When competition does not matter: Grassland diversity and community composition

American Naturalist

Volumn 171, Issue 6, 2008, Pages 777-787

  Lamb, Eric G ^a,b   Cahill Jr , James F ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ALBERTA   (Canada)

^b UNIVERSITY OF SASKATCHEWAN   (Canada)

Author keywords

Community structure; Competition; Importance; Intensity; Root; Shoot

Indexed keywords

NITROGEN; WATER;

ASYMMETRIC COMPETITION; ECOLOGICAL MODELING; GRASSLAND; ROOT COMPETITION; SPECIES DIVERSITY; SPECIES EVENNESS; SPECIES RICHNESS;

ARTICLE; BIODIVERSITY; BIOLOGICAL MODEL; CANADA; ECOSYSTEM; ENVIRONMENT; EVOLUTION; PLANT; PLANT ROOT; POACEAE; TREE;

BIODIVERSITY; CANADA; ECOSYSTEM; ENVIRONMENT; EVOLUTION; MODELS, BIOLOGICAL; NITROGEN; PLANT ROOTS; PLANTS; POACEAE; TREES; WATER;

ALBERTA; CANADA; NORTH AMERICA;

EID: 43949110982     PISSN: 00030147     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1086/587528     Document Type: Article

References (58)

1. Aarssen, L. W. 2004. Interpreting co-variation in species richness and productivity in terrestrial vegetation: making sense of causations and correlations at multiple scales. Folia Geobotanica 39:385-403.
2. Aarssen, L. W., and T. Keogh. 2002. Conundrums of competitive ability in plants: what to measure? Oikos 96:531-542.
3. Adler, P. B., J. HilleRisLambers, and J. M. Levine. 2007. A niche for neutrality. Ecology Letters 10:95-104.
4. Belcher, J. W., P. A. Keddy, and L. Twolan-Strutt. 1995. Root and shoot competition intensity along a soil depth gradient. Journal of Ecology 83:673-682.
5. Brooker, R., Z. Kikvidze, F. I. Pugnaire, R. M. Callaway, P. Choler, C. J. Lortie, and R. Michalet. 2005. The importance of importance. Oikos 109:63-70.
6. Cahill, J. F. 1999. Fertilization effects on interactions between above-and belowground competition in an old field. Ecology 80:466-480.
7. _. 2002. Interactions between root and shoot competition vary among species. Oikos 99:101-112.
8. _. 2003. Neighbourhood-scale diversity, composition and root crowding do not alter competition during drought in a native grassland. Ecology Letters 6:599-603.
9. Cahill, J. F., and B. B. Casper. 2000. Investigating the relationship between neighbor root biomass and belowground competition: field evidence for symmetric competition belowground. Oikos 90:311-320.
10. _. 2002. Canopy gaps are sites of reduced belowground plant competition in a productive old field. Plant Ecology 164:29-36.
11. Casper, B. B., and R. B. Jackson. 1997. Plant competition underground. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 28:545-570.
12. Clark, C. M., E. E. Cleland, S. L. Collins, J. E. Fargione, L. Gough, K. L. Gross, S. C. Pennings, K. N. Suding, and J. B. Grace. 2007. Environmental and plant community determinants of species loss following nitrogen enrichment. Ecology Letters 10:596-607.
13. Clements, F. E., J. E. Weaver, and H. C. Hanson. 1929. Plant competition: an analysis of community functions. Carnegie Institution of Washington, Washington, D.C.
14. Cotgreave, P., and P. Harvey. 1994. Evenness of abundance in bird communities. Journal of Animal Ecology 63:365-374.
15. Coupe, M. D. 2003. Effects of insect herbivory in herbaceous communities: coarse- and fine-scale examination. MS thesis. University of Alberta, Edmonton.
16. Facelli, J. M., and S. T. A. Pickett. 1991. Plant litter: its dynamics and effects on plant community structure. Botanical Review 57:1-32.
17. Goldberg, D. E., and A. M. Barton. 1992. Patterns and consequences of interspecific competition in natural communities: a review of field experiments with plants. American Naturalist 139:771-801.
18. Gough, L., and J. B. Grace. 1999. Effects of environmental change on plant species density: comparing predictions with experiments. Ecology 80:882-890.
19. Grace, J. B. 1991. A clarification of the debate between Grime and Tilman. Functional Ecology 5:583-587.
20. _. 1999. The factors controlling species density in herbaceous plant communities: an assessment. Perspectives in Plant Ecology Evolution and Systematics 2:1-28.
21. _. 2006. Structural equation modeling and natural systems. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
22. Grace, J. B., and K. A. Bollen. Forthcoming. Representing general theoretical concepts in structural equation models: the role of composite variables. Environmental and Ecological Statistics.
23. Grace, J. B., and H. Jutila. 1999. The relationship between species density and community biomass in grazed and ungrazed coastal meadows. Oikos 85:398-408.
24. Grace, J. B., and B. H. Pugesek. 1997. A structural equation model of plant species richness and its application to a coastal wetland. American Naturalist 149:436-460.
25. Grime, J. 2001. Plant strategies, vegetation processes, and ecosystem properties. Wiley, Chichester.
