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...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | The American naturalist 1992-04, Vol.139 (4), p.771-801 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , |
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&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 & 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 & 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 & 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 & Build (Plan A) - APAC</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - Canada</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - West</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - EMEALA</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access (Plan D) - Northeast</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - Midwest</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - North Central</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - Northeast</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & Build (Plan A) - South Central</collection><collection>Primary Sources Access & 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 |