The space-use strategy of plants with different growth forms, in a field experiment with manipulated nutrients and light

Lepik, Mari; Liira, Jaan; Zobel, Kristjan

doi:10.1007/bf02805241

Cited by 13 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 34 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This is opposite to the prediction by Weiner and Thomas (1986) that the availability of light is more important for allocation than nutrients. Biomass partitioning did not respond to added light and nutrients in the study of Lepik et al (2004). Our results also differ from Müller et al (2000), who found in an experiment with 27 herbaceous species on two levels of nutrients that changes in root-to-shoot ratios were due to allometry of growth rather than phenotypic plasticity.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 84%

“…The result agrees with an experiment with birch seedlings (Porthsmuth and Niinemets 2006) but contrasts with an experiment on an Estonian grassland, where supplemental light increased biomass but fertilization did not (Lepik et al 2004). In our results, also shootto-root allocation was primarily determined by the availability of nutrients, and only secondly by the availability of light, as was also the case in Porthsmuth and Niinemets (2006).…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 46%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Dynamics of biomass partitioning in two competing meadow plant species

2009

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The optimal allocation theory predicts that growth is allocated between the shoot and the roots so that the uptake of the most limiting resource is increased. Allocation is dynamic due to resource depletion, interaction with competitors, and the allometry of growth. We assessed the effects of intraand inter-specific competition on growth and resource allocation of the meadow species Ranunculus acris and Agrostis capillaris, grown in environments with high (?) or low (-) availability of light (L) and nutrients (N). We took samples twice a week over the 7 weeks experiment, to follow the changes in root-toshoot ratios in plants of different sizes, and carried out a larger scale harvest at the end of the experiment. Of all the tested factors, availability of nutrients had the largest effect on the growth rate and shoot-to-root allocation in both species, although both competition and light had significant effects as well. The highest root-to-shoot ratios were measured from the L?Ntreatment, and the lowest from the L-N? treatment, as predicted by the optimal allocation theory.Competition changed resource allocation, but not always toward acquiring the resource that is most limiting to growth. We thus conclude that the greatest variation in shoot-to-root allocation was due to the resource availability and the effects of competition were small, probably due to low density of plants in the experiment.

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 84%

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 46%

Dynamics of biomass partitioning in two competing meadow plant species

2009

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…changing a trait value either led to a few large ramets connected by short rhizomes or to many small ramets connected by long rhizomes. A similar tradeoff between ramet size and short‐distance colonization ability has often been observed in field experiments with clonal plants (Huber and Wiggerman 1997, Stuefer et al 2002, Lepik et al 2004). Such tradeoffs are likely to be generated by traits that affect how the plant distributes resource within the clonal fragment, but do not strongly alter the total amount of resource available to the plant.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 68%

Architectural and growth traits differ in effects on performance of clonal plants: an analysis using a field‐parameterized simulation model

Wildová¹,

Gough²,

Herben³

et al. 2007

Oikos

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Individual traits are often assumed to be linked in a straightforward manner to plant performance and processes such as population growth, competition and community dynamics. However, because no trait functions in isolation in an organism, the effect of any one trait is likely to be at least somewhat contingent on other trait values. Thus, to the extent that the suite of trait values differs among species, the magnitude and even direction of correlation between values of any particular trait and performance is likely to differ among species. Working with a group of clonal plant species, we assessed the degree of this contingency and therefore the extent to which the assumption of simple and general linkages between traits and performance is valid. To do this, we parameterized a highly calibrated, spatially explicit, individual-based model of clonal plant population dynamics and then manipulated one trait at a time in the context of realistic values of other traits for each species. The model includes traits describing growth, resource allocation, response to competition, as well as architectural traits that determine spatial spread. The model was parameterized from a short-term (3 month) experiment and then validated with a separate, longer term (two year) experiment for six clonal wetland sedges, Carex lasiocarpa, Carex sterilis, Carex stricta, Cladium mariscoides, Scirpus acutus and Scirpus americanus . These plants all co-occur in fens in southeastern Michigan and represent a spectrum of clonal growth forms from strong clumpers to runners with long rhizomes.Varying growth, allocation and competition traits produced the largest and most uniform responses in population growth among species, while variation in architectural traits produced responses that were smaller and more variable among species. This is likely due to the fact that growth and competition traits directly affect mean ramet size and number of ramets, which are direct components of population biomass. In contrast, architectural and allocation traits determine spatial distribution of biomass; in the long run, this also affects population size, but its net effect is more likely to be mediated by other traits. Such differences in how traits affect plant performance are likely to have implications for interspecific interactions and community structure, as well as on the interpretation and usefulness of single trait optimality models.Species traits are general, genetically determined characteristics of morphology and physiology. Such traits are often used in ecology to group species; these groups are then used to explain and predict community structure and dynamics (Grime et al.

show abstract

“…Rosette species, lacking a leafy stem, are unable to increase their above‐ground biomass with fertilization in grasslands (Lepik et al. ), and are inferior competitors in these conditions. Large leaf area is advantageous in light competition under a dense canopy (Poorter & Remkes ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…These traits are probably related to competitive response; hence, species with a low tolerance to competitive suppression are lost. Rosette species, lacking a leafy stem, are unable to increase their above-ground biomass with fertilization in grasslands (Lepik et al 2004), and are inferior competitors in these conditions. Large leaf area is advantageous in light competition under a dense canopy (Poorter & Remkes 1990).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Functional and phylogenetic community assembly linked to changes in species diversity in a long‐term resource manipulation experiment

Gerhold

Price

Püssa

et al. 2013

J Vegetation Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Question There are contrasting opinions about how communities assemble along a productivity gradient, particularly in relation to competitive interactions. One view is that functionally similar, and closely related species, are less likely to co‐exist (limiting similarity). Alternatively, competitive exclusion may act on dissimilar species because species bearing traits associated with low competitive ability are excluded (weaker competitor exclusion). We ask if patterns of functional and phylogenetic diversity are related to changes in species diversity in response to fertility manipulations. Location Species‐rich mesophytic grassland in Estonia. Methods The grassland has been manipulated from 2002 to 2011 to increase (fertilizer addition) and decrease productivity (sucrose addition) in small‐scale (50 cm × 50 cm) plots. We linked annual increases and decreases in species diversity to changes in functional and phylogenetic diversity. We used abundance‐weighted mean pair‐wise functional or phylogenetic distance of all possible species pairs. Results We found convergence in four traits (plant height, leaf distribution, lateral spread, type of reproduction) and a decrease in mean functional and phylogenetic diversity, in support of weaker competitor exclusion or habitat filtering. There was less support for limiting similarity, with divergence found for two traits associated with decreasing species diversity (leaf distribution in the sucrose treatment and lateral spread in the fertilizer treatment). Conclusions Our results support the view that competition can lead to the exclusion of weaker competitors, rather than increasing functional and phylogenetic diversity, as expected from the principle of limiting similarity. However, multiple assembly processes, which are generally seen as mutually exclusive, are operating simultaneously, albeit on different traits and at different stages of community assembly.

show abstract

The space-use strategy of plants with different growth forms, in a field experiment with manipulated nutrients and light

Cited by 13 publications

References 34 publications

Dynamics of biomass partitioning in two competing meadow plant species

Dynamics of biomass partitioning in two competing meadow plant species

Architectural and growth traits differ in effects on performance of clonal plants: an analysis using a field‐parameterized simulation model

Functional and phylogenetic community assembly linked to changes in species diversity in a long‐term resource manipulation experiment

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About