Light partitioning in experimental grass communities

Oikos

Volumn 117, Issue 9, 2008, Pages 1351-1361

  Vojtech, Eva ^a   Loreau, Michel ^b   Yachi, Shigeo ^c   Spehn, Eva M ^d   Hector, Andy ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ZURICH   (Switzerland)

^b MCGILL UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

^c RESEARCH INSTITUTE FOR HUMANITY AND NATURE   (Japan)

^d UNIVERSITY OF BASEL   (Switzerland)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CANOPY ARCHITECTURE; COEXISTENCE; COMPETITIVE ABILITY; EXPERIMENTAL STUDY; GRASS; LIGHT EFFECT; LIGHT USE EFFICIENCY; MONOCULTURE; NICHE PARTITIONING; PERENNIAL PLANT; PLANT COMMUNITY; SPACE USE; YIELD RESPONSE;

EID: 49649111877     PISSN: 00301299     EISSN: 16000706     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.0030-1299.2008.16700.x     Document Type: Article

References (37)

1. Adams, T. P. et al. 2007. Understanding height-structured competition in forests: is there an R* for light? Proc. R. Soc. B 274 : 3039 3047.
2. Anten, N. P. R. 2005. Optimal photosynthetic characteristics of individual plants in vegetation stands and implications for species coexistence Ann. Bot. 95 : 495 506.
3. Anten, N. P. R. Hirose, T. 1999. Interspecific differences in above-ground growth patterns result in spatial and temporal partitioning of light among species in a tall-grass meadow J. Ecol. 87 : 583 597.
4. Anten, N. P. R. Hirose, T. 2003. Shoot structure, leaf physiology, and daily carbon gain of plant species in a tallgrass meadow Ecology 84 : 955 968.
5. Berendse, F. 1982. Competition between plant-populations with different rooting depths. 3. Field experiments Oecologia 53 : 50 55.
6. Berendse, F. 1983. Interspecific competition and niche differentiation between Plantago lanceolata and Anthoxanthum odoratum in a natural hayfield J. Ecol. 71 : 379 390.
7. Fargione, J. et al. 2003. Community assembly and invasion: an experimental test of neutral versus niche processes Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 100 : 8916 8920.
8. Fox, J. W. 2005. Interpreting the'selection effect' of biodiversity on ecosystem function Ecol. Lett. 8 : 846 856.
9. Fridley, J. D. 2002. Resource availability dominates and alters the relationship between species diversity and ecosystem productivity in experimental plant communities Oecologia 132 : 271 277.
10. Fridley, J. D. 2003. Diversity effects on production in different light and fertility environments: an experiment with communities of annual plants J. Ecol. 91 : 396 406.
11. Gross, N. et al. 2007. Complementarity as a mechanism of coexistence between functional groups of grasses J. Ecol. 95 : 1296 1305.
12. Hirose, T. Werger, M. J. A. 1995. Canopy structure and photon flux partitioning among species in a herbaceous plant community Ecology 76 : 466 474.
13. Huston, M. A. DeAngelis, D. L. 1994. Competition and coexistence - the effects of resource transport and supply rates Am. Nat. 144 : 954 977.
14. Kahmen, A. et al. 2006. Niche complementarity for nitrogen: an explanation for the biodiversity and ecosystem functioning relationship? Ecology 87 : 1244 1255.
15. Lauber, K. Wagner, G. 1996. Flora Helvetica. Haupt Verlag.
16. Legendre, P. 2001. Model II regression - user's guide. Dépt Sci. Biol., Univ. de Montréal .
17. Lepš, J. 1999. Nutrient status, disturbance and competition: an experimental test of relationships in a wet meadow J. Veg. Sci. 10 : 219 230.
18. Loreau, M. 1998a. Separating sampling and other effects in biodiversity experiments Oikos 82 : 600 602.
19. Loreau, M. 1998b. Biodiversity and ecosystem functioning: a mechanistic model Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 95 : 5632 5636.
20. Loreau, M. Hector, A. 2001. Partitioning selection and complementarity in biodiversity experiments Nature 412 : 72 76.
21. Lorentzen, S. et al. 2008. Species richness and identity affect the use of aboveground space in experimental grasslands, Persp. Plant Ecol. Evol. Syst doi:10.1016/j.ppees.2007.12.001.
22. McKane, R. B. et al. 2002. Resource-based niches provide a basis for plant species diversity and dominance in arctic tundra Nature 415 : 68 71.
23. Mwangi, P. N. et al. 2007. Niche pre-emption increases with species richness in experimental plant communities J. Ecol. 95 : 65 78.
24. Naeem, S. et al. 1994. Declining biodiversity can alter the performance of ecosystems Nature 368 : 734 737.
25. Parrish, J. A. D. Bazzaz, F. A. 1976. Underground niche separation in successional plants Ecology 57 : 1281 1288.
26. Schoener, T. W. 1970. Nonsynchronous spatial overlap of lizards in patchy habitats Ecology 51 : 408 418.
27. Schwinning, S. Fox, G. A. 1995. Population-dynamic consequences of competitive symmetry in annual plants Oikos 72 : 422 432.
28. Silvertown, J. 2004. Plant coexistence and the niche Trends Ecol. Evol. 19 : 605 611.
29. Silvertown, J. et al. 1999. Hydrologically defined niches reveal a basis for species richness in plant communities Nature 400 : 61 63.
30. Spehn, E. M. et al. 2000. Above-ground resource use increases with plant species richness in experimental grassland ecosystems Funct. Ecol. 14 : 326 337.
31. Spehn, E. M. et al. 2005. Ecosystem effects of biodiversity manipulations in European grasslands Ecol. Monogr. 75 : 37 63.
32. Turnbull, L. A. et al. 2005. Experimental invasion by legumes reveals non-random assembly rules in grassland communities J. Ecol. 93 : 1062 1070.
33. Violle, C. et al. 2007. How relevant are instantaneous measurements for assessing resource depletion under plant cover? A test on light and soil water availability in 18 herbaceous communities Funct. Ecol. 21 : 185 190.
34. Vojtech, E. et al. 2007. Differences in light interception in grass monocultures predict short-term competitive outcomes under productive conditions PLoS One 2 : e499 doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0000499.
35. Von Felten, S. Schmid, B. inpress. Complementarity among species in horizontal vs. vertical rooting space. J. Plant Ecol doi: 10.1093/jpe/rtm006.
36. Werger, M. J. A. et al. 2002. Light partitioning among species and species replacement in early successional grasslands J. Veg. Sci. 13 : 615 626.
37. Yachi, S. Loreau, M. 2007. Does complementary resource use enhance ecosystem functioning? A model of light competition in plant communities Ecol. Lett. 10 : 54 62.