View Item 

Show simple item record

The Economics Of Mutualisms: Optimal Utilization Of Mycorrhizal Mutualistic Partners By Plants

dc.contributor.authorKummel, Miroslaven_US
dc.contributor.authorSalant, Stephen W.en_US
dc.date.accessioned2016-02-01T18:49:04Z
dc.date.available2016-02-01T18:49:04Z
dc.date.issued2006-04en_US
dc.identifier.citationKummel, Miroslav; Salant, Stephen W. (2006). "The Economics Of Mutualisms: Optimal Utilization Of Mycorrhizal Mutualistic Partners By Plants." Ecology 87(4): 892-902.en_US
dc.identifier.issn0012-9658en_US
dc.identifier.issn1939-9170en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/117073
dc.publisherEcological Society of Americaen_US
dc.publisherWiley Periodicals, Inc.en_US
dc.subject.otheroptimal choiceen_US
dc.subject.othermarginal costen_US
dc.subject.otherbiological marketen_US
dc.subject.otherpartner choiceen_US
dc.subject.othermutualismen_US
dc.subject.othermycorrhizaeen_US
dc.titleThe Economics Of Mutualisms: Optimal Utilization Of Mycorrhizal Mutualistic Partners By Plantsen_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.contributor.affiliationumDepartment of Economics, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48109 USAen_US
dc.contributor.affiliationotherDepartment of Environmental Science, Colorado College, Colorado Springs, Colorado 80907 USAen_US
dc.description.bitstreamurlhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/117073/1/ecy2006874892.pdf
dc.identifier.doi10.1890/0012-9658(2006)87[892:TEOMOU]2.0.CO;2en_US
dc.identifier.sourceEcologyen_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSachs, J. L., U. G. Mueller, T. P. Wilcox, and J. J. Bull. 2004. The evolution of cooperation. Quarterly Review of Biology 79 2 135 – 160.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceFischer, M. K., K. H. Hoffmann, and W. Volkl. 2001. Competition for mutualists in an ant–homopteran interaction mediated by hierarchies of ant attendance. Oikos 92: 531 – 541.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceHoeksema, J. D., and M. Kummel. 2003. Ecological persistence of the plant–mycorrhizal mutualism: a hypothesis from species coexistence theory. American Naturalist 162: S40 – S50.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceJanos, D. P. 1985. Mycorrhizal fungi: agents of symptoms of tropical community composition? Pages 98 – 103 in R. Molina, editor. Proceedings of the sixth North American conference on mycorrhizae Forest Research Laboratory, Corvallis, Oregon, USA.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceJanzen, D. H. 1985. The natural history of mutualism. Pages 40 – 99 in D. H. Boucher, editor. The biology of mutualism Oxford University Press, New York, New York, USA.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceJones, M. D., D. M. Durall, and P. B. Tinker. 1991. Fluxes of carbon and phosphorus between symbionts in willow ectomycorrhizas. New Phytologist 119: 99 – 106.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceJones, M. D., D. M. Durall, and P. B. Tinker. 1998. Comparison of arbuscular and ectomycorrhizal Eucalyptus coccifera. New Phytologist 140: 125 – 134.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceKiers, T. E., R. A. Rousseau, S. A. West, and R. F. Denison. 2003. Host sanctions and the legume–rhizobium mutualism. Nature 425: 78 – 81.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceKnowlton, N., and F. Rohwer. 2003. Multispecies microbial mutualisms on coral reefs: the host as a habitat. American Naturalist 162: S51 – S62.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceKoide, R., and G. Elliot. 1989. Cost, benefit and efficiency of the vesicular arbuscular mycorrhizal symbiosis. Functional Ecology 3: 252 – 255.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceKytoviita, M. M. 2005. Role of nutrient level and defoliation on symbiotic function: experimental evidence by tracing C-14/N-15 exchange in mycorrhizal birch seedlings. Mycorrhiza 15 1 65 – 70.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceNoë, R. 1990. A veto game played by baboons—a challenge to the use of the prisoners dilemma as a paradigm for reciprocity and cooperation. Animal Behaviour 39: 78 – 90.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceNoë, R., and P. Hammerstein. 1994. Biological markets: supply and demand determine the effect of partner choice in cooperation, mutualism, and mating. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 35: 1 – 11.