The emergence of primary strategies in evolving virtual-plant populations

Evolutionary Ecology Research

Volumn 5, Issue 7, 2003, Pages 1067-1081

  Mustard, Matthew J ^a,b   Standing, Dominic B ^b   Aitkenhead, Matthew J ^c   Robinson, David ^b   McDonald, A James S ^b  

^a ROYAL BOTANIC GARDENS   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF ABERDEEN   (United Kingdom)

^c SCOTTISH CROP RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Evolutionary computation; Individual based model; Mutable single plant model; Plant strategies; Primary strategies

Indexed keywords

EID: 1942535267     PISSN: 15220613     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (48)

1. Aerts, R. 1997. Climate, leaf litter chemistry and leaf litter decomposition in terrestrial ecosystems: a triangular relationship. Oikos, 79: 439-449.
2. Aerts, R. and Chapin, F.S., III. 2000. The mineral nutrition of wild plants revisited: a re-evaluation of processes and patterns. Adv. Ecol. Res., 30: 1-67.
3. 4 mono- and dicotyledonous species. Oecologia, 101: 504-513.
4. Begon, M., Harper, J. and Townsend, C. 1996. Ecology: Individuals, Populations and Communities, 3rd edn. Oxford: Blackwell Science.
5. Bolker, B.M. and Pacala, S.W. 1999. Spatial moment equations for plant competition: understanding spatial strategies and the advantages of short dispersal. Am. Nat., 153: 575-602.
6. Chapin, F.S., III, Autumn, K. and Pugnaire, F. 1993. Evolution of suites of traits in response to environmental stress. Am. Nat. , 142: S76-S92.
7. Clarkson, D.T. 1967. Phosphorus supply and growth rate in species of Agrostis L. J. Ecol., 55: 111-118.
8. Crawley, M.J. 1997. Life history and environment. In Plant Ecology (M.J. Crawley, ed.), pp. 73-131. Oxford: Blackwell Science.
9. Dijkstra, P. 1989. Cause and effect of differences in specific leaf area. In Causes and Consequences of Variation in Growth Rate and Productivity of Higher Plants (H. Lambers, M.L. Cambridge, H. Konings and T.L. Pons, eds), pp. 125-140. The Hague: SPB Academic.
10. Eissenstat, D.M. and Yanai, R.D. 1997. The ecology of root lifespan. Adv. Ecol. Res., 27: 1-60.
11. Evans, J.R. 1998. Photosynthetic characteristics of fast- and slow-growing species. In Inherent Variation in Plant Growth: Physiological Mechanisms and Ecological Consequences (H. Lambers, H. Poorter and M.M.I. Van Vuuren, eds), pp. 101-119. Leiden: Backhuys.
12. Gersani, M., Brown, J.S., O'Brien, E.E., Maina, G.M. and Abramsky, Z. 2001. Tragedy of the commons as a result of root competition. J. Ecol., 89: 660-669.
13. Greenslade, P.J.M. 1983. Adversity selection and the habitat template. Am. Nat., 122: 352-365.
14. Grime, J.P. 1979. Plant Strategies and Vegetation Processes. Chichester: Wiley.
15. Grime, J.P. 2001. Plant Strategies, Vegetation Processes, and Ecosystem Properties, 2nd edn. Chichester: Wiley.
16. Grime, J.P., Thompson, K., Hunt, R. et al. 1997. Integrated screening validates primary axes of specialisation in plants. Oikos, 79: 259-281.
17. Grubb, P.J. 1998. A reassessment of the strategies of plants which cope with shortages of resources. Perspectives Plant Ecol. Evol. Syst., 1: 3-31.
18. Ingestad, T. and Ågren, G. 1992. Theories and methods on plant nutrition and growth. Physiol. Plantarum, 84: 177-184.
19. Jungk, A. 1991. Dynamics of water movement at the soil-root interface. In Plant Roots, the Hidden Half (J. Waisel, A. Eshel and U. Kafkafi, eds), pp. 455-481. New York: Marcel Dekker.
20. Kent, M. and Coker, P. 1992. Vegetation Description and Analysis: A Practical Approach. Chichester: Wiley.
21. Lambers, H. and Poorter, H. 1992. Inherent variation in growth rate between higher plants: a search for physiological causes and ecological consequences. Adv. Ecol. Res., 23: 187-261.
22. Lambers, H., Poorter, H. and Van Vuuren, M.M.I., eds. 1998. Inherent Variation in Plant Growth: Physiological Mechanisms and Ecological Consequences. Leiden: Backhuys.
