Asymmetric competition as a natural outcome of neighbour interactions among plants: Results from the field-of-neighbourhood modelling approach

Plant Ecology

Volumn 170, Issue 1, 2004, Pages 135-145

  Bauer, Silke ^a   Wyszomirski, Tomasz ^b   Berger, Uta ^c   Hildenbrandt, Hanno ^c   Grimm, Volker ^a  

^a HELMHOLTZ CENTRE FOR ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH UFZ   (Germany)

^b UNIVERSITY OF WARSAW   (Poland)

^c LEIBNIZ CENTRE FOR TROPICAL MARINE RESEARCH ZMT   (Germany)

Author keywords

Asymmetric competition; Field of neighbourhood; Individual based model; Plant; Size distribution

Indexed keywords

BIOMASS; COMPETITION (ECOLOGY); INTERSPECIFIC COMPETITION; MODELING;

EID: 1842523137     PISSN: 13850237     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1023/B:VEGE.0000019041.42440.ea     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. Adler F.R. 1996. A model of self-thinning through local competition. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 93: 9980-9984.
2. Berger U. and Hildenbrandt H. 2000. A new approach to spatially explicit modelling of forest dynamics: Spacing, ageing and neighbourhood competition of mangrove trees. Ecological Modelling 132: 287-302.
3. Berger U., Hildenbrandt H. and Grimm V. 2002a. Towards a standard for the individual-based modeling of plant populations: self-thinning and the field of neighbourhood approach. Natural Resource Modeling 15 (in press).
4. Berger U. and Hildenbrandt H. 2002b. The competition strength of individual trees and its influence on the curvature of the biomass-density trajectory of a cohort. Plant Ecology in-press.
5. Berntson G.M. and Wayne P.M. 2000. Characterizing the size dependence of resource acquisition within crowded plant populations. Ecology 81: 1072-1085.
6. Bonan G.B. 1991. Density effects on the size structure of annual plant populations: an indication of neighbourhood competition. Annals of Botany 68: 341-347.
7. Bonan G.B. 1993. Analysis of neighborhood competition among annual plants: implications of a plant growth model. Ecological Modelling 65: 123-136.
8. Czárán T. and Bartha S. 1989. The effect of spatial pattern on community dynamics: a comparison of simulated and field data. Vegetatio 83: 229-239.
9. Czárán T. and Bartha S. 1992. Spatio-temporal dynamical models of plant populations and communities. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 7: 38-42.
10. Czárán T. 1998. Spatiotemporal Models of Population and Community Dynamics. Population and Community Dynamics Series. Chapman & Hall, London.
11. DeAngelis D.L. and Gross L.J. 1992. Individual-based models and approaches in ecology: populations, communities and ecosystems. Chapman & Hall, New York, London.
12. Firbank L.G. and Watkinson A.R. 1987. On the analysis of competition at the level of the individual plant. Oecologia 71: 308-317.
13. Grimm V. and Uchmanski J. 2002. Individual variability and population regulation: a model of the significance of within-generation density dependence. Oecologia (in press).
14. HaraT. and Wyszomirski T. 1994. Competitive asymmetry reduces spatial effects on size-structure dynamics in plant populations. Annals of Botany 73: 285-297.
15. Houston A., Clark J.C., McNamara J. and Mangel M. 1988. Dynamic models in behavioral and evolutionary ecology. Nature 332: 29-34.
16. Kenkel N.C. 1990. Spatial competition models for plant populations. Coenoses 6: 149-158.
17. Lomnicki A. 1980. Regulation of population density due to individual differences and patchy environment. Oikos 35: 185-193.
18. Miller T.E. and Weiner J. 1989. Local density variation may mimic effects of asymmetric competition on plant size variability. Ecology 70: 1188-1191.
19. Pacala S.W. and Weiner J. 1991. Effect of competitive asymmetry on a local density model of plant interference. Journal of Theoretical Biology 149: 165-179.
20. Railsback S.F. 2001. Concepts from complex adaptive systems as a framework for individual-based modelling. Ecological Modelling 139: 47-62.
21. Schwinning S. and Fox G.A. 1995. Population dynamic consequences of competitive symmetry in annual plants. Oikos 72: 422-432.
22. Schwinning S. and Weiner J. 1998. Mechanisms determining the degree of size asymmetry in competition among plants. Oecologia 113: 447-455.
23. Sletvold N. and Hestmark G. 1999. A comparative test of the predictive power of neighbourhood models in natural populations of Lasalia pustulata. Canadian Journal of Botany 77: 1655-1661.
24. Stoll P. and Weiner J. 2000. A neighborhood view of interactions among individual plants. In: Dieckmann U., Law R. and Metz J.A.J. (eds), The Geometry of Ecological Interactions - Simplifying spatial complexity. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 11-27.
25. Uchmanski J. 1985. Differentiation and frequency distributions of body weights in plants and animals. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society London B 310: 1-75.
26. Uchmanski J. 2000. Resource partitioning among competing individuals and population persistence: an individual-based model. Ecological Modelling 131: 21-32.
27. Walker J., Sharpe P.J.H., Penridge L.K. and Wu H. 1989. Ecological field theory: the concept and field tests. Vegetatio 83: 81-95.
28. Weiner J. 1990. Asymmetric competition in plant populations. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 5: 360-364.
29. Weiner J., Stoll P., Muller-Landau H. and Jasentuliyana A. 2001. Spatial pattern, competitive symmetry and size variability in a spatially-explcit, individual-based plant competition model. The American Naturalist 158: 438-450.
30. Wu H., Sharpe P.J.H., Walker J. and Penridge L.K. 1985. Ecological field theory: a spatial analysis of resource interference among plants. Ecological Modelling 29: 215-243.
31. Wyszomirski T. 1983. A simulation model of the growth of competing individuals of a plant population. Ekologia Polska 31: 73-92.
32. Wyszomirski T. 1986. Growth, competition and skewness in a population of one-dimensional individuals. Ekologia Polska 43: 615-641.
33. Wyszomirski T. 1992. Detecting and displaying size bimodality: kurtosis, skewness and bimodalizable distributions. Journal of Theoretical Biology 158: 109-128.
34. Wyszomirski T., Wyszomirski I. and Jarzyna I. 1999. Simple mechanisms of size distribution dynamics in crowded and uncrowded virtual monocultures. Ecological Modelling 115: 253-273.
35. Yastrebov A.B. 1996. Different types of heterogeneity and plant competition in monospecific stands. Oikos 75: 89-97.