A Relationship between Individual Plant-spacing and Yield

Mead, R.

doi:10.1093/oxfordjournals.aob.a084076

Cited by 116 publications

(43 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Ross and Harper (1972) demonstrated that in Dactylis glornerata, the space available (size of the opening) affected plant size; individuals growing in larger openings grew larger those growing in smaller openings. Similarly, Mead (1966) found that in cultivated stands of carrot (Daucus carota) where the plants were grown in rows, a significant proportion (20%) of the variation in plant size could be accounted for by differences in the area available to individual rosettes (based on distances to nearest neighbors). In the KBS study the larger proportion of open area in the 1 year old-field (65%, compared to 15% and 5% in the 5 and 15 year old-fields), and presumedly reduced interspecific competition, apparently allowed the plants to grow larger in a single growing season.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Predictions of fate from rosette size in four ?biennial? plant species: Verbascum thapsus, Oenothera biennis, Daucus carota, and Tragopogon dubius

1981

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Individual plants were marked in field populations of four biennial plant species, Verbascum thapsus L., Oenothera biennis L., Daucus carota L., and Tragopogon dubius Scop., and followed for 2 or 3 years. The relationship of both rosette size and age to the probability of an individual dying, remaining vegetative, or flowering was determined for each species. In all four species, a minimum size must be reached before flowering can be induced and above that minimum the probability of flowering increases directly with rosette size. Conversely, the probability of dying decreases with increasing rosette size. In general, the fate of a rosette appears to be independent of its age although in populations where the probability of death is high for individuals above the minimum size for flowering, the age of a rosette may influence its fate to some extent.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Predictions of fate from rosette size in four ?biennial? plant species: Verbascum thapsus, Oenothera biennis, Daucus carota, and Tragopogon dubius

1981

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, plants do not compete for resources with all others in a stand, but only with those individuals located in their immediate surroundings (Yoda, Kira and Hozumi, 1957;Goodall, 1960;Mead, 1966;Mack and Harper, 1977;Weiner, 1982Weiner, , 1984Silander and Pacala, 1985;Goldberg, 1987;Thomas and Weiner, 1989). The variability in growth rates created by neighbourhood competition results in increased size inequality relative to non-competing plants, whether resources are symmetrically or asymmetrically distributed among competing plants (Bonan, 1988).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Density Effects on the Size Structure of Annual Plant Populations: An Indication of Neighbourhood Competition

Bonan

1991

Annals of Botany

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Size variability among plants has been observed to increase with higher stand density, leading to the speculation that resource distribution among competing plants is primarily asymmetric rather than symmetric. The relationships between size variability, stand density, and type of resource distribution among competing plants were investigated using a spatially explicit, individual-plant model of annual plant population dynamics. When plants varied in neighbourhood competition, size variability increased with higher stand densities whether shared resources were symmetrically or asymmetrically distributed among competing plants. Size variability did not increase with higher stand densities when neighbourhood competition was constant for all plants. These simulations indicate that increased size variability among competing plants does not distinguish between symmetric and asymmetric resource distribution, but rather is direct evidence for neighbourhood competition.

show abstract

“…Mead (1966) identified two concepts to describe the shape of a growing space. Daniels et al (1986) pointed out that growth might be more effective in stands that have a more irregular spatial pattern, even though the study did not improve predictions for individual trees.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

How Does Spacing Shape Affect Tree Growth? -Preliminary Study of an Area Fixed, Shape Change Design Plot Experiment-

Takahashi

Furuya

2014

FORMATH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:The effect of spacing shape is one of the major problems of tree growth modeling. Nelder (1962) proposed an area fixed, shape change plot design (design Ib) to solve the spacing-shape problem. We analyzed periodically measured data from a design Ib type plot of Picea glehnii planted in the Hitsujigaoka experimental forest at the Hokkaido Research Center of the Forestry and Forest Products Research Institute. As a preliminary result, spacing shape affected growth in both DBH and height.

show abstract

A Relationship between Individual Plant-spacing and Yield

Cited by 116 publications

References 0 publications

Predictions of fate from rosette size in four ?biennial? plant species: Verbascum thapsus, Oenothera biennis, Daucus carota, and Tragopogon dubius

Predictions of fate from rosette size in four ?biennial? plant species: Verbascum thapsus, Oenothera biennis, Daucus carota, and Tragopogon dubius

Density Effects on the Size Structure of Annual Plant Populations: An Indication of Neighbourhood Competition

How Does Spacing Shape Affect Tree Growth? -Preliminary Study of an Area Fixed, Shape Change Design Plot Experiment-

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About