The assembly of forest communities according to maximum species height along resource and disturbance gradients

Oikos

Volumn 118, Issue 4, 2009, Pages 564-572

  Schamp, Brandon S ^a,b   Aarssen, Lonnie W ^a  

^a QUEEN S UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

^b ALGOMA UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COEXISTENCE; COMPARATIVE STUDY; COMPETITIVE ABILITY; DISTURBANCE; ECOLOGICAL MODELING; FOREST ECOSYSTEM; HEIGHT; HYPOTHESIS TESTING; MODEL TEST; NICHE; RESOURCE AVAILABILITY; SPECIES POOL; TEMPERATE FOREST;

CANADA; NORTH AMERICA; ONTARIO [CANADA];

EID: 64149125864     PISSN: 00301299     EISSN: 16000706     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0706.2008.16589.x     Document Type: Article

References (53)

1. Aarssen, L. W. 1983. Ecological combining ability and competitive combining ability in plants: toward a general evolutionary theory of coexistence in systems of competition Am. Nat. 122 : 707 731.
2. Aarssen, L. W. Epp, G. A. 1990. Neighbor manipulations in natural vegetation: a review J. Veg. Sci. 1 : 13 30.
3. Aarssen, L.W. Keogh, T. 2002. Conundrums of competitive ability in plants: what to measure? Oikos 96 : 531 542.
4. Aarssen, L. W. Schamp, B. S. 2002. Predicting distributions of species richness and species size in regional floras: applying the species pool hypothesis to the habitat templet model Persp. Plant Ecol. Evol. Syst. 5 : 3 12.
5. Aarssen, L. W. et al. 2006. Why are there so many small plants? Implications for species coexistence J. Ecol. 94 : 569 580.
6. Bersier, L. F. Sugihara, G. 1997. Species abundance patterns: the problem of testing stochastic models J. Anim. Ecol. 66 : 769 774.
7. Bonser, S. P. Reader, R. J. 1995. Plant competition and herbivory in relation to vegetation biomass Ecology 76 : 2176 2183.
8. Brooker, R. et al. 2005. The importance of importance Oikos 109 : 63 70.
9. Connor, E. F. Simberloff, D. 1979. The assembly of species communities: chance or competition? Ecology 60 : 1132 1140.
10. Craine, J. M. 2005. Reconciling plant strategy theories of Grime and Tilman J. Ecol. 93 : 1041 1052.
11. Diamond, J. M. 1975. Assembly of species communities Cody, M. L. Diamond, J. M. Ecology and evolution of communities. Harvard Univ. Press 342 444.
12. DiTomasso, A. Aarssen, L. W. 1991. Effect of nutrient level on competition intensity in the field for three coexisting grass species J. Veg. Sci. 2 : 513 522.
13. Environment Canada. 1965. The Canada land inventory: objectives, scope and organization. Report no. 1. Queen's Printer for Canada, Ottawa.
14. Fraser, L. H. Keddy, P. A. 2005. Can competitive ability predict structure in experimental plant communities? J. Veg. Sci. 16 : 571 578.
15. Frazer, G. W. et al. 1999. Gap light analyzer (GLA), ver. 2.0: imaging software to extract canopy structure and gap light transmission indices from true-colour fisheye photographs, users manual and program documentation. Simon Fraser Univ., Burnaby, BC, and the Inst. of Ecosystem Studies, Millbrook, NY.
16. Gaudet, C. L. Keddy, P. A. 1988. A comparative approach to predicting competitive ability from plant traits Nature 334 : 242 243.
17. Gaudet, C. L. Keddy, P. A. 1995. Competitive performance and species distribution in shoreline plant communities: a comparative approach Ecology 76 : 280 291.
18. Gleason, H. A. Cronquist, A. 1991. Manual of the vascular plants of northeastern United States and adjacent Canada. N. Y. Bot. Gard.
19. Goldberg, D. E. Landa, K. 1991. Competitive effect and response: hierarchies and correlated traits in the early stages of competition J. Ecol. 79 : 1013 1030.
20. Goldberg, D. E. Barton, A. M. 1992. Patterns and consequences of interspecific competition in natural communities: a review of field experiments with plants Am. Nat. 139 : 771 801.
21. Gotelli, N. J. McCabe, D. J. 2002. Species co-occurrence: a meta-analysis of J. M. Diamond's assembly rules model Ecology 83 : 2091 2096.
22. Grime, J. P. 1979. Plant strategies and vegetation processes. Wiley.
23. Grime., J. P. 2006. Trait convergence and trait divergence in herbaceous plant communities: mechanisms and consequences J. Veg. Sci. 17 : 255 260.
