1988EvolutionRequires access

INTRAPOPULATION DIFFERENTIATION IN ANNUAL PLANTS. III. THE CONTRASTING EFFECTS OF INTRA‐ AND INTERSPECIFIC COMPETITION

Yan B. Linhart

Open publisher page 69 citations

Abstract

) generated by quasi-simultaneous germination (90% of seeds germinate in one week). Individuals at the periphery are subjected to interspecific competition with grasses, which shade out the Veronica 4-6 weeks after the onset of winter growth. I predicted that 1) when grown under immediate intraspecific competition in the greenhouse, offspring of plants from the central subpopulation (C) would perform better (i.e., grow larger and produce more seeds) than those from the periphery (P) and that 2) when grown under delayed interspecific competition provided by Agrostis tenuis and Lollium multiflorum, offspring of plants from the periphery would perform better than those from the center. Both predictions were confirmed. The center-periphery differences were pronounced and statistically significant in an undisturbed population (V-2), while in a population disturbed by yearly plowing (V-3), the differences tended to be consistent with those in V-2 but seldom significant. Distribution of variability tended to be positively skewed and/or leptokurtic in subpopulations grown under "foreign" competition (i.e., intraspecific for P plants and interspecific for C plants) but was normally distributed following exposure to "familiar" competition. Timing of competition affected many results. There were four additional significant differences between the central and peripheral subpopulations. 1) Germination rate: the faster rate in central plants can be advantageous under immediate intraspecific competition. The slower rate in peripheral plants can be advantageous under conditions of erratic and unpredictable soil moisture. 2) Response to nutrient competition: central plants were more sensitive to N-deficiency and peripheral plants were more sensitive to P-deficiency. 3) Allocation of biomass: central plants allocated a greater proportion of biomass to seeds, while peripheral plants allocated a greater proportion of biomass to leaves under all growing conditions. 4) Root elongation: at the seedling stage, central plants have longer roots, while at the adult stage, peripheral plants have longer roots (but not more root mass). Most components of this complex pattern of differentiation are interpretable in an adaptive context. Other results defy simple explanations and underline the importance of phenotypic plasticity, which was pronounced in the competition experiments.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

) generated by quasi-simultaneous germination (90% of seeds germinate in one week). Individuals at the periphery are subjected to interspecific competition with grasses, which shade out the Veronica 4-6 weeks after the onset of winter growth. I predicted that 1) when grown under immediate intraspecific competition in the greenhouse, offspring of plants from the central subpopulation (C) would perform better (i.e., grow larger and produce more seeds) than those from the periphery (P) and that 2) when grown under delayed interspecific competition provided by Agrostis tenuis and Lollium multiflorum, offspring of plants from the periphery would perform better than those from the center. Both predictions were confirmed. The center-periphery differences were pronounced and statistically significant in an undisturbed population (V-2), while in a population disturbed by yearly plowing (V-3), the differences tended to be consistent with those in V-2 but seldom significant. Distribution of variability tended to be positively skewed and/or leptokurtic in subpopulations grown under "foreign" competition (i.e., intraspecific for P plants and interspecific for C plants) but was normally distributed following exposure to "familiar" competition. Timing of competition affected many results. There were four additional significant differences between the central and peripheral subpopulations. 1) Germination rate: the faster rate in central plants can be advantageous under immediate intraspecific competition. The slower rate in peripheral plants can be advantageous under conditions of erratic and unpredictable soil moisture. 2) Response to nutrient competition: central plants were more sensitive to N-deficiency and peripheral plants were more sensitive to P-deficiency. 3) Allocation of biomass: central plants allocated a greater proportion of biomass to seeds, while peripheral plants allocated a greater proportion of biomass to leaves under all growing conditions. 4) Root elongation: at the seedling stage, central plants have longer roots, while at the adult stage, peripheral plants have longer roots (but not more root mass). Most components of this complex pattern of differentiation are interpretable in an adaptive context. Other results defy simple explanations and underline the importance of phenotypic plasticity, which was pronounced in the competition experiments.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 69 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

) generated by quasi-simultaneous germination (90% of seeds germinate in one week). Individuals at the periphery are subjected to interspecific competition with grasses, which shade out the Veronica 4-6 weeks after the onset of winter growth. I predicted that 1) when grown under immediate intraspecific competition in the greenhouse, offspring of plants from the central subpopulation (C) would perform better (i.e., grow larger and produce more seeds) than those from the periphery (P) and that 2) when grown under delayed interspecific competition provided by Agrostis tenuis and Lollium multiflorum, offspring of plants from the periphery would perform better than those from the center. Both predictions were confirmed. The center-periphery differences were pronounced and statistically significant in an undisturbed population (V-2), while in a population disturbed by yearly plowing (V-3), the differences tended to be consistent with those in V-2 but seldom significant. Distribution of variability tended to be positively skewed and/or leptokurtic in subpopulations grown under "foreign" competition (i.e., intraspecific for P plants and interspecific for C plants) but was normally distributed following exposure to "familiar" competition. Timing of competition affected many results. There were four additional significant differences between the central and peripheral subpopulations. 1) Germination rate: the faster rate in central plants can be advantageous under immediate intraspecific competition. The slower rate in peripheral plants can be advantageous under conditions of erratic and unpredictable soil moisture. 2) Response to nutrient competition: central plants were more sensitive to N-deficiency and peripheral plants were more sensitive to P-deficiency. 3) Allocation of biomass: central plants allocated a greater proportion of biomass to seeds, while peripheral plants allocated a greater proportion of biomass to leaves under all growing conditions. 4) Root elongation: at the seedling stage, central plants have longer roots, while at the adult stage, peripheral plants have longer roots (but not more root mass). Most components of this complex pattern of differentiation are interpretable in an adaptive context. Other results defy simple explanations and underline the importance of phenotypic plasticity, which was pronounced in the competition experiments.

Key concepts: Intraspecific competition, Interspecific competition, Biology, Competition (biology), Population, Germination, Ecology, Botany

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
INTRAPOPULATION DIFFERENTIATION IN ANNUAL PLANTS. III. THE CONTRASTING EFFECTS OF INTRA‐ AND INTERSPECIFIC COMPETITION — Research Paper | ScholarLens