Patterns of consequences of interspecific competition in natural communities: a review of field experiments with plants

We present a quantitative literature review to assess the extent to which field experiments with plants have addressed questions about patterns of competition over time and space, consequences of competition for community structure, and comparisons of competitive ability among species. We outline th...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:The American naturalist 1992-04, Vol.139 (4), p.771-801
Hauptverfasser: Goldberg, Deborah E., Barton, Andrew M.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 801
container_issue 4
container_start_page 771
container_title The American naturalist
container_volume 139
creator Goldberg, Deborah E.
Barton, Andrew M.
description We present a quantitative literature review to assess the extent to which field experiments with plants have addressed questions about patterns of competition over time and space, consequences of competition for community structure, and comparisons of competitive ability among species. We outline the necessary treatment comparisons and statistical analyses to answer each question and then describe the number of experiments that meet these criteria and their results. Although we found a total of 101 experiments in 89 studies, 63% of these experiments only addressed whether competition significantly affected some component of individual fitness of a single species at a single time and site. Despite the limited data base to address more complex questions about competitive interactions, we did find consistent results for a few of the questions we reviewed. Where tested, competition always had significant effects on distribution patterns (five experiments), on relative abundances (two experiments), and on diversity (four experiments), consistent with the notion that competition has strong effects on community structure. On the other hand, intraspecific competition was not usually stronger than interspecific competition for either competitive effect (four experiments) or response (three experiments), which suggests that resource partitioning may not be an important mechanism of coexistence in plants.
doi_str_mv 10.1086/285357
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>jstor_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_16664881</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><jstor_id>2462621</jstor_id><sourcerecordid>2462621</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c353t-30c296a423ac0b63121ecd577b28dcefb53a084982a402ab0445da31a1e3f07d3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpdkd2KFDEQhYMoOI76BCINyt61Jqkk3e2dLLoKCwq6101NuqIZepI2STv69macZQWvUlXny6F-GHsq-CvBe_Na9hp0d49thIau1SDhPttwzqHlQnUP2aOc9zUd1KA37PgZS6EUchNdY2PI9GOlYOlv7kOV8kLWO2-relio-OJjqEoTsKwJ51P5sIZapvymwSbRT0_H02_naZ4a-rVQ8gcKJTdHX743y4w1fsweOJwzPbl9t-zm_buvlx_a609XHy_fXrcWNJQWuJWDQSUBLd8ZEFKQnXTX7WQ_WXI7Dch7NfQSFZe440rpCUGgIHC8m2DLLs6-S4p1slzGg8-W5toExTWPwhij-l5U8MV_4D6uKdTeRgG8B9CqN__sbIo5J3LjUofD9HsUfDxtfzxvv4Ivb-0wW5xdwmB9vqO1qly9z5Y9O2P7XGK6k6Uy0shTU8_PssM44rdUHW6-iGGQXNRTcgV_ANEwlsQ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1308335486</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Patterns of consequences of interspecific competition in natural communities: a review of field experiments with plants</title><source>Periodicals Index Online</source><source>Free E-Journal (出版社公開部分のみ)</source><source>JSTOR</source><creator>Goldberg, Deborah E. ; Barton, Andrew M.</creator><creatorcontrib>Goldberg, Deborah E. ; Barton, Andrew M. ; University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI</creatorcontrib><description>We present a quantitative literature review to assess the extent to which field experiments with plants have addressed questions about patterns of competition over time and space, consequences of competition for community structure, and comparisons of competitive ability among species. We outline the necessary treatment comparisons and statistical analyses to answer each question and then describe the number of experiments that meet these criteria and their results. Although we found a total of 101 experiments in 89 studies, 63% of these experiments only addressed whether competition significantly affected some component of individual fitness of a single species at a single time and site. Despite the limited data base to address more complex questions about competitive interactions, we did find consistent results for a few of the questions we reviewed. Where tested, competition always had significant effects on distribution patterns (five experiments), on relative abundances (two experiments), and on diversity (four experiments), consistent with the notion that competition has strong effects on community structure. On the other hand, intraspecific competition was not usually stronger than interspecific competition for either competitive effect (four experiments) or response (three experiments), which suggests that resource partitioning may not be an important mechanism of coexistence in plants.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0003-0147</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1537-5323</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1086/285357</identifier><identifier>CODEN: AMNTA4</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press</publisher><subject>Animal and plant ecology ; Animal, plant and microbial ecology ; Biological and medical sciences ; Biological competition ; Communities ; competencia biologica ; competition biologique ; Demecology ; Ecological competition ; evolucion ; evolution ; Forest ecology ; Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology ; Plant ecology ; plantas ; plante ; Plants ; Plants and fungi ; Population ecology ; Productivity ; Species ; Synecology</subject><ispartof>The American naturalist, 1992-04, Vol.139 (4), p.771-801</ispartof><rights>Copyright 1992 The University of Chicago</rights><rights>1992 INIST-CNRS</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c353t-30c296a423ac0b63121ecd577b28dcefb53a084982a402ab0445da31a1e3f07d3</citedby></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/2462621$$EPDF$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/2462621$$EHTML$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,803,27869,27924,27925,58017,58250</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&amp;idt=5428515$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Goldberg, Deborah E.