Competition hierarchy, transitivity and additivity: investigating the effect of fertilisation on plant–plant interactions using three common bryophytes

Plant Ecology - Tập 191 - Trang 171-184 - 2006
Carsten F. Dormann1
1Department Computational Landscape Ecology, Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research–UFZ, Leipzig, Germany

Tóm tắt

The way competition structures plant communities has been investigated intensely over many decades. Dominance structures due to competitive hierarchies, with consequences for species richness, have not received as much experimental attention, since their manipulation is a large logistic undertaking. Here the data from a model system based on bryophytes are presented to investigate competition structure in a three-species system. Grown in monocultures, pairwise and three-species mixtures under no and high nitrogen supply, the three moss species responded strongly to treatment conditions. One of them suffered from nitrogen fertilisation and hence performed better in mixtures, where the dominant species provided physical shelter from apparently toxic nitrogen spray. Accordingly, no linear competitive hierarchy emerged and qualitative transitivity remains restricted to the unfertilised treatments. Faciliation also affected other properties of the competition structure. The reciprocity of competition effects could not be observed. Moreover, the performances in three-species mixtures were not well predictable from the knowledge of monocultures and pairwise mixtures because competitive effects were not additive. This had implications for community stability at equilibrium: all two-species systems were stable, both fertilised and unfertilised, while the three-species system was only stable when fertilised. This stability under fertilisation has probably to do with the facilitative effect of the two dominant species on the third. In this experiment, little support for commonly held ideas was found about the way competition in plant communities is structured. On the other hand, this study shows that moss communities are ideal model systems to test predictions of theoretical models concerning properties and consequences of competition in plant communities.

