Using three pairs of competitive indices to test for changes in plant competition under different resource and disturbance levels

Journal of Vegetation Science

Volumn 21, Issue 6, 2010, Pages 1025-1034

  Carlyle, Cameron N ^a,b   Fraser, Lauchlan H ^a   Turkington, Roy ^a,b  

^a THOMPSON RIVERS UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

^b UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA   (Canada)

Author keywords

Absolute and relative competition; Clipping; Competitive effect and response; CSR strategy theory; Drought; Festuca campestris; Importance and intensity of competition; Nutrient availability; Pseudoroegneria spicata; R* theory

Indexed keywords

ASSESSMENT METHOD; CLIPPING; COMPETITION (ECOLOGY); DROUGHT STRESS; ENVIRONMENTAL DISTURBANCE; GRASS; INTERSPECIFIC INTERACTION; NUTRIENT AVAILABILITY; POPULATION DECLINE; RESOURCE USE; SPECIES DIVERSITY; TEMPERATE ENVIRONMENT;

BRITISH COLUMBIA; CANADA; KAMLOOPS;

FESTUCA CAMPESTRIS; PSEUDOROEGNERIA SPICATA;

EID: 78049234184     PISSN: 11009233     EISSN: 16541103     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1654-1103.2010.01207.x     Document Type: Article

References (55)