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Barton, Andrew M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI</creatorcontrib><title>Patterns of consequences of interspecific competition in natural communities: a review of field experiments with plants</title><title>The American naturalist</title><description>We present a quantitative literature review to assess the extent to which field experiments with plants have addressed questions about patterns of competition over time and space, consequences of competition for community structure, and comparisons of competitive ability among species. We outline the necessary treatment comparisons and statistical analyses to answer each question and then describe the number of experiments that meet these criteria and their results. Although we found a total of 101 experiments in 89 studies, 63% of these experiments only addressed whether competition significantly affected some component of individual fitness of a single species at a single time and site. Despite the limited data base to address more complex questions about competitive interactions, we did find consistent results for a few of the questions we reviewed. Where tested, competition always had significant effects on distribution patterns (five experiments), on relative abundances (two experiments), and on diversity (four experiments), consistent with the notion that competition has strong effects on community structure. On the other hand, intraspecific competition was not usually stronger than interspecific competition for either competitive effect (four experiments) or response (three experiments), which suggests that resource partitioning may not be an important mechanism of coexistence in plants.</description><subject>Animal and plant ecology</subject><subject>Animal, plant and microbial ecology</subject><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Biological competition</subject><subject>Communities</subject><subject>competencia biologica</subject><subject>competition biologique</subject><subject>Demecology</subject><subject>Ecological competition</subject><subject>evolucion</subject><subject>evolution</subject><subject>Forest ecology</subject><subject>Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology</subject><subject>Plant ecology</subject><subject>plantas</subject><subject>plante</subject><subject>Plants</subject><subject>Plants and fungi</subject><subject>Population ecology</subject><subject>Productivity</subject><subject>Species</subject><subject>Synecology</subject><issn>0003-0147</issn><issn>1537-5323</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>1992</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>K30</sourceid><recordid>eNpdkd2KFDEQhYMoOI76BCINyt61Jqkk3e2dLLoKCwq6101NuqIZepI2STv69macZQWvUlXny6F-GHsq-CvBe_Na9hp0d49thIau1SDhPttwzqHlQnUP2aOc9zUd1KA37PgZS6EUchNdY2PI9GOlYOlv7kOV8kLWO2-relio-OJjqEoTsKwJ51P5sIZapvymwSbRT0_H02_naZ4a-rVQ8gcKJTdHX743y4w1fsweOJwzPbl9t-zm_buvlx_a609XHy_fXrcWNJQWuJWDQSUBLd8ZEFKQnXTX7WQ_WXI7Dch7NfQSFZe440rpCUGgIHC8m2DLLs6-S4p1slzGg8-W5toExTWPwhij-l5U8MV_4D6uKdTeRgG8B9CqN__sbIo5J3LjUofD9HsUfDxtfzxvv4Ivb-0wW5xdwmB9vqO1qly9z5Y9O2P7XGK6k6Uy0shTU8_PssM44rdUHW6-iGGQXNRTcgV_ANEwlsQ</recordid><startdate>19920401</startdate><enddate>19920401</enddate><creator>Goldberg, Deborah E.</creator><creator>Barton, Andrew M.</creator><general>University of Chicago Press</general><scope>FBQ</scope><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>ICWRT</scope><scope>K30</scope><scope>PAAUG</scope><scope>PAWHS</scope><scope>PAWZZ</scope><scope>PAXOH</scope><scope>PBHAV</scope><scope>PBQSW</scope><scope>PBYQZ</scope><scope>PCIWU</scope><scope>PCMID</scope><scope>PCZJX</scope><scope>PDGRG</scope><scope>PDWWI</scope><scope>PETMR</scope><scope>PFVGT</scope><scope>PGXDX</scope><scope>PIHIL</scope><scope>PISVA</scope><scope>PJCTQ</scope><scope>PJTMS</scope><scope>PLCHJ</scope><scope>PMHAD</scope><scope>PNQDJ</scope><scope>POUND</scope><scope>PPLAD</scope><scope>PQAPC</scope><scope>PQCAN</scope><scope>PQCMW</scope><scope>PQEME</scope><scope>PQHKH</scope><scope>PQMID</scope><scope>PQNCT</scope><scope>PQNET</scope><scope>PQSCT</scope><scope>PQSET</scope><scope>PSVJG</scope><scope>PVMQY</scope><scope>PZGFC</scope><scope>7SN</scope><scope>C1K</scope></search><sort><creationdate>19920401</creationdate><title>Patterns of consequences of interspecific competition in natural communities: a review of field experiments with plants</title><author>Goldberg, Deborah E. ; Barton, Andrew M.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c353t-30c296a423ac0b63121ecd577b28dcefb53a084982a402ab0445da31a1e3f07d3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>1992</creationdate><topic>Animal and plant ecology</topic><topic>Animal, plant and microbial ecology</topic><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Biological competition</topic><topic>Communities</topic><topic>competencia biologica</topic><topic>competition biologique</topic><topic>Demecology</topic><topic>Ecological competition</topic><topic>evolucion</topic><topic>evolution</topic><topic>Forest ecology</topic><topic>Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology</topic><topic>Plant ecology</topic><topic>plantas</topic><topic>plante</topic><topic>Plants</topic><topic>Plants and fungi</topic><topic>Population ecology</topic><topic>Productivity</topic><topic>Species</topic><topic>Synecology</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Goldberg, Deborah E.