Can we predict performance and spatial structure of two-species mixtures using only single species information from monocultures?

Ecological Modelling

Volumn 234, Issue , 2012, Pages 31-37

  Yu, Fei Hai ^a   Herben, Tomáš ^b,c   Wildová, Radka ^b,d   Hershock, Chad ^d   Goldberg, Deborah E ^d  

^a BEIJING FORESTRY UNIVERSITY   (China)

^b INSTITUTE OF BOTANY   (Czech Republic)

^c CHARLES UNIVERSITY   (Czech Republic)

^d UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN   (United States)

Author keywords

Clonal growth model; Clonal plants; Clumpers; Competition; Runners; Wetland plants

Indexed keywords

CLONAL GROWTH; CLONAL PLANTS; CLUMPERS; RUNNERS; WETLAND PLANTS;

CLONE CELLS; COMPETITION; ECOLOGY; PARAMETERIZATION; VIRTUAL REALITY;

MIXTURES;

BIOMASS; CALIBRATION; CLONAL ORGANISM; ECOLOGICAL MODELING; GARDEN; GROWING SEASON; GROWTH MODELING; INTERSPECIFIC COMPETITION; MONOCULTURE; PARAMETERIZATION; PREDICTION; SEDGE; SPATIAL ANALYSIS; WETLAND;

CAREX; ELAGATIS;

EID: 84860596117     PISSN: 03043800     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2011.05.036     Document Type: Article

References (36)

1. Austin M.P. Use of a relative physiological performance value in the prediction of performance in multispecies mixtures from monoculture performance. J. Ecol. 1982, 70:559-570.
2. Damgaard C., Weiner J. Modelling the growth of individuals in crowded plant populations. J. Plant Ecol. 2008, 1:111-116.
3. de Kroon H., Hutchings M.J. Morphological plasticity in clonal plants: the foraging concept reconsidered. J. Ecol. 1995, 83:143-152.
4. Gaudet C.L., Keddy P.A. A comparative approach to predicting compeitive ability from plant traits. Nature 1988, 334:242-243.
5. Goldberg D.E. Neighborhood competition in an old-field plant community. Ecology 1987, 68:1211-1223.
6. Goldberg D.E. Influence of competition at the community level: an experimental version of the null models approach. Ecology 1994, 75:1503-1506.
7. Goldberg D.E. Competitive ability: definitions, contingency and correlated traits. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B 1996, 351:1377-1385.
8. Goldberg D.E., Estabrook G.F. Separating the effects of number of individuals sampled and competition on species diversity: an experimental and analytic approach. J. Ecol. 1998, 86:983-988.
9. Goldberg D.E., Turkington R., Olsvig-Whittaker L. Quantifying the community-level consequences of competition. Folia Geobot. Phytotax. 1995, 30:231-242.
10. Goldberg D.E., Werner P.A. Equivalence of competitors in plant communities: a null hypothesis and a field experimental approach. Am. J. Bot. 1983, 70:1098-1104.
11. Gough L., Goldberg D.E., Hershock C., Pauliukonis N., Petru M. Investigating the community consequences of competition among clonal plants. Evol. Ecol. 2001, 15:547-563.
12. Grime J.P. Plant Strategies, Vegetation Processes, and Ecosystem Proporties 2001, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., Chichester.
13. Herben T. Physiological integration affects growth form and competitive ability in clonal plants. Evol. Ecol. 2004, 18:493-520.
14. Herben T., Hara T. Competition and spatial dynamics of clonal plants. The Ecology and Evolution of Clonal Plants 1997, 331-357. Backhuys Publishers, Leiden. H. de Kroon, J. van Groenendael (Eds.).
15. Herben T., Suzuki J.-I. A simulation study of the effects of architectural constraints and resource translocation on population structure and competition in clonal plants. Evol. Ecol. 2001, 15:403-423.
16. Hershock, C., 2002. Plant community structure in calcareous pearlands (fens): effects of competition, soil environment, and clonal architecture. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI.
17. Hubbell S.B. The Unified Neutral Theory of Bidiversity and Biogeography 2001, Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ.
18. Humphrey L.D., Pyke D. Demographic and growth responses of a guerrilla and a phalanx perennial grass in competitive mixtures. J. Ecol. 1998, 86:854-865.
19. Ikegami M., Whigham D.F., Werger M.J.A. Responses of rhizome length and ramet production to resource availability in the clonal sedge Scirpus olneyi A. Gray. Plant Ecol. 2007, 189:247-259.
20. Keddy P., Fraser L.H., Wisheu I.C. A comparative approach to examine competitive response of 48 wetland plant species. J. Veg. Sci. 1998, 9:777-786.
21. Monzeglio U., Stoll P. Spatial patterns and species performances in experimental plant communities. Oecologia 2005, 145:619-628.
22. Monzeglio U., Stoll P. Effects of spatial pattern and relatedness in an expermental plant community. Evol. Ecol. 2008, 22:723-741.
23. Murrell D.J., Law R. Heteromyopia and the spatial coexistence of similar competitors. Ecol. Lett. 2003, 6:48-59.
24. Pacala S.W., Deutschman D.H. Details that matter: the spatial distribution of individual trees maintains forest ecosystem function. Oikos 1995, 74:357-365.
25. Rajaniemi T.K., Allison V.J., Goldberg D.E. Root competition can cause a decline in diversity with increased productivity. J. Ecol. 2003, 91:407-416.
26. Rees M., Grubb P.J., Kelly D. Quantifying the impact of competition and spatial heterogeneity on the structure and dynamics of a four-species guild of winter annuals. Am. Nat. 1996, 147:1-32.
27. Schmid B., Bazzaz F.A. Clonal integration and population structure in perennials: effects of severing rhizome connections. Ecology 1987, 68:2016-2022.
28. Stoll P., Prati D. Intraspecific aggregation alters competitive interactions in experimental plant communities. Ecology 2001, 82:319-322.
29. Tilman D. Resource Competition and Community Structure 1982, Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ.
30. Tilman D., Kareiva P. Spatial Ecology: The Role of Space in Population Dynamics and Interspecific Interactions 1997, Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ.
31. Turnbull L.A., Coomes D.A., Purves D.W., Rees M. How spatial structure alters population and community dynamics in a natural plant community. J. Ecol. 2007, 95:79-89.
32. Vogt D.R., Murrell D.J., Stoll P. Testing spatial theories of plant coexistence: no consistent differences in intra- and interspecific interaction distances. Am. Nat. 2010, 175:73-84.
33. Weiner J. A neighborhood model of annual plant interference. Ecology 1982, 65:1237-1241.
34. Weiner J., Muller-Landau H., Jasentuliyana A. The effects of density, spatial pattern, and competitive symmetry on size variation in simulated plant populations. Am. Nat. 2001, 158:438-450.
35. Wildová R., Gough L., Herben T., Hershock C., Goldberg D.E. Architectural and growth traits differ in effects on performance of clonal plants: an analysis using a field-parameterized simulation model. Oikos 2007, 116:836-852.
36. Zamfir M., Goldberg D.E. The effect of initial density on interactions between bryophytes at individual and community levels. J. Ecol. 2000, 88:243-255.