23. MacArthur, R.H. and Wilson, E.O. 1967. The Theory of Island Biogeography. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
24. McDonald, A.J.S. 1989. Phenotypic variation in growth rate as affected by N-supply: its effects on net assimilation rate (NAR), leaf weight ratio (LWR) and specific leaf area (SLA). In Causes and Consequences of Variation in Growth Rate and Productivity of Higher Plants (H. Lambers, M.L. Cambridge, H. Konings and T.L. Pons, eds), pp. 35-44. The Hague: SPB Academic.
25. Niklas, K.J. 1997. The Evolutionary Biology of Plants. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
26. Peuke, A.D. and Jeschke, W.D. 1998. The effects of light on induction, time courses, and kinetic patterns of net nitrate uptake in barley. Plant Cell Environ., 21: 765-774.
27. Pianka, E.R. 1980. On r- and K-selection. Am. Nat., 104: 592-597.
28. Poorter, H. and Evans, J.R. 1998. Photosynthetic nitrogen-use efficiency of species that differ inherently in specific leaf area. Oecologia, 116: 26-37.
29. Post, W.M., Pastor, J., Zinke, P.J. and Stangenberger, A.G. 1985. Global patterns of soil nitrogen storage. Nature, 317: 613-616.
30. Reich, P.B., Ellsworth, D.S., Walters, M.B., Vose, J.M., Gresham, V., Violin, J.C. and Bowman, W.D. 1999. Generality of leaf trait relationships: a test across six biomes. Ecology, 80: 1955-1969.
31. Reynolds, H.L. and D'Antonio, C. 1996. The ecological significance of plasticity in root weight ratio in response to nitrogen: opinion. Plant and Soil, 185: 75-97.
32. Robinson, D. 1996. Resource capture by localized root proliferation: why do plants bother? Ann. Bot., 77: 179-185.
33. Robinson, D. and Van Vuuren, M.M.I. 1998. Responses of wild plants to nutrient patches in relation to growth rate and life form. In Inherent Variation in Plant Growth: Physiological Mechanisms and Ecological Consequences (H. Lambers, H. Poorter and M.M.I. Van Vuuren, eds), pp. 237-257. Leiden: Backhuys.
34. Schieving, F. and Poorter, H. 1999. Carbon gain in a multispecies canopy: the role of specific leaf area and photosynthetic nitrogen-use efficiency in the tragedy of the commons. New Phytol., 143: 201-211.
35. Schmitt, J. 1997. Is photomorphogenic shade avoidance adaptive? Perspectives form population biology. Plant Cell Environ., 20: 826-830.
36. Sibly, R.M. and Grime, P.J. 1986. Strategies of resource capture by plants - evidence for adversity selection. J. Theor. Biol., 118: 247-250.
37. Silvertovvn, J. 1988. The paradox of seed size and adaptation. Trends Ecol. Erol., 4: 24-26.
38. Southwood, T.R.E. 1988. Tactics, strategies and templets. Oikos, 52: 3-18.
39. Standing, D.B. 2001. Growth and survival of plants in patchy environments. PhD thesis, University of Aberdeen.
40. Stearns, S.C. 1989. Trade-offs in life-history evolution. Funct. Ecol., 3: 259-268.
41. Stearns, S.C. and Hoekstra, R. 2000. Evolution: An Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
42. Strand, E., Huse, G. and Giske, J. 2002. Artificial evolution of life history and behaviour. Am. Nat., 159: 624-644.
43. Taylor, D.R., Aarssen, L.W. and Loehle, C. 1990. On the relationship between r/K selection and environmental carrying capacity: a new habitat templet for plant life history strategies. Oikos, 58: 239-250.
44. Tilman, D. 1988. Plant Strategies and the Dynamics and Structure of Plant Communities. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
45. Warren, J. and Topping, C. 2001. Trait evolution in an individual-based model of herbaceous vegetation. Evol. Ecol., 15: 15-23.
46. Westoby, M. 1998. A leaf-height-seed (LHS) plant ecology strategy scheme. Plant and Soil, 199: 213-227.
47. Wilson, J.B. and Lee, W.G. 2000. C-S-R triangle theory: community-level predictions, tests, evaluation of criticisms, and relation to other theories. Oikos, 91: 77-96.
48. Yedid, G. and Bell, G. 2002. Macroevolution simulated with autonomously replicating computer programs. Nature, 420: 810-812.