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSalant, S. W., K. L. Kalat, and A. Wheatcroft. 1995. Deducing implications of fitness maximization when a trade-off exists among alternative currencies. Behavioral Ecology 6: 424 – 434.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSchwartz, M. W., and J. D. Hoeksema. 1998. Specialization and resource trade: biological markets as a model of mutualisms. Ecology 79: 1029 – 1038.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSmith, S. E., and D. Read. 1997. Mycorrhizal symbiosis Academic Press, New York, New York, USA.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceStanton, M. L. 2003. Interacting guilds: moving beyond the pair-wise perspective on mutualisms. American Naturalist 162: S10 – S23.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceTinker, P. B., D. M. Durall, and M. D. Jones. 1994. Carbon use efficiency in mycorrhizas: theory and sample calculations. New Phytologist 128: 115 – 122.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceToumi, J., M. M. Kytoviita, and R. Hardling. 2001. Cost efficiency of nutrient acquisition and the advantage of mycorrhizal symbiosis for the host plant. Oikos 92: 62 – 70.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceVarian, H. 1992. Microeconomic analysis W.W. Norton, New York, New York, USA.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceVisick, K. L., J. Foster, J. Doino, M. McFall-Ngai, and E. G. Ruby. 2000. Vibrio fischeri lux genes play an important role in colonization and development of the host light organ. Journal of Bacteriology 182 16 4578 – 4586.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceWest, S. A., E. T. Kiers, and E. L. Simms. 2002. Sanctions and mutualism stability: why do rhizobia fix nitrogen? Proceedings of the Royal Society of London Series B-Biological Sciences 269: 685 – 694.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceWu, B., K. Nara, and T. Hogetsu. 1999. Competition between ectomycorrhizal fungi colonizing Pinus densiflora. Mycorrhiza 9: 151 – 159.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceAxelrod, R., and W. D. Hamilton. 1981. The evolution of cooperation. Science 211: 1390 – 1396.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBronstein, J. L. 1994. Our current understanding of mutualisms. Quarterly Review of Biology 69 1 31 – 51.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBronstein, J. L., W. G. Wilson, and W. F. Morris. 2003. Ecological dynamics of mutualist/antagonist communities. American Naturalist 162: S24 – S39.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBshary, R. S., and J. L. Bronstein. 2004. Game structures in mutualisms: what can the evidence tell us about the kinds of models we need? Advances in the Study of Behavior 34: 59 – 104.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBull, J. J., and W. R. Rice. 1991. Distinguishing mechanisms for the evolution of cooperation Journal of Theoretical Biology 149 1):63–74.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceCallaway, R. M., S. C. Pennings, and C. L. Richards. 2003. Phenotypic plasticity and interactions among plants. Ecology 84: 1115 – 1128.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceDawkins R. 1976. The selfish gene Oxford University Press, New York, New York, USA.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceDenison, R. F. 2000. Legume sanctions and the evolution of symbiotic cooperation by rhizobia. American Naturalist 156 6 567 – 576.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceDenison, R. F., C. Bledsoe, M. Kahn, F. O'Gara, E. L. Simms, and L. S. Thomashow. 2003. Cooperation in the rhizosphere and the “free rider” problem. Ecology 84: 838 – 845.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceEshel, I., and L. L. Cavallisforza. 1982. Assortment of encounters and evolution of cooperativeness. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (USA) 79: 1331 – 1335.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceFerriere, R., J. L. Bronstein, S. Rinaldi, R. Law, and M. Gauduchon. 2002. Cheating and the evolutionary stability of mutualisms. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B 269: 773 – 780.en_US
dc.owningcollnameInterdisciplinary and Peer-Reviewed


Files in this item

Name:
ecy2006874892.pdf
Size:
143.8KB
Format:
PDF
View/Open

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.