Relatedness and competitive asymmetry - Implications for growth and population dynamics

Oikos

Volumn 100, Issue 2, 2003, Pages 283-290

  Aikio, Sami ^a   Pakkasmaa, Susanna ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF HELSINKI   (Finland)

^b UPPSALA UNIVERSITY   (Sweden)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ASYMMETRIC COMPETITION; GROWTH; POPULATION DYNAMICS; RELATEDNESS;

EID: 0037648805     PISSN: 00301299     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1034/j.1600-0706.2003.11814.x     Document Type: Article

References (40)

1. Aikio, S. and Markkola, A. M. 2002. Optimality and phenotypic plasticity of shoot-to-root ratio under variable light and nutrient availabilities. - Evol. Ecol. 16: 67-76.
2. 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.
3. Begon, M., Harper, J. L. and Townsend, C. R. 1996. Ecology-individuals, populations and communities. - Blackwell Scientific Press.
4. Bjørnstad, O. N. and Hansen, T. F. 1994. Individual variation and population dynamics. - Oikos 69: 167-171.
5. Bloom, A. J., Chapin, F. S. and Mooney, H. A. 1985. Resource limitation in plants-an economic analogy. - Annu. Rev. Ecol. System. 16: 363-392.
6. Cheplick, G. P. 1992. Sibling competition in plants. - J. Ecology 80: 567-575.
7. Conolly, J., Wayne, P. and Bazzaz, F. A. 2001. Interspecific competition in plants: how well do current methods answer fundamental questions? - Am. Nat. 157: 107-125.
8. Croy, M. I. and Hughes, R. N. 1991. Effects of food supply, hunger, danger and competition on choice of foraging location by the fifteen-spined stickleback, Spinachia spinachia L. - Anim. Behav. 42: 131-140.
9. Cutts, C. J., Metcalfe, N. B. and Taylor, A. C. 1999. Competitive asymmetries in territorial juvenile Atlantic salmon, Salmo salar. - Oikos 86: 479-486.
10. Goldberg, D. E., Turkington, R., Olsvig-Whittager, L. and Dyer, A. R. 2001. Density dependence in an annual plant community: variation among life history stages. - Ecol. Monogr. 71: 423-446.
11. Grafen, A. 1984. Natural selection, kin selection and group selection. - In: Krebs, J. R. and Davies, N. B. (eds), Behavioural ecology. Sinauer Associates, pp. 62-84.
12. Hamilton, W. 1964. The genetical evolution of social behaviour, I and II. - J. Theor. Biol. 7: 1-52.
13. Harper, J. L. 1977. Population biology of plants. - Academic Press.
14. Jasienski, M. 1988. Kinship ecology of competition: size hierarchies in kin and nonkin laboratory cohorts of tadpoles. - Oecologia 77: 407-413.
15. Lomnicki, A. 1988. Population ecology of individuals. - Princeton Univ. Press.
16. Maynard-Smith, J. 1964. Group selection and kin selection. - Nature 210: 1145-1147.
17. Mock, D. W. and Forbes, L. S. 1995. The evolution of parental optimism. - Trends Ecol. Evol. 10: 130-134.
18. Niklas, K. J. 1994. Plant allometry - the scaling of form and process. - The Univ. of Chicago Press.
19. Nilsson, P., Fagerström, T., Tuomi, J. and Åström, M. 1994. Does seed dormancy benefit the mother plant by reducing sibling competition? - Evol. Ecol. 8: 422-430.
20. Pacala, S. W. and Weiner, J. 1991. Effects of competitive asymmetry on a local density model of plant interference. - J. Theor. Biol. 149: 165-179.
21. Pakkasmaa, S. and Aikio, S. 2002. Relatedness and competitive asymmetry - the growth and development of common frog tadpoles. - Oikos, accepted.
22. Peters, R. H. 1983. The ecological implications of body size. - Cambridge Univ. Press.
23. Rees, M. and Crawley, M. J. 1989. Growth, reproduction and population dynamics. - Funct. Ecol. 3: 645-653.
24. Ripa, J. and Lundberg, P. 2000. The route to extinction in variable environments. - Oikos 90: 89-96.
25. Royama, T. 1992. Analytical population dynamics. - Chapman & Hall.
26. Samson, D. A. and Werk, K. S. 1986. Size-dependent effects of in the analysis of reproductive effort in plants. - Am. Nat. 127: 667-680.
27. Schwinning, S. and Fox, G. A. 1995. Population dynamic consequences of competitive symmetry in annual plants. - Oikos 72: 422-432.
28. Schwinning, S. and Weiner, J. 1998. Mechanisms determining the degree of size asymmetry in competition among plants. - Oecologia 113: 447-455.
29. Silvertown, J. 1991. Modularity, reproductive thresholds and plant population dynamics. - Funct. Ecol. 5: 577-582.
30. Simmons, L. W. 1986. Inter-male competition and mating success in the field cricket, Gryllus bimaculatus. - Anim. Behav. 34: 567-579.
31. Tilman, D. 1988. Plant strategies and the dynamics and structure of plant communities. - Princeton Univ. Press.
32. Tonsor, S. J. 1989. Relatedness and intraspecific competition in Plantago lanceolata. - Am. Nat. 134: 897-906.
33. Uchmanski, J. 2000. Individual variability and population regulation: an individual-based approach. - Oikos 90: 539-548.
34. Uchmanski, J. and Grimm, V. 1996. Individual-based modelling in ecology: what makes the difference? - Trends Ecol. Evol. 11: 437-441.
35. Watkinson, A. R. 1980. Density-dependence in single-species populations of plants. - J. Theor. Biol. 83: 345-357.
36. Weiner, J. 1986. How competition for light and nutrients affects size variability in Ipomoea tricolor populations. - Ecology 67: 1425-1427.
37. Weiner, J. 1990. Asymmetric competition in plant populations. - Trends Ecol. Evol. 5: 360-364.
38. Weiner, J. and Thomas, S. C. 1986. Size variability and competition in plant monocultures. - Oikos 47: 211-222.
39. Wilbur, H. M. 1980. Complex life cycles. - Annu. Rev. Ecol. System. 11: 67-93.
40. Woodward, B. D. 1987. Interactions between Woodhouse's toad tadpoles (Bufo woodhousii) of mixed sizes. - Copeia 380-386.