Paper · 1998 · The American Naturalist

Competition Intensity along a Productivity Gradient in a Low-Diversity Grassland

Peltzer; Wilson; Gerry

4
claims
13
verbatim quotes
23
citations
2
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

Competition among plants often shifts from roots to shoots as productivity increases and species composition changes. We examined competition in an old field with low diversity to test whether this shift occurred along a productivity gradient without species turnover. Forty plots received one of four nitrogen treatments ($$0,\,5,\,or\,15\,g\,added\,N\,m^{- 2}\,yr^{- 1}\,or\,400\,g\,m^{- 2}\,yr^{- 1}\,of\,sawdust\,added\,to\,immobilize\,N$$) annually for 5 yr. All N levels were dominated by the perennial grasses Agropyron cristatum and Bromus inermis. Transplants of Agropyron were grown with all neighbors, roots of neighbors, or no neighbors present to measure total, root, and shoot competition. Transplant growth was 22%–165% higher in subplots without neighbors present, which indicates that competition occurred. Competition from neighbor roots was primarily responsible for suppression of transplant growth over the entire productivity gradient. In contrast to previous field experiments that found either an increase in total competition intensity or a shift from root to shoot competition with increasing productivity, we found neither. Increases in total competition intensity or shifts from root to shoot competition found along other gradients may be caused by changes in species composition and not by increased resources or neighbor biomass. These results suggest that different competitive mechanisms may operate in low‐diversity vegetation than in more diverse natural vegetation.

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. Read at the source ↗

The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.

Claims 4

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Agropyron transplant growth was 22%–165% higher without neighbors.

Taxon
AgropyronAgropyrone1
Treatment
without neighbors presente0
Outcome
Transplant growthe0
Direction
highere0
Value
22%–165%e0
Comparator
all neighborse2

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Agropyron
Agropyron · Taxon · picture of the genus (one of its species)Rasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Transplant growth was 22%–165% higher in subplots without neighbors present”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 704–779 · show in text ↑
e1

“Transplants of Agropyron”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 557–581 · show in text ↑
e2

“all neighbors”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 598–611 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Neighbor roots primarily suppressed transplant growth across the productivity gradient.

Taxon
AgropyronAgropyrone1
Interactor
neighbor rootse0other
Outcome
suppression of transplant growthe0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Agropyron
Agropyron · Taxon · picture of the genus (one of its species)Rasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Competition from neighbor roots was primarily responsible for suppression of transplant growth over the entire productivity gradient”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 824–956 · show in text ↑
e1

“Transplants of Agropyron”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 557–581 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Total competition intensity did not increase with productivity.

Taxon
AgropyronAgropyrone1
Outcome
total competition intensitye2
Direction
neithere0
Setting
productivity gradiente3

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Agropyron
Agropyron · Taxon · picture of the genus (one of its species)Rasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“we found neither”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1133–1149 · show in text ↑
e1

“Transplants of Agropyron”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 557–581 · show in text ↑
e2

“increase in total competition intensity”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1021–1060 · show in text ↑
e3

“along a productivity gradient without species turnover”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 213–267 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Competition did not shift from roots to shoots as productivity increased.

Taxon
AgropyronAgropyrone1
Outcome
shift from root to shoot competitione2
Direction
neithere0
Setting
productivity gradiente3

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Agropyron
Agropyron · Taxon · picture of the genus (one of its species)Rasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“we found neither”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1133–1149 · show in text ↑
e1

“Transplants of Agropyron”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 557–581 · show in text ↑
e2

“shift from root to shoot competition”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1066–1102 · show in text ↑
e3

“along a productivity gradient without species turnover”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 213–267 · show in text ↑

competition · growth · AgropyronResults agree

3 papers: 3 positive, 0 negative or no effect

2 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
  2. positive
See all 3 papers →

Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.