1. Arredondo, J.T. & Johnson, D.A. 1998. Clipping effects on root architecture and morphology of 3 range grasses. Journal of Range Management 51: 207-214.
2. Brooker, R., Kikvidze, Z., Pugnaire, F.I., Callaway, R.M., Choler, P., Lortie, C.J. & Michalet, R. 2005. The importance of importance. Oikos 109: 73-70.
3. Brooker, R.W. & Kikvidze, Z. 2008. Importance: an overlooked concept in plant interaction research. Journal of Ecology 96: 703-708.
4. Busso, C.A., Richards, J.H. & Chatterton, N.J. 1990. Nonstructural carbohydrates and spring regrowth of two cool-season grasses: interaction of drought and clipping. Journal of Range Management 43: 336-343.
5. Cahill, J.F. 2002. Interactions between root and shoot competition vary among species. Oikos 99: 101-112.
6. Cahill, J.F., Kembel, S.W. & Gustafson, D.J. 2005. Differential genetic influences on competitive effect and response in Arabidopsis thaliana. Journal of Ecology 93: 958-967.
7. Campbell, B.D. & Grime, J.P. 1992. An experimental test of plant strategy theory. Ecology 73: 15-29.
8. Carlyle, C.N. & Fraser, L.H. 2006. A test of three juvenile plant competitive response strategies. Journal of Vegetation Science 17: 11-18.
9. Craine, J.M. 2005. Reconciling plant strategy theories of Grime and Tilman. Journal of Ecology 93: 1041-1052.
10. Douglas, G.W., Straley, G.B. & Meidinger, D. 1994. The vascular plants of British Columbia. Ministry of Forests, Victoria, BC, CA.
11. Engel, E.C. & Weltzin, J.F. 2008. Can community composition be predicted from pairwise species interactions? Plant Ecology 195: 77-85.
12. Fraser, L.H. & Miletti, T.E. 2008. Effect of minor water depth treatments on competitive effect and response of eight wetland plants. Plant Ecology 195: 33-43.
13. Frekelton, R.P., Watkinson, A.R. & Rees, M. 2009. Measuring the importance of competition in plant communities. Journal of Ecology 97: 379-384.
14. Gaucherand, S., Liancourt, P. & Lavorel, S. 2006. Importance and intensity of competition along a fertility gradient and across species. Journal of Vegetation Science 17: 455-464.
15. Gaudet, C.L. & Keddy, P.A. 1988. A comparative approach to predicting competitive ability from plant traits. Nature 334: 242-243.
16. Goldberg, D.E. 1987. Neighborhood competition in an Old-Field Plant community. Ecology 68: 1211-1223.
17. Goldberg, D.E. 1990. Components of resource competition in plant communities. In: Grace, J.B. & Tilman, D. (eds.) Perspectives on plant competition. pp. 27-49. Academic Press, Sand Diego, CA, US.
18. Goldberg, D.E. 1996. Competitive ability: definitions, contingency and correlated traits. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society London B 351: 1377-1285.
19. Goldberg, D.E. & Fleetwood, L. 1987. Competitive effect and response in four annual plants. Journal of Ecology 75: 1131-1143.
20. Goldberg, D.E. & Landa, K. 1991. Competitive effect and response: hierarchies and correlated traits in the early stages of competition. Journal of Ecology 79: 1013-1030.
21. Goldberg, D.E. & Scheiner, S.M. 1993. ANOVA and ANCOVA: field competition experiments. In: Scheiner, S.M. & Gurevich, J. (eds.) Design and analysis of ecological experiments. pp. 77-98. Oxford University Press, New York, NY, US.
22. Goldberg, D.E. & Werner, P.A. 1983. Equivalence of competitors in plant communities: a null hypothesis and a field experimental approach. American Journal of Botany 70: 1098-1104.
23. Goldberg, D.E., Rajaniemi, T., Gurevitch, J. & Stewart-Oaten, A. 1999. Empirical approaches to quantifying interaction intensity: competition and facilitation along productivity gradients. Ecology 80: 1118-1131.
24. Grace, J. 1991. A clarification of the debate between Grime and Tilman. Functional Ecology 5: 583-587.
25. Grace, J.B. 1993. The effects of habitat productivity on competition intensity. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 8: 33-34.
26. Grace, J.B. 1995. On the measurement of plant competition intensity. Ecology 76: 305-308.
27. Grime, J.P. 1977. Evidence for the existence of three primary strategies in plants and its relevance to ecological and evolutionary theory. American Naturalist 111: 1169-1194.
28. Grime, J.P. 2001. Plant strategies, vegetation processes, and ecosystem properties. 2nd edn. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, Chichester.
29. Hendry, G.A.F. & Grime, J.P. 1993. Methods in comparative plant ecology: a laboratory manual. Chapman & Hall, London, UK.
30. Keddy, P.A. 2001. Competition. 2nd edn. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, NL.
31. Keddy, P.A., Fraser, L.H. & Wisheu, I.C. 1998. A comparative approach to examine competitive response of 48 wetland plant species. Journal of Vegetation Science 9: 777-786.
32. Kennett, G.A., Lacey, J.R., Butt, C.A., Olson-Rutz, K. & Haferkamp, M.R. 1992. Effects of defoliation, shading and competition on spotted knapweed and bluebunch wheatgrass. Journal of Range Management 45: 363-369.
33. Markham, J.H. & Chanway, C.P. 1996. Measuring plant neighbour effects. Functional Ecology 10: 548-549.
34. Miller, T.E. 1996. On quantifying the intensity of competition across gradients. Ecology 77: 978-981.
35. Miller, T.E., Burns, J.H., Munguia, P., Walters, E.L., Kneitel, J.M., Richards, P.M., Mouquet, N. & Buckley, H.L. 2005. A critical review of twenty years' use of the resource-ratio theory. American Naturalist 165: 439-448.
36. Miller, T.E., Burns, J.H., Munguia, P., Walters, E.L., Kneitel, J.M., Richards, P.M., Mouquet, N. & Buckley, H.L. 2007. Evaluating support for the resource-ratio hypothesis: a reply to Wilson et al. American Naturalist 169: 707-708.
37. Oksanen, L., Sammul, M. & Mägi, M. 2006. On the indices of plant-plant competition and their pitfalls. Oikos 112: 149-155.
38. Olofsson, J., Moen, J. & Oksanen, L. 2002. Effects of herbivory on competition intensity in two arctic-alpine tundra communities with different productivity. Oikos 96: 265-272.
39. Sammul, M., Kull, K., Oksanen, L. & Veromann, P. 2000. Competition intensity and its importance: results of field experiments with Anthoxanthum odoratum. Oecologia 125: 18-25.
40. Schwinning, S. & Weiner, J. 1998. Mechanisms determining the degree of size asymmetry in competition among plants. Oecologia 113: 447-455.
41. Thompson, K. 1987. The resource ratio hypothesis and the meaning of competition. Functional Ecology 1: 297-303.
42. Tilman, D. 1982. Resource competition and community structure. Princeton University Press, Princeton.
43. Tilman, D. 1985. The resource-ratio hypothesis of plant succession. American Naturalist 125: 827-852.
44. Tilman, D. 1988. Plant strategies and the dynamics and structure of plant communities. Princeton University Press, Princeton.
45. Turkington, R., Klein, E. & Chanway, C.P. 1993. Interaction effects of nutrients and disturbance: an experimental test of plant strategy theory. Ecology 74: 863-878.
46. Vujnovic, K., Wein, R.W. & Dale, M.R.T. 2000. Factors determining the centrifugal organization of remnant Festuca grassland communities in Alberta. Journal of Vegetation Science 11: 127-134.
47. Weigelt, A. & Jolliffe, P. 2003. Indices of plant competition. Journal of Ecology 91: 707-720.
48. Welden, C.W. & Slauson, W.L. 1986. The intensity of competition versus its importance: an overlooked distinction and some implications. The Quarterly Review of Biology 61: 23-44.
49. Welden, C.W., Slauson, W.L. & Ward, R.T. 1988. Competition and abiotic stress among trees and shrubs in northwest Colorado. Ecology 69: 1566-1577.
50. Willms, W.D. & Fraser, J. 1992. Growth characteristics of rough fescue (Festuca scabrella var. campestris) after three years of repeated harvesting at scheduled frequencies and heights. Canadian Journal of Botany 70: 2125-2129.
51. Wilson, J.B. & 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.
52. * concept? A comment on Miller et al. American Naturalist 169: 700-706.
53. Wilson, M.V. 2007. Measuring the components of competition along productivity gradients. Journal of Ecology 95: 301-308.
54. Wilson, S.D. & Keddy, P.A. 1986. Measuring diffuse competition along an environmental gradient: results from a shoreline plant community. American Naturalist 127: 862-869.
55. Wilson, S.D. & Tilman, D. 1995. Competitive responses of eight old-field plant species in four environments. Ecology 76: 1169-1180.