Tài liệu tham khảo

Aarssen LW (1988) ‘Pecking order’ of four plant species from pastures of different ages. Oikos 51:3–12 Archibold OW (1994) Ecology of world vegetation. Chapman & Hall, London Bauer S, Wyszomirski T, Berger U, Hildenbrandt H, Grimm V (2004) Asymmetric competition as a natural outcome of neighbour interactions among plants: results from the field-of-neighbourhood modelling approach. Plant Ecol 170:135–145 Bertness MD, Hacker SD (1994) Physical stress and positive associations among marsh plants. Am Natural 144:363–372 Brooker RW, Callaghan TV (1998) The balance between positive and negative plant interactions and its relationship to environmental gradients: a model. Oikos 81:196–207 Buss LW (1986) Competition and community organization on hard surfaces in the sea. In: Diamond JM, Case TJ (eds) Community ecology. Harper & Row, New York, pp 517–536 Callaway RM, Brooker RW, Choler P, Kikvidze Z, Lortie CJ, Michalet R, Paolini L, Pugnaire FI, Newingham B, Aschehoug ET, Armas C, Kikodze D, Cook BJ (2002) Positive interactions among alpine plants increase with stress. Nature 417:844–848 Case TJ (2000) An illustrated guide to theoretical ecology. Oxford University Press, Oxford Case TJ, Bender EA (1981) Testing for higher-order interactions. Am Natural 118:920–929 Connolly J, Wayne P, Bazzaz FA (2001) Interspecific competition in plants: how well do current methods answer fundamental questions? Am Natural 157:107–112 Connolly J, Wayne P, Murray R (1990) Asymmetric competition between plant species. Oecologia 108:311–320 Diamond JM (1986) Overview: Laboratory experiments, field experiments, and natural experiments. In: Diamond JM, Case TJ (eds) Community ecology. Harper & Row, New York, pp 3–22 Dierßen K (2001) Distribution, ecological amplitude and phytosociological characterization of European bryophytes. J. Cramer, Berlin Dormann CF, Roxburgh SH (2005) Experimental evidence rejects classical modelling approach to coexistence in plant communities. Proc R Soc London Ser B 272:1279–1285 Fowler N (1981) Competiton and coexistence in a North Carolina grassland. II. The effect of the experimental removal of species. J Ecol 69:843–854 Frahm J-P, Frey W (1992) Moosflora, 3rd edn. Ulmer, Stuttgart Frean M, Abraham ER (2001) Rock-scissors-paper and the survival of the weakest. Proc R Soc London Ser B 268:1323–1327 Freckleton RP, Watkinson AR (2000) Designs for greenhouse studies of interactions between plants: an analytical perspective. J Ecol 88:386–391 Freckleton RP, Watkinson AR (2001a) Nonmanipulative determination of plant community dynamics. Trends Ecol Evol 16:301–307 Freckleton RP, Watkinson AR (2001b) Predicting competition coefficients for plant mixtures: reciprocity, transitivity and correlations with life-history traits. Ecol Lett 4:348–357 Gaudet CL, Keddy PA (1988) A comparative approach to predicting competitive ability from plant traits. Nature 334:242–243 Gibson DJ, Connolly J, Hartnett DC, Weidenhamer JD (1999) Designs for greenhouse studies of interactions between species. J Ecol 87:1–16 Gleason HA (1926) The individualistic concept of plant association. Bull Torrey Bot Club 53:7–26 Goldberg DE (1994) Influence of competition at the community level: an experimental version of the null models approach. Ecology 75:1503–1506 Goldberg DE, Landa K (1991) Competitive effect and response: hierarchies and correlated traits in the early stages of competition. J Ecol 79:1013–1030 Goldberg DE, Rajaniemi T, Gurevitch J, Stewart-Oaten A (1999) Empirical approaches to quantifying interaction intensity: competition and facilitation along productivity gradients. Ecology 80:1118–1131 Goldberg DE, Turkington R, Olsvig Whittaker L (1995) Quantifying the community-level consequences of competition. Folia Geobot Phytotaxon 30:231–242 Gotelli N (1995) A primer of ecology. Sinauer Associates, Sunderland, Massachusetts Gough L, Osenberg CW, Gross KL, Collins SL (2000) Fertilization effects on species density and primary productivity in herbaceous plant communities. Oikos 89:428–439 Grace JB (1995) On the measurement of plant competition intensity. Ecology 76:305–308 Grime JP (2001) Plant strategies and vegetation processes, 2nd edn. John Wiley, Chichester Hacker SD, Gaines SD (1997) Some implications of direct positive interactions for community species diversity. Ecology 78:1990–2003 Hector A, Schmid B, Beierkuhnlein C, Caldeira MC, Diemer M, Dimitrakopoulos PG, Finn JA, Freitas H, Giller PS, Good J, Harris R, Högberg P, Huss-Danell K, Joshi J, Jumpponen A, Körner C, Leadley PW, Loreau M, Minns A, Mulder CPH, O’Donovan G, Otway SJ, Pereira JS, Prinz A, Read DJ, Scherer-Lorenzen M, Schulze E-D, Siamantziouras A-SD, Spehn EM, Terry AC, Troumbis AY, Woodward FI, Yachi S, Lawton JH (1999) Plant diversity and productivity experiments in European grasslands. Science 286:1123–1127 Hubbell SP (2001) The unified neutral theory of biodiversity and biogeography. Princeton Univ. Press, Princeton Hutchings MH (1997) The structure of plant populations. In: Crawley MJ (ed) Plant ecology, 2nd edn. Blackwell, Oxford, pp 325–358 Istock CA (1977) Logistic interaction of natural populations of two species of waterboatmen. Am Natural 111:279–287 Jones MLM, Oxley ERB, Ashenden TW (2002) The influence of nitrogen deposition, competition and desiccation on growth and regeneration of Racomitrium lanuginosum (Hedw.) Brid. Environ Pollut 120:371–378 Keddy PA (1989) Competition. Chapman & Hall, London Keddy PA, Shipley B (1989) Competitive hierarchies in herbaceous plant communities. Oikos 54:234–241 Kokkoris GD, Jansen VAA, Loreau M, Troumbis AY (2002) Variability in interaction strength and implications for biodiversity. J Anim Ecol 71:362–371 Kokkoris GD, Troumbis AY, Lawton JH (1999) Patterns of species interaction strength in assembled theoretical