Show simple item record

Patterns and mechanisms of conspecific and heterospecific interactions in a dry perennial grassland

dc.contributor.authorFarrer, Emily C.en_US
dc.contributor.authorGoldberg, Deborah E.en_US
dc.date.accessioned2011-01-31T17:44:26Z
dc.date.available2012-03-05T15:30:01Zen_US
dc.date.issued2011-01en_US
dc.identifier.citationFarrer, Emily C.; Goldberg, Deborah E.; (2011). "Patterns and mechanisms of conspecific and heterospecific interactions in a dry perennial grassland." Journal of Ecology 99(1): 265-276. <http://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/79241>en_US
dc.identifier.issn0022-0477en_US
dc.identifier.issn1365-2745en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/79241
dc.description.abstract1. Models of local stable coexistence require negative feedbacks, i.e. intraspecific interactions must be more negative than interspecific interactions. However, most competition experiments, often done in the glasshouse, have found evidence for competitive hierarchies. Measurement of interactions under realistic field conditions is necessary to assess their contribution to community dynamics, and explicit measurement of intermediaries thought to be important in interactions may allow studies to account for any variation in experimental results. 2. In this study, we compare conspecific and heterospecific interactions in a field experiment in a dry sand prairie in Michigan. We study the four dominant species at two different stages, germination and adult growth. Using seed addition and adult transplant experiments, we ask whether plants perform best in natural field monocultures of conspecifics, heterospecifics or no neighbour plots. We also measure abiotic environmental characteristics associated with each neighbourhood type and test whether performance can be explained by environmental effects. We hypothesize that plants will create competitive hierarchies because our experimental design is similar to classic competition experiments. 3. Neighbour species created consistent hierarchies in their effects on germination of all four target species, which is likely due to light limitation. However, interestingly, adult plant biomass for two of the three species (one species did not survive) was lower in conspecific monocultures compared to heterospecific or no neighbour plots, thus producing negative feedbacks. For two species, the effects of neighbours on adult growth are likely due to reduction of light and soil nitrate; for the third, however, resources could not explain the pattern that conspecific interactions were more negative than heterospecific. 4. Synthesis. These results suggest that patterns in the relative strength of conspecific and heterospecific competition depend on life-history stage. Moreover, resource uptake could explain some, but not all, of the interactions among species, suggesting that other factors such as microbial communities or other forms of niche partitioning may play a role and that field experiments are necessary to gauge their relative importance.en_US
dc.format.extent503089 bytes
dc.format.extent3106 bytes
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.format.mimetypetext/plain
dc.publisherBlackwell Publishing Ltden_US
dc.subject.otherCoexistenceen_US
dc.subject.otherCompetitionen_US
dc.subject.otherCompetitive Hierarchyen_US
dc.subject.otherFacilitationen_US
dc.subject.otherGerminationen_US
dc.subject.otherIntraspecific vs. Interspecific Interactionsen_US
dc.subject.otherPlant-soil Feedbacksen_US
dc.titlePatterns and mechanisms of conspecific and heterospecific interactions in a dry perennial grasslanden_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.rights.robotsIndexNoFollowen_US
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevelEcology and Evolutionary Biologyen_US
dc.subject.hlbtoplevelScienceen_US
dc.description.peerreviewedPeer Revieweden_US
dc.description.bitstreamurlhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/79241/1/j.1365-2745.2010.01734.x.pdf
dc.identifier.doi10.1111/j.1365-2745.2010.01734.xen_US
dc.identifier.sourceJournal of Ecologyen_US
dc.owningcollnameInterdisciplinary and Peer-Reviewed


Files in this item

Show simple item record

Remediation of Harmful Language

The University of Michigan Library aims to describe library materials in a way that respects the people and communities who create, use, and are represented in our collections. Report harmful or offensive language in catalog records, finding aids, or elsewhere in our collections anonymously through our metadata feedback form. More information at Remediation of Harmful Language.

Accessibility

If you are unable to use this file in its current format, please select the Contact Us link and we can modify it to make it more accessible to you.