24. Grime, J. P. 2007. Plant strategy theories: a comment on Craine (2005) J. Ecol. 95 : 227 230.
25. Gurevitch, J. et al. 1992. A meta-analysis of field experiments on competition Am. Nat. 140 : 539 572.
26. Howard, T. G. Goldberg, D. E. 2001. Competitive response hierarchies for germination, growth, and survival and their influence on abundance Ecology 82 : 979 990.
27. Lee, H. et al. 1998. Ecological land classification for southern Ontario: first approximation and its application. Ontario Ministry of Nat. Res.
28. Keddy, P. A. 2007. Plants and vegetation - origins, processes, consequences. Cambridge Univ. Press.
29. Keddy, P. A. et al. 1997. Experimental evidence that interspecific competitive asymmetry increases with soil productivity Oikos 80 : 253 256.
30. Oliveira-Filho, E. et al. 1997. Effects of past disturbance and edges on tree community structure and dynamics within a fragment of tropical semideciduous forest in south-eastern Brazil over a five-year period (1987-1992) Plant Ecol. 131 : 45 66.
31. Pither, J. Aarssen, L. W. 2005. Environmental specialists: their prevalence and their influence on community-similarity analyses Ecol. Lett. 8 : 261 271.
32. Pugnaire, F. I. Luque, M. T. 2001. Changes in plant interactions along a gradient of environmental stress Oikos 93 : 42 49.
33. Reader, R. J. et al. 1994. Plant competition in relation to neighbor biomass: an intercontinental study with Poa pratensis Ecology 75 : 1753 1760.
34. Rees, M. et al. 1996. Quantifying the impact of competition and spatial heterogeneity on the structure and dynamics of a four-species guild of winter annuals Am. Nat. 147 : 1 32.
35. Rosch, H. et al. 1997. Predicting competitive interactions between pioneer plant species by using plant traits J. Veg. Sci. 8 : 489 494.
36. Sammul, M. et al. 2000. Competition intensity and its importance: results of field experiments with Anthoxanthum odoratum Oecologia 125 : 18 25.
37. Schamp, B. S. et al. 2003. Plant species richness increases with regional habitat commonness across a gradient of forest productivity Folia Geobot. 38 : 273 280.
38. Schamp, B. S. et al. 2008. Dispersion of traits related to competitive ability in an old-field plan community J. Ecol. 96 : 204 212.
39. Scheffer, M. van Nes, E. H. 2006. Self-organized similarity, the evolutionary emergence of groups of similar species Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 103 : 6230 6235.
40. Schoener, T. W. 1983. Field experiments on interspecific competition Am. Nat. 122 : 240 285.
41. Stone, L. Roberts, A. 1990. The checkerboard score and species distributions Oecologia 85 : 74 79.
42. Stubbs, W. J. Wilson, J. B. 2004. Evidence for limiting similarity in a sand dune community J. Ecol. 92 : 557 567.
43. Taylor, D. R. et al. 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. Thompson, K. Grime, J. P. 1988. Competition reconsidered - a reply to Tilman Funct. Ecol. 2 : 114 116.
45. Tilman, D. 1982. Resource competition and community structure. Princeton Univ. Press.
46. Tilman, D. 1987. On the meaning of competition and the mechanisms of competitive superiority Funct. Ecol. 1 : 304 315.
47. Tilman, D. 1988. Plant strategies and the dynamics and structure of plant communities. Princeton Univ. Press.
48. Warren, J. et al. 2002. Competitive relationships in a fertile grassland community does size matter? Oecologia 132 : 125 130.
49. Weiher, E. Keddy, P. A. 1995. Assembly rules, null models, and trait dispersion: new questions from old patterns Oikos 74 : 159 164.
50. Weiher, E. et al. 1998. Community assembly rules, morphological dispersion, and the coexistence of plant species Oikos 81 : 309 322.
51. Westoby, M. 1997. A leaf-height-seed (LHS) plant ecology strategy scheme Plant Soil 199 : 213 227.
52. Westoby, M. et al. 2002. Plant ecological strategies: some leading dimensions of variation between species Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 33 : 125 159.
53. Zobel, M. 1992. Plant species coexistence - the role of historical, evolutionary and ecological factors Oikos 65 : 314 320.