competition communities. Ecol Lett 2:70–74 Kooijman AM, Bakker C (1995) Species replacement in the bryophyte layer in mires—the role of water type, nutrient supply and interspecific interactions. J Ecol 83:1–8 Lehman CL, Tilman D (2000) Biodiversity, stability, and productivity in competitive communities. Am Natural 156:534–552 Levins R (1968) Evolution in changing environments. Princeton University Press, Princeton Loreau M (1998) Ecosystem development explained by competition within and between material cycles. Proc R Soc London Ser B 265:33–38 Loreau M (2004) Does functional redundancy exist? Oikos 104:606–611 Markham JH, Chanway CP (1996) Measuring plant neighbour effects. Funct Ecol 10:548–549 McAlister S (1995) Species interactions and substrate-specificity among log-inhabiting bryophyte species. Ecology 76:2184–2195 Mitchell RJ, Sutton MA, Truscott A-M, Leith ID, Cape JN, Pitcairn CER, Van Dijk N (2004) Growth and tissue nitrogen of epiphytic Atlantic bryophytes: effects of increased and decreased atmospheric N deposition. Funct Ecol 18:322–329 Mittelbach G, Steiner CF, Scheiner SM, Gross KL, Reynolds HL, Waide RB, Willig MR, Dobson SI, Gough L (2001) What is the observed relationship between species richness and productivity? Ecology 82:2381–2396 Mulder CPH, Uliassi DD, Doak DF (2001) Physical stress and diversity–productivity relationships: the role of positive interactions. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 98:6704–6708 Mulligan RC, Gignac LD (2002) Bryophyte community structure in a boreal poor fen II: interspecific competition among five mosses. Can J Bot-Revue Canadienne De Botanique 80:330–339 Oksanen L (1990) Predation, herbivory, and plant strategies along gradients of primary productivity. In: Grace JB, Tilman D (eds) Perspectives in plant competition. Academic Press, London, pp 445–474 R Development Core Team (2004) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. URL http://www.R-project.org Rajaniemi TK (2003) Explaining productivity–diversity relationships in plants. Oikos 101:449–457 Rees M, Condit R, Crawley MJ, Pacala S, Tilman D (2001) Long-term studies of vegetation dynamics. Science 293:650–655 Rees M, Grubb PJ, Kelly D (1996) Quantifying the impact of competition and spatial heterogeneity on the structure and dynamics of a four-species guild of winter annuals. Am Natural 147:1–32 Richardson DHS (1981) The biology of mosses. Blackwell, Oxford Rixen C, Mulder CPH (2005) Improved water retention links high species richness with increased productivity in arctic tundra moss communities. Oecologia 146:287–299 Roscher C, Schumacher J, Baade J, Wilcke W, Gleixner G, Weisser WW, Schmid B, Schulze ED (2004) The role of biodiversity for element cycling and trophic interactions: an experimental approach in a grassland community. Basic Appl Ecol 5:107–121 Roxburgh SH, Wilson JB (2000) Stability and coexistence in a lawn community: mathematical prediction of stability using a community matrix with parameters derived from competition experiments. Oikos 88:395–408 Rozdilsky ID, Stone L (2001) Complexity can enhance stability in competitive systems. Ecol Lett 4:397–400 Shipley B (1993) A null model for competitive hierarchies in competition matrices. Ecology 74:1693–1699 Solga A, Burkhardt J, Zechmeister HG, Frahm JP (2005) Nitrogen content, N-15 natural abundance and biomass of two pleurocarpous mosses Pleurozium schreberi (Brid.) Mitt. and Scleropodium purum (Hedw.) Limpr. in relation to atmospheric nitrogen deposition. Environ Pollut 134:465–473 Steel JB, Wilson JB, Anderson BJ, Lodge RHE, Tangney RS (2004) Are bryophyte communities different from higher-plant communities? Abundance relations. Oikos 104:479–486 Tilman D (1982) Resource competition and community structure. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ Tilman D, Wedin D (1991) Plant traits and resource reduction for five grasses growing on a nitrogen gradient. Ecology 72:685–700 Tilman D, Wedin D, Knops J (1996) Productivity and sustainability influenced by biodiversity in grassland ecosystems. Nature 379:718–720 Tirado R, Pugnaire FI (2005) Community structure and positive interactions in constraining environments. Oikos 111:437–444 van der Hoeven EC, Korporaal M, Van Gestel E (1998) Effects of simulated shade on growth, morphology and competitive interactions in two pleurocarpous mosses. J Bryol 20:301–310 Waide RB, Willig MR, Steiner CF, Mittelbach G, Gough L, Dodson SI, Juday GP, Parmenter R (1999) The relationship between productivity and species richness. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 30:257–300 Wedin DA, Tilman D (1993) Competition among grasses along a nitrogen gradient: initial conditions and mechanisms of competition. Ecol Monogr 63:199–229 Weigelt A, Jolliffe P (2003) Indices of competition. J Ecol 91:707–720 Wilson JB, Roxburgh SH (1992) Application of community matrix theory to plant competition. Oikos 65:343–348 Wilson JB, Steel JB, Newman JE, Tangney RS (1995) Are bryophyte communities different? J Bryol 18:689–705 Wilson WG, Lundberg P, Vázquez DP, Shurin JB, Smith MD, Langford W, Gross KL, Mittelbach GG (2003) Biodiversity and species interactions: extending Lotka–Volterra community theory. Ecol Lett 6:944–952 Wootton JT (1994a) The nature and consequences of indirect effects in ecological communities. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 25:443–466 Wootton JT (1994b) Putting the pieces together—testing the independence of interactions among organisms. Ecology 75:1544–1551 Yoda K, Kira T, Ogawa H, Hozumi K (1963) Self-thinning in overcrowded pure stands under cultivated and natural conditions. J Biol, Osaka City Univ 14:107–129 Zamfir M, Goldberg DE (2000) The effect of initial density on interactions between bryophytes at individual and community levels. J Ecol 88:243–255