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Barton, Andrew M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI</creatorcontrib><collection>AGRIS</collection><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Periodicals Index Online Segment 28</collection><collection>Periodicals Index Online</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - West</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - International</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access &amp; Build (Plan A) - MEA</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - Midwest</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - Northeast</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - Southeast</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - North Central</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - Southeast</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - South Central</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access &amp; Build (Plan A) - UK / I</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - Canada</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - EMEALA</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - North Central</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - South Central</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access &amp; Build (Plan A) - International</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - International</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - West</collection><collection>Periodicals Index Online Segments 1-50</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - APAC</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - Midwest</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - MEA</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - Canada</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - UK / I</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - EMEALA</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access &amp; Build (Plan A) - APAC</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access &amp; Build (Plan A) - Canada</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access &amp; Build (Plan A) - West</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access &amp; Build (Plan A) - EMEALA</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - Northeast</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access &amp; Build (Plan A) - Midwest</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access &amp; Build (Plan A) - North Central</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access &amp; Build (Plan A) - Northeast</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access &amp; Build (Plan A) - South Central</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access &amp; Build (Plan A) - Southeast</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - UK / I</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - APAC</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access—Foundation Edition (Plan E) - MEA</collection><collection>Ecology Abstracts</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><jtitle>The American naturalist</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Goldberg, Deborah E.</au><au>Barton, Andrew M.</au><aucorp>University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI</aucorp><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Patterns of consequences of interspecific competition in natural communities: a review of field experiments with plants</atitle><jtitle>The American naturalist</jtitle><date>1992-04-01</date><risdate>1992</risdate><volume>139</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>771</spage><epage>801</epage><pages>771-801</pages><issn>0003-0147</issn><eissn>1537-5323</eissn><coden>AMNTA4</coden><abstract>We present a quantitative literature review to assess the extent to which field experiments with plants have addressed questions about patterns of competition over time and space, consequences of competition for community structure, and comparisons of competitive ability among species. We outline the necessary treatment comparisons and statistical analyses to answer each question and then describe the number of experiments that meet these criteria and their results. Although we found a total of 101 experiments in 89 studies, 63% of these experiments only addressed whether competition significantly affected some component of individual fitness of a single species at a single time and site. Despite the limited data base to address more complex questions about competitive interactions, we did find consistent results for a few of the questions we reviewed. Where tested, competition always had significant effects on distribution patterns (five experiments), on relative abundances (two experiments), and on diversity (four experiments), consistent with the notion that competition has strong effects on community structure. On the other hand, intraspecific competition was not usually stronger than interspecific competition for either competitive effect (four experiments) or response (three experiments), which suggests that resource partitioning may not be an important mechanism of coexistence in plants.</abstract><cop>Chicago, IL</cop><pub>University of Chicago Press</pub><doi>10.1086/285357</doi><tpages>31</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0003-0147
ispartof The American naturalist, 1992-04, Vol.139 (4), p.771-801
issn 0003-0147
1537-5323
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_16664881
source Periodicals Index Online; Free E-Journal (出版社公開部分のみ); JSTOR
subjects Animal and plant ecology
Animal, plant and microbial ecology
Biological and medical sciences
Biological competition
Communities
competencia biologica
competition biologique
Demecology
Ecological competition
evolucion
evolution
Forest ecology
Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology
Plant ecology
plantas
plante
Plants
Plants and fungi
Population ecology
Productivity
Species
Synecology
title Patterns of consequences of interspecific competition in natural communities: a review of field experiments with plants
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-25T05%3A07%3A25IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-jstor_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Patterns%20of%20consequences%20of%20interspecific%20competition%20in%20natural%20communities:%20a%20review%20of%20field%20experiments%20with%20plants&rft.jtitle=The%20American%20naturalist&rft.au=Goldberg,%20Deborah%20E.&rft.aucorp=University%20of%20Michigan,%20Ann%20Arbor,%20MI&rft.date=1992-04-01&rft.volume=139&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=771&rft.epage=801&rft.pages=771-801&rft.issn=0003-0147&rft.eissn=1537-5323&rft.coden=AMNTA4&rft_id=info:doi/10.1086/285357&rft_dat=%3Cjstor_proqu%3E2462621%3C/jstor_proqu%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1308335486&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_jstor_id=2462621&rfr_iscdi=true