Skip to main content
Log in

Larger Triticum aestivum plants do not preempt nutrient-rich patches in a glasshouse experiment

  • Published:
Plant Ecology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Plant competition belowground generally appears to be size-symmetric, i.e. larger plants only obtain a share of belowground resources proportional to their size, and therefore do not suppress smaller individuals. The experimental evidence for size-symmetric belowground competition comes primarily from experiments with homogenous soil conditions. It has been hypothesized that the presence of high nutrient patches that can be pre-empted by larger plants can make competition belowground size-asymmetric. We tested this hypothesis by growing Triticum aestivum individuals singly and in pairs in containers with aboveground dividers so that competition occurred only belowground. Plants grew in either a homogenous soil mixture, or in the same mixture with a band of enriched soil between them. Initial size differences were generated by a seven day difference in sowing date. There was no evidence of size-asymmetric competition with or without soil heterogeneity. Large plants did not have a disproportionate effect on smaller plants, nor did they perform disproportionately better when paired with a small neighbor. Our results suggest that in heterogeneous soil conditions, roots of larger plants that reach nutrient patches first are not able to prevent roots of smaller plants that arrive later from obtaining resources from the patch.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Berntson G.M. and Wayne P.M. 2000. Characterizing the size dependence of resource acquisition within crowded plant populations. Ecology 81: 1072–1085.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blair B. 2001. Effect of soil nutrient heterogeneity on the symmetry of belowground competition. Plant Ecology 156: 199–203.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cahill J.F. and Casper B.B. 2000. Investigating the relationship between neighbor root biomass and belowground competition: field evidence for symmetric competition belowground. Oikos 90: 311–320.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cahill J.F. 2002. What evidence is necessary in studies which separate root and shoot competition along productivity gradients. Journal of Ecology 90: 201–205.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Casper B.B. and Cahill J.F. 1996. Limited effects of soil nutrient heterogeneity on populations of Abutilon theophrasti (Malvaceae). American Journal of Botany 83: 333–341.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Casper B.B. and Jackson R.B. 1997. Plant competition underground. Annual Reviews of Ecology and Systematics 28: 545–570.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Casper B.B. and Cahill J.F. 1998. Population-level responses to nutrient heterogeneity and density by Abutilon theophrasti (Malvaceae): An experimental neighborhood approach. American Journal of Botany 85: 1680–1687.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fransen B., De Kroon H. and Berendse F. 2001. Soil nutrient heterogeneity alters competition between two perennial grass species. Ecology 82: 2534–2546.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gerry A.K. and Wilson S.D. 1995. The influence of initial size on the competitive responses of 6 plant species. Ecology 76: 272–279.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gersani M., Brown J.S., O'Brien E.E., Maina G.M. and Abramsky Z. 2001. Tragedy of the commons as a result of root competition. Journal of Ecology 89: 660–669.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hikosaka K., Sudoh S. and Hirose T. 1999. Light acquisition and use by individuals competing in a dense stand of an annual herb, Xanthium canadense. Oecologia 118: 388–396.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hikosaka K. and Hirose T. 2001. Nitrogen uptake and use by competing individuals in a Xanthium canadense stand. Oecologia 126: 174–181.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Legendre and Legendre 1998. Numerical Ecology. Elsevier, Amsterdam.

    Google Scholar 

  • McConnaughay K.M.D. and Bazzaz F.A. 1991. Is physical space a soil resource? Ecology 72: 94–103.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller T.E. 1996. On quantifying the intensity of competition across gradients. Ecology 77: 978–981.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McPhee C.S. and Aarssen L.W. 2001. The separation of above-and below-ground competition in plants: A review and critique of methodology. Plant Ecology 152: 119–136.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Newbery D.M. and Newman E.I. 1978. Competition between grassland plants of different sizes. Oecologia 33: 361–380.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rasmussen K., Rasmussen J. and Petersen J. 1996. Effects of fertilizer placement on weeds in weed harrowed spring barley. Acta Agriculture Scandinavico 46: 192–196.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwinning S. and Fox G.A. 1995. Population dynamic consequences of competitive symmetry in annual plants. Oikos 72: 422–432.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwinning S. and Weiner J. 1998. Mechanisms determining the degree of size-asymmetry in competition among plants. Oecologia 113: 447–455.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thomas S.C. and Weiner J. 1989. Including competitive asymmetry in measures of local interference in plant populations. Oecologia 80: 349–355.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weiner J. 1986. How competition for light and nutrients affects size variability in Ipomoea tricolor populations. Ecology 67: 1425–1427.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weiner J. and Thomas S.C. 1986. Size variability and competition in plant monocultures. Oikos 47: 211–222.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weiner J. 1990. Asymmetric competition in plant populations. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 5: 360–364.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weiner J., Wright D.B. and Castro S. 1997. Symmetry of belowground competition between Kochia scoparia individuals. Oikos 79: 85–91.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilson J.B. 1988a. The effect of initial advantage on the course of plant competition. Oikos 51: 19–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilson J.B. 1988b. Shoot competition and root competition. Journal of Applied Ecology 25: 279–296.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zobel M. and Zobel K. 2002. Studying plant competition: from root biomass to general aims. Journal of Ecology 90: 578–580.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Eric J. von Wettberg.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

von Wettberg, E.J., Weiner, J. Larger Triticum aestivum plants do not preempt nutrient-rich patches in a glasshouse experiment. Plant Ecology 169, 85–92 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1026253007056

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1026253007056

Navigation