26. Grubb, P. J. 1977. The maintenance of species-richness in plant communities: the importance of the regeneration niche. Biological Reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society 52:107-145.
27. Gurevitch, J., L. L. Morrow, A. Wallace, and J. S. Walsh. 1992. A meta-analysis of competition in field experiments. American Naturalist 140:539-572.
28. Hedges, L. V., J. Gurevitch, and P. S. Curtis. 1999. The meta-analysis of response ratios in experimental ecology. Ecology 80:1150-1156.
29. Hölscher, D., D. Hertel, C. Leuschner, and M. Hottkowitz. 2002. Tree species diversity and soil patchiness in a temperate broad-leaved forest with limited rooting space. Flora (Jena) 197:118-125.
30. Howitt, R. W. 1988. Soil survey of the county of Beaver, Alberta. Terrain Sciences Department, Alberta Research Council, Edmonton, Alberta.
31. Jackson, R. B., J. Canadell, J. R. Ehleringer, H. A. Mooney, O. E. Sala, and E. D. Schultze. 1996. A global analysis of root distributions for terrestrial biomes. Oecologia (Berlin) 108:389-411.
32. Keddy, P. A. 2001. Competition. Kluwer, Dordrecht. Lamb, E. G. 2007. Competition and community structure in a rough fescue grassland. PhD thesis. University of Alberta, Edmonton.
33. _. 2008. Direct and indirect control of species richness and evenness by resources, biomass, and litter in a native grassland. Ecology 89:216-225.
34. Lamb, E. G., and J. F. Cahill. 2006. Consequences of differing competitive abilities between juvenile and adult plants. Oikos 112:502-512.
35. Lamb, E. G., J. F. Cahill, and M. R. T. Dale. 2006. A nonlinear regression approach to test for size-dependence of competitive ability. Ecology 87:1452-1457.
36. Lamb, E. G., B. S. Shore, and J. F. Cahill. 2007. Water and nitrogen addition differentially impact plant competition in a native rough fescue grassland. Plant Ecology 192:21-33.
37. McCune, B., and J. B. Grace. 2002. Analysis of ecological communities. MjM Software Design, Gleneden Beach, OR.
38. McCune, B., and D. Keon. 2002. Equations for potential annual direct incident radiation and heat load. Journal of Vegetation Science 13:603-606.
39. McCune, B., and M. J. Mefford. 1999. PC-ORD: multivariate analysis of ecological data. MjM Software Design, Gleneden Beach, OR.
40. McLellan, A. J., A. H. Fitter, and R. Law. 1995. On decaying roots, mycorrhizal colonization and the design of removal experiments. Journal of Ecology 83:225-230.
41. Mitchell, G. E. 2006. Competition and facilitation in a subarcticalpine plant community. 2006. MS thesis. University of Alberta, Edmonton.
42. Mokany, K., R. J. Raison, and A. S. Prokushkin. 2006. Critical analysis of root : shoot ratios in terrestrial biomes. Global Change Biology 12:84-96.
43. Muthén, L. K., and B. O. Muthén. 2006. M-plus user's guide. Muthén & Muthén, Los Angeles.
44. Peltzer, D. A., S. D. Wilson, and A. K. Gerry. 1998. Competition intensity along a productivity gradient in a low-diversity grassland. American Naturalist 151:465-476.
45. Pielou, E. C. 1969. An introduction to mathematical ecology. Wiley, New York.
46. Rajaniemi, T. K., V. J. Allison, and D. E. Goldberg. 2003. Root competition can cause a decline in diversity with increased productivity. Journal of Ecology 91:407-416.
47. R Development Core Team. 2006. R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna.
48. Schenk, H. J. 2006. Root competition: beyond resource depletion. Journal of Ecology 94:725-739.
49. Schwinning, S., and J. Weiner. 1998. Mechanisms determining the degree of size asymmetry in competition among plants. Oecologia (Berlin) 113:447-455.
50. Shipley, B. 2000. Cause and correlation in biology. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
51. Sims, P. L., and P. G. Risser. 2000. Grasslands. Pages 324-356 in M. G. Barbour and W. D. Billings, eds. North American terrestrial vegetation. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
52. Soil Classification Working Group. 1998. Canadian system of soil classification. Agriculture and Agri-food Canada, Ottawa, Ontario.
53. Sprankle, P., W. F. Meggitt, and D. Penner. 1975. Rapid inactivation of glyphosate in soil. Weed Science 23:224-228.
54. Turnbull, L. A., M. J. Crawley, and M. Rees. 2000. Are plant populations seed limited? a review of seed sowing experiments. Oikos 88:225-238.
55. von Wettberg, E. J., and J. Weiner. 2003. Larger Triticum aestivum plants do not preempt nutrient-rich patches in a glasshouse experiment. Plant Ecology 169:85-92.
56. Weiher, E., S. Forbes, T. Schauwecker, and J. B. Grace. 2004. Multivariate control of plant species richness and community biomass in blackland prairie. Oikos 106:151-157.
57. Weiner, J. 1986. How competition for light and nutrients affects size variability in Ipomoea tricolor populations. Ecology 67:1425-1427.
58. Welden, C. W., and W. L. Slauson. 1986. The intensity of competition versus its importance: an overlooked distinction and some implications. Quarterly Review of Biology 61:23-44.