View Item 

Show simple item record

Experimental Ramet Aggregation In The Clonal Plant Agrostis Stolonifera Reduces Its Competitive Ability

dc.contributor.authorLenssen, John P. M.en_US
dc.contributor.authorHershock, Chaden_US
dc.contributor.authorSpeek, Tanjaen_US
dc.contributor.authorDuring, Heinjo J.en_US
dc.contributor.authorde Kroon, Hansen_US
dc.date.accessioned2016-02-01T18:50:09Z
dc.date.available2016-02-01T18:50:09Z
dc.date.issued2005-05en_US
dc.identifier.citationLenssen, John P. M.; Hershock, Chad; Speek, Tanja; During, Heinjo J.; de Kroon, Hans (2005). "Experimental Ramet Aggregation In The Clonal Plant Agrostis Stolonifera Reduces Its Competitive Ability." Ecology 86(5): 1358-1365.en_US
dc.identifier.issn0012-9658en_US
dc.identifier.issn1939-9170en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/117189
dc.publisherEcological Society of Americaen_US
dc.publisherWiley Periodicals, Inc.en_US
dc.subject.othercompetition–colonization trade-offen_US
dc.subject.otherfloodingen_US
dc.subject.otherphenotypic manipulationen_US
dc.subject.otherspatial patternen_US
dc.subject.otherdisturbanceen_US
dc.titleExperimental Ramet Aggregation In The Clonal Plant Agrostis Stolonifera Reduces Its Competitive Abilityen_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 Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48109 USAen_US
dc.contributor.affiliationotherDepartment of Ecology, Radboud University Nijmegen, Toernooiveld 1, 6525 ED Nijmegen, The Netherlandsen_US
dc.contributor.affiliationotherDepartment of Plant Ecology, F.A.F.C. Went Building, P.O. Box 800.84, NL-3508 TB Utrecht, The Netherlandsen_US
dc.description.bitstreamurlhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/117189/1/ecy20058651358.pdf
dc.identifier.doi10.1890/04-0939en_US
dc.identifier.sourceEcologyen_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSchmid, B., and J. L. Harper. 1985. Clonal growth in grassland perennials. I. Density and pattern-dependent competition between plants with different growth forms. Journal of Ecology 73: 793 – 808.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferencede Kroon, H., and J. van Groenendael. 1997. The ecology and evolution of clonal plants. Backhuys Publishers, Leiden, the Netherlands.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceFahrig, L., D. P. Coffin, W. K. Lauenroth, and H. S. Shugart. 1994. The advantage of long-distance clonal spreading in highly disturbed habitats. Evolutionary Ecology 8: 172 – 187.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceFischer, M., and M. van Kleunen. 2002. On the evolution of clonal plant life histories. Evolutionary Ecology 15: 565 – 582.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceGoldberg, D. E. 1990. Components of resource competition in plant communities. Pages 27–49 in J. B. Grace and D. Tilman, editors. Perspectives on plant competition. Academic Press, San Diego, California, USA.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceGrace, J. B., J. Keough, and G. R. Guntenspergen. 1992. Size bias in traditional analyses of substitutive competition experiments. Oecologia 90: 429 – 434.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceHumphrey, L. D., and D. A. Pyke. 1998. Demographic and growth responses of a guerilla and a phalanx perennial grass in competitive mixtures. Journal of Ecology 86: 854 – 865.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceLaw, R., T. Herben, and U. Dieckmann. 1997. Non-manipulative estimates of competition coefficients in a montane grassland community. Journal of Ecology 85: 505 – 517.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceLenssen, J. P. M., H. M. van de Steeg, and H. de Kroon. 2004. Does disturbance favour weak competitors? Mechanisms of changing plant abundance after flooding. Journal of Vegetation Science 15: 303 – 312.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMurrell, D., D. Purves, and R. Law. 2002. Intraspecific aggregation and species coexistence—response from Murrell, Purves and Law. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 17: 211.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceNeuhauser, C., and S. W. Pacala. 1999. An explicitly spatial version of the Lotka-Volterra model with interspecific competition. Annals of Applied Probability 9: 1226 – 1259.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceNorusis, M. J. 1999. SPSS for Windows. Release 10.0. SPSS, Chicago, Illinois, USA.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferencePineda-Krch, M., and A. G. B. Poore. 