Simple mechanisms of size distribution dynamics in crowded and uncrowded virtual monocultures

Wyszomirski, Tomasz; Wyszomirska, Izabela; Jarzyna, Ingeborga

doi:10.1016/s0304-3800(98)00182-3

Cited by 58 publications

(57 citation statements)

References 78 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Given that this is a descriptive study, we cannot draw definite conclusions about causal relationships for the observed patterns; many possible variables may affect plant-plant interactions and thus be responsible for the observed patterns discussed above (Barot et al, 1999;Bazzaz, 1990;Wyszomirski et al, 1999). However, if we ignore spatial interactions, we may risk being unable to accurately predict the dynamics of even a very simple ecological system, regardless of how accurately we measure the underlying demographic rates (Hastings, 1993).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Spatial patterns of regeneration in managed uneven-aged ponderosa pine/Douglas-fir forests of Western Montana, USA

Fajardo

Goodburn

Graham

2006

Forest Ecology and Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Spatial patterns of regeneration in managed uneven-aged ponderosa pine/Douglas-fir forests of Western Montana, USA

Fajardo

Goodburn

Graham

2006

Forest Ecology and Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The resources of a small area, dX, are distributed among the k plants where the ZOI areas overlap dX according to a power function of the biomass of the plants (e.g., Wyszomirski et al 1999). The available resources for the growth of plant i are obtained by adding over the entire ZOI area of plant i, X i :…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The effect of size-asymmetric growth may be included in the Richards growth model by modeling individual plant growth as proportional to a power function of their size (Damgaard 1999;Damgaard et al 2002;Schwinning and Fox 1995;Wyszomirski et al 1999). f ðvðtÞ; aÞ ¼ 1 a ¼ 0 ðvðtÞ þ 1Þ a À 1 a > 0 1 or 0 a ¼ 1…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Size‐asymmetric competition and size‐asymmetric growth in a spatially explicit zone‐of‐influence model of plant competition

Weiner

Damgaard²

2006

Ecological Research

103

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Size-asymmetric competition among plants is usually defined as resource pre-emption by larger individuals, but it is usually observed and measured as a disproportionate size advantage in the growth of larger individuals in crowded populations (''size-asymmetric growth''). We investigated the relationship between sizeasymmetric competition and size-asymmetric growth in a spatially explicit, individual-based plant competition model based on overlapping zones of influence (ZOI). The ZOI of each plant is modeled as a circle, growing in two dimensions. The size asymmetry of competition is reflected in the rules for dividing up the overlapping areas. We grew simulated populations with different degrees of size-asymmetric competition and at different densities and analyzed the size dependency of individual growth by fitting coupled growth functions to individuals. The relationship between size and growth within the populations was summarized with a parameter that measures the size asymmetry of growth. Complete competitive symmetry (equal division of contested resources) at the local level results in a very slight size asymmetry in growth. This slight size asymmetry of growth did not increase with increasing density. Increased density resulted in increased growth asymmetry when resource competition at the local level was size asymmetric to any degree. Size-asymmetric growth can be strong evidence that competitive mechanisms are at least partially size asymmetric, but the degree of sizeasymmetric growth is influenced by the intensity as well as the mode of competition. Intuitive concepts of sizeasymmetric competition among individuals in spatial and nonspatial contexts are very different.

show abstract

“…There are various studies showing a rela tion among dimensional attributes of trees without considering the age (Moser & Hall 1969, Zeide 1993, Thrower 2003, Garcia 1979, Garcia 1983, Rennolls 1995, Birch 1999, Damgaard 1998, Damgaard 1999, Damgaard et al 2002, Khatouri & Dennis 1990, Atta-Boateng & Moser 2000, Wyszomirski et al 1999, Duerr & Gevorki antz 1938, Kolström 1993, Moser 1972. For instance, Chrimes (2004) demonstrates that current increment is directly and signific antly related to volume.…”

Section: The For-est (Forest Estimates) Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

An approach to estimate carbon stocks change in forest carbon pools under the UNFCCC: the Italian case

Federici¹,

Vitullo²,

Tulipano³

et al. 2008

iForest

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Simple mechanisms of size distribution dynamics in crowded and uncrowded virtual monocultures

Cited by 58 publications

References 78 publications

Spatial patterns of regeneration in managed uneven-aged ponderosa pine/Douglas-fir forests of Western Montana, USA

Spatial patterns of regeneration in managed uneven-aged ponderosa pine/Douglas-fir forests of Western Montana, USA

Size‐asymmetric competition and size‐asymmetric growth in a spatially explicit zone‐of‐influence model of plant competition

An approach to estimate carbon stocks change in forest carbon pools under the UNFCCC: the Italian case

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About