed sizes in swards of subterranean clover (Trifolium subterranean L.) with particular reference to leaf area and the light microclimate. - Aust. J. Agric. Res. 9: 299-318.
5. Bonan, G. B. 1988. The size structure of theoretical plant populations: spatial patterns and neighborhood effects. - Ecology 69: 1721-1730.
6. Brown, G. S. 1965. Point density in stems per acre. - N. Z. For. Res. Notes 38: 1-11.
7. Cannell, M. G. R., Rothery, P. and Ford, E. D. 1984. Competition within stands of Picea sitchensis and Pinus contorta. - Ann. Bot. 53: 349-362.
8. Daniels, R. F. 1976. Simple competition indices and their correlation with annual loblolly pine tree growth. - For. Sci. 22: 454-456.
9. _ , Burkhart, H. E. and Clason T. R. 1986. A comparison of competition measures for predicting growth of loblolly pine trees. - Can. J. For. Res. 16: 1230-1237.
10. Eytingen G. R. 1949. Tree survival in the forest 1. - Agrobiol. 0(1): 55-74 (in Russian).
11. _ 1950. Tree survival in the forest II. - Agrobiol. 0(6): 42-56 (in Russian).
12. Ford, E. D. and Diggle, P. J. 1981. Competition for light in a plant monoculture modelled as a spatial stochastic process. - Ann. Bot.48: 481-500.
13. Hara, T. 1986. Effects of density end extinction coefficient on size variability in plant populations. - Ann. Bot. 67: 885-892.
14. Huston, M. 1986. Size bimodality in plant populations: an alternative hypothesis. - Ecology 67: 265-269.
15. _ and DeAngelis, D. L. 1987. Size bimodality in monospecific populations: a crirical review of potential mechanisms. - Am. Nat. 129: 678-707.
16. Jurik, T. W. 1991. Population distributions of plant size and light environment of giant ragweed (Ambrosia trifida L.) at three densities. - Oecologia 87: 539-550.
17. Kenkel, N. C., Hoskins, J. A. and Hoskins, W. D. 1989. Local competition in a naturally established jack pine stand. - Can. J. Bot. 67: 2630-2635.
18. Mack, R. N. and Harper, J. L. 1977. Interference in dune annuals: spatial pattern and neighborhood effects. - J. Ecol. 65: 345-363.
19. Mead, R. 1966. A relationship between individual plant-spacing and yield. - Ann. Bot. 30: 301-303.
20. Miller T. E. and Weiner J. 1989 Local density variation may mimic effects of asymmetric competition on plant size variability. - Ecology 70: 1181-1191.
21. Munro, D. D. 1974. Forest growth models - a prognosis. - In: Fries, J. (ed.), Growth models for tree and stand simulation. R. Coll. For. Res. Notes 30, Stockholm, pp.7-21.
22. Rice, K. J. 1990. Reproductive hierarchies in Erodium: effects of variation in plant dansity and rainfall distribution. - Ecology 71: 1316-1322.
23. Ross, M. A. and Harper J. L. 1972. Occupation of biological space during seedling establishment. - J. Ecol. 60: 77-88.
24. Schmitt, J., Ehrhardt, D. W. and Cheo, M. 1986. Light-dependent dominance and suppression in experimental radish population. - Ecology 67: 1502-1507.
25. _ , Eccleston, J. and Ehrhardt, D. W. 1987. Dominance and suppression, size-dependent growth and self-thinning in a natural Impatiens capensis population. - J. Ecol. 75: 651-665.
26. Silander, J. A., Jr. and Pacala, S. W. 1985. Neighborhood predictors of plant performance. - Oecologia 66: 256-263.
27. Smith, S. H. and Bell J. F. 1983. Using competitive stress index to estimate diameter growth for thinned Douglas-fir stands. - For. Sci. 29: 491-499.
28. Turner, M. D. and Rabinowitz, D. 1983. Factors affecting frequency distributions of plant mass: the absence of dominance and suppression in competing monocultures of Festuca paradoxa. - Ecology 64: 469-475.
29. Waller, D. M. 1985. The genesis of size hierarchies in seedling populations of Impatiens capensis Meerb. - New Phytol. 100: 243-260.
30. Weiner, J. 1982. A neighborhood model of annual-plant interference. - Ecology 63: 1237-1241.
31. _ 1984. Neighborhood interference amongst Pinus rigida individuals. - J. Ecol. 72: 295-306.
32. _ 1985. Size hierarchies in experimental populatons of annual plants. - Ecology 66: 743-752.
33. _ and Thomas, S. C. 1986. Size variability and competition in plant monocultures. - Oikos 47: 211-222.
34. West, P. W., Jackett, D. R. and Borough, C. J. 1989. Competitive processes in a monoculture of Pinus radiata D. Don. - Oecologia 81: 57-61 .
35. Westoby, M. and Howell, J. 1986. Influence of population structure on self-thinning of plant populations. - J. Ecol. 74: 343-359.
36. Wilson, J. B. 1988. The effect of initial advantage on the course of plant competition. - Oikos 51: 19-24.
37. Wyszomirski, T. 1986. Growth, competition and skewness in a population in one-dimensional individuals. - Ekol. Pol. 34: 615-641.
38. Yastrebov, A. B. 1988. The mathematical model of tree growth in the stand. - Vestn. Leningr. Univ. 0(17): 44-52 (in Russian).
39. _ 1989. On process of stand differentiation. - Vestn. Leningr. Univ. 0(3): 45-53 (in Russian).
40. Zlobin, Yu. A.1980. On the unequality of individuals in plant populations. - Bot. Zh. 65: 311-322 (in Russian).