2004. Spatial interactions within modular organisms: genetic heterogeneity and organism fitness. Theoretical Population Biology 66: 25 – 36.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceRees, M., P. J. Grubb, and D. Kelly. 1996. Quantifying the impact of competition and spatial heterogeneity on the structure and dynamics of a four-species guild of winter annuals. American Naturalist 147: 1 – 32.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceRejmanek, M. 2002. Intraspecific aggregation and species coexistence. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 17: 209 – 210.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSackville Hamilton, N. R. 1994. Replacement and additive designs for plant competition studies? Journal of Applied Ecology 31: 599 – 603.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceShmida, A., and S. Ellner. 1984. Coexistence of plant species with similar niches. Vegetatio 58: 29 – 55.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSilvertown, J., C. E. M. Lines, and M. P. Dale. 1994. Spatial competition between grasses: rates of mutual invasion between four species and the interaction with grazing. Journal of Ecology 82: 31 – 38.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSokal, R. R., and F. J. Rohlf. 1995. Biometry, the principles and practice of statistics in biological research. Third edition. Freeman, San Francisco, California, USA.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceStoll, P., and D. Prati. 2001. Intraspecific aggregation alters competitive interactions in experimental plant communities. Ecology 82: 319 – 327.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSykora, K. V., E. Scheper, and F. van der Zee. 1988. Inundation and the distribution of plant-communities on Dutch river dikes. Acta Botanica Neerlandica 37: 279 – 290.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceTilman, D. 1994. Competition and biodiversity in spatially structured habitats. Ecology 75: 2 – 16.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceUpton, G. J. G., and B. Fingleton. 1985. Spatial data analysis by example. Volume I. Point pattern and quantitative data. Wiley, Chicester, UK.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferencevan der Hoeven, E. C., H. de Kroon, and H. J. During. 1990. Fine-scale spatial distribution of leaves and shoots of two chalk grassland perennials. Vegetatio 86: 151 – 160.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferencevan Eck, W. H. J. M., H. M. van de Steeg, C. W. P. M. Blom, and H. de Kroon. 2004. Is tolerance to summer flooding correlated with distribution patterns in river floodplains? A comparative study of 20 terrestrial grassland species. Oikos 107: 393 – 405.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceWinkler, E., M. Fischer, and B. Schmid. 1999. Modeling the competitiveness of clonal plants by complementary analytical and simulation approaches. Oikos 85: 217 – 233.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceAckerly, D. D., S. A. Dudley, S. E. Sultan, J. Schmitt, J. S. Coleman, C. Randall Linder, D. R. Sandquist, M. A. Geber, A. S. Evans, T. E. Dawson, and M. J. Lechowicz. 2000. The evolution of plant ecophysiological traits: recent advances and future directions. BioScience 50: 979 – 995.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBolker, B. M., and W. S. Pacala. 1999. Spatial moment equations for plant competition: understanding spatial strategies and the advantages of short dispersal. American Naturalist 153: 575 – 602.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBolker, B. M., W. S. Pacala, and C. Neuhauser. 2003. Spatial dynamics in model plant communities: what do we really know? American Naturalist 162: 135 – 148.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceCheplick, G. P. 1997. Responses to severe competitive stress in a clonal plant: differences between genotypes. Oikos 79: 581 – 591.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceCheplick, G. P., and C. M. Gutierrez. 2000. Clonal growth and storage in relation to competition in genets of the rhizomatous perennial Amphibromus scabrivalvis. Canadian Journal of Botany 78: 536 – 546.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferencede Kroon, H., T. Hara, and R. Kwant. 1992. Size hierarchies of shoots and clones in clonal herb monocultures: do clonal and non-clonal plants compete differently? Oikos 63: 410 – 419.en_US
dc.owningcollnameInterdisciplinary and Peer-Reviewed


Files in this item

Name:
ecy20058651358.pdf
Size:
281.1KB
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.