Biomass allocation and light partitioning among dominant and subordinate individuals in Xanthium canadense stands

Annals of Botany

Volumn 82, Issue 5, 1998, Pages 665-673

  Anten, Niels P R ^a   Hirose, Tadaki ^a  

^a TOHOKU UNIVERSITY   (Japan)

Author keywords

Canopy structure; Cockleburr; Competition; Height growth; Leaf mass ratio; Light capture; Specific leaf area; Xanthium canadense

Indexed keywords

LAMIINAE; XANTHIUM; XANTHIUM CANADENSE; XANTHIUM STRUMARIUM; XANTHIUM STRUMARIUM CANADENSE;

EID: 0031741416     PISSN: 03057364     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1006/anbo.1998.0729     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. Anten NPR. 1997. Modelling canopy photosynthesis using parameters determined from simple non-destructive measurements. Ecological Research 12: 77-88.
2. Anten NPR, Hirose T. 1998. Interspecific differences in aboveground growth patterns result in spatial and temporal partitioning of light among species in a tall-grass meadow. Journal of Ecology (in press).
3. Anten NPR, Werger MJA. 1996. Canopy structure and nitrogen distribution in dominant and subordinate plants in a dense stand of Amaranthus dubius L. with a size hierarchy of individuals. Oecologia 105: 30-37.
4. Bradshaw AD. 1965. Evolutionary significance of phenotypic plasticity in plants. Advances in Genetics 13: 115-154.
5. Corré WJ. 1983. Growth and morphogenesis of sun and shade plants II. The influence of light quality. Acta Botanica Neerlandica 32: 185-202.
6. Dijkstra P. 1989. Cause and effect of differences in specific leaf area. In: Lambers H, Cambridge ML, Konings H, Pons TL, eds. Causes and consequences of variation in growth rate and productivity of higher plants. The Hague: SPB Academic Publishing, 124-140.
7. Evans JR. 1993. Photosynthesis acclimation and nitrogen partitioning within a lucerne canopy. II Stability through time and comparison with a theoretical optimum. Australian Journal of Plant Physiology 20: 69-82.
8. Ford ED. 1975. Competition and stand structure in some even-aged plant monocultures. Journal of Ecology 63: 311-333.
9. Gates BM. 1980. Biophysical ecology. Berlin : Springer-Verlag.
10. Geber MA. 1989. Interplay of morphology and development on size inequality : a Polygonum greenhouse study. Ecological Monographs 59: 267-288.
11. Givnish TJ. 1982. On the adaptive significance of leaf height in forest herbs. American Naturalist 120: 353-381.
12. Givnish TJ. 1995. Plant stems: biomechanical adaptation for energy capture and influence on species distribution. In : Gartner BL, ed. Plant stems: physiology and functional morphology. San Diego: Academic Press, 3-49.
13. Goudriaan J. 1977. Crop micrometeorology : a simulation study. Simulation Monographs, Wageningen: Pudoc.
14. Goudriaan J. 1988. The bare bones of leaf angle distribution in radiation models for canopy photosynthesis and energy exchange. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology 43: 155-169.
15. Hara T. 1992. Effects of the mode of competition on stationary size distribution in plant populations. Annals of Botany 69: 509-513.
16. Hara T, Yokozawa M. 1994. Effects of physiological and environmental variations on size-structure dynamics in plant populations. Annals of Botany 73: 39-51.
17. Hikosaka K. 1996. Effects of leaf age, nitrogen nutrition and photon flux density on the organization of the photosynthetic apparatus in leaves of a vine (Ipomoea tricolor Cav.) grown horizontally to avoid mutual shading of leaves. Planta 198: 144-150.
18. Hirose T. 1986. Nitrogen uptake and plant growth. II. An empirical model of vegetative growth and partitioning. Annals of Botany 58: 487-496.
19. Hirose T, Werger MJA. 1995. Canopy structure and photon flux partitioning among species in a herbaceous plant community. Ecology 76: 466-474.
20. King DA. 1990. Allometry of saplings and understorey trees of a Panamanian forest. Functional Ecology 4: 27-32.
21. Kohyama T. 1987. Significance of architecture and allometry in saplings. Functional Ecology 1: 399-404.
22. McMahon T. 1973. Size and shape in biology. Science 179: 1201-1204.
23. Menges ES. 1987. Biomass allocation and geometry of the clonal forest herb Laportea canadensis: adaptive responses to the environment or allometnc constraints. American Journal of Botany 74: 551-563.
24. Monsi M, Saeki T. 1953. Über den Lichtfaktor in den Pflanzen-gesellchaften und seine Bedeutung für die Stoffproduktion. Japanese Journal of Botany 14: 22-52.
25. Nagashima H, Terashima I. 1995. Relationships between height, diameter and weight distribuions of Chenopodium album plants in stands: effects of dimension and allometry. Annals of Botany 75: 181-188.
26. Poorter H, Remkes C. 1990. Leaf area ratio and net assimilation rate of 24 wild species differing in relative growth rate. Oecologia 83: 553-559.
27. Schmitt J, Wulff RD. 1993. Light spectral quality, phytochrome and plant competition. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 8: 47-50.
28. Shitaka Y, Hirose T. 1993. Timing of the seed germination and the reproductive effort in Xanthium canadense. Oecologia 95: 334-339
29. Soitters CJT. 1986. Separating the diffuse and direct component of global radiation and its implications for modelling canopy photosynthesis. II. Calculation of canopy photosynthesis. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology 38: 239-250.
30. Weiner J. 1990. Asymmetric competition in plant populations. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 5: 360-364.
31. Weiner J, Thomas SC. 1986. Size variability and competitton in plant monocultures. Oikos 47: 211-222.
32. Weiner J, Thomas SC. 1992. Competition and allometry in three species of annual plants. Ecology 73: 648-656
33. Weller DE, 1987. Self-thinning exponent correlated with allometric measures of plant geometry. Ecology 68: 813-821.
34. White J. 1981. Allometric interpretation of the self-thinning rule. Journal of Theoretical Biology 89: 475-500.
35. Yokozawa M, Hara T. 1992. A canopy photosynthesis model for the dynamics of size-structure and self-thinning in plant populations. Annals of Botany 70: 305-316.