Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Importance of Species Differences in the Development of Mathematical Models of California Grasslands

  • Chapter
Grassland structure and function

Part of the book series: Tasks for vegetation science ((TAVS,volume 20))

Abstract

Mathematical models have had a short, but highly visible, history in ecology. In early attempts to build a general theory in ecology highly simplified analytical models were dominant (e.g., Lotka 1925; MacArthur and Levins 1967; May and MacArthur 1972). As the role of stochastic variation and disturbance became recognized as an important influence on ecological systems, simulation models of greater complexity but less generality became important (e.g., Holling 1965; Royama 1971; Innis 1978). However, unfulfilled promise in the aftermath of the Biome Modeling program in the US IBP has created questions about the future potential of large mathematical models in ecology (Watt 1975; Pielou 1981).

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Bartolome JW and Gcmmill B (1981) The ecological status of Stipa pulchra (Poaceae) in California, Madrono 28, 172–184,

    Google Scholar 

  • Batzli GO and FA Pitelka (1970) Influence of meadow mouse populations on California grassland. Ecology 51, 1027–1039.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Botkin DB (1976) The role of species interactions in the response of a forest ecosystem to environmental perturbation. In Patten BC. ed. Systems Analysis and Simulation in Ecology, Vol. 4 New York. Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Botkin DB (1977) Life and death in a forest: the computer as an aid to understanding In Hall CAS and Day JW. eds. Ecosystem Modeling in Theory and Practice New York, Wiley Interscience

    Google Scholar 

  • Botkin DB. Janak JF and Wallis JR (1972) Some ecological consequences of a model of forest growth, J. Ecol. 60. 849–873.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burcham LT (1975) Climate, structure, and history of California’s annual grassland ecosystem In Love RM. ed The California Annual Grassland Ecosystem. Univ. California. Davis: Inst, or Ecology Publ. 7.

    Google Scholar 

  • Caswell H (1978) Predator-mediated coexistence: a nonequilibrium model. Am Nat. 112. 127–154

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen D (1978) A general model of optimal reproduction in a randomly varying environment, J. Ecol. 56. 219–228.

    Google Scholar 

  • Demment MW, Laca EA and Greenwood GB (1987) Intake in grazing ruminants: a conceptual framework. In Owen FN. ed. Feed Intake of Beef Cattle Stillwater. Oklahoma. Oklahoma State University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Wit CT (1970) Dynamic concepts in biology In Setlik I. ed. Prediction and Measurement of Photosynthetic Productivity. Wageningen. Netherlands, PUDOC

    Google Scholar 

  • De Wit CT and Goudriaan J (1974) Simulation of Ecological Processes Wageningen. Netherlands. PUDOC

    Google Scholar 

  • De Wit CT and Van den Bergh JP (1965) Competition between herbage plants. Neth. J. Agrk. Sci. 13. 212–221.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elliott HW and Wehausen JD (1974) Vegetational succession on coastal rangcland of Point Reyes Peninsula. Madrono 22, 231–238.

    Google Scholar 

  • Foin TC (1986) Succession climax and range evaluation in the California coastal prairie ccosystem. In Joss PJ, Lynch PW and Williams OB. eds. Rangelands: A Resource Under Siege. Proceedings of the 2nd international rangeland congress. Canberra. Australian Academy of Science.

    Google Scholar 

  • Foin TC and Hektner MM (1986) Secondary succession and the fate of native spccics in a California coastal prairie cimmunity. Madrono 33, 189–206.

    Google Scholar 

  • Forman RTT and Godron M (1986) Landscape Ecology. New York. Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldberg DE and Werner PA (1983) Equivalence of competitors in plant communities: a null hypothesis and a field experimental approach, Amer. J. Bot. 70, 1098–1104.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guiterrez AP, Falcon LA. Locw W. Leipzig PA and Van den Bosch R (1975) An analysis of cotton production in California: a model for Acala cotton and the effects of defoliators on its yields. Environ. Fantom. 4, 125–136.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harper JL (1977) The Population Biology of Plants. London, Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heady HF (1975) Range Management. New York. McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heady HF (1977) Valley grassland. In Barbour MG and Major J, eds. Terrestrial Vegetation of California. New York. Wiley Interscience.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heady HF, Foin TC, Hektner MM. Taylor DW. Barbour MG and Barry WJ (1977) Coastal prairie and northern coastal scrub. In Barbour MG and Major J, eds. Terrestrial Vegetation of California. New York. Wiley Interscience.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hektner MM and Foin TC (1977) Vegetation analysis of a northern California coastal prairie: Sea Ranch, Sonoma County, California, Madrono 24, 83–103

    Google Scholar 

  • Hektner MM and Foin TC (1978) A flora of the coastal tcrraccs of Sea Ranch. Sonoma County, California, Wasmann. J. Biol 35. 26–53.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holling CS (1965) The functional response of predators to prey density and its role in mimicry and population regulation, Mem. Entom. Soc. Canada 45, 1–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hutchinson KJ and King KL (1980) Management impacts on structure and function of sown grasslands. In Breymeyer AI and Van Dyne GM. eds. Grasslands, Systems Analysis, and Man. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Innis GS ed. (1978) Grassland Simulation Model. Ecological Studies no 26. Berlin, Springer-Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kessell SR (1979) Gradient Modeling. New York, Springer-Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee DB (1973) Requiem for large-models, J. Amer Inst Planners 39, 103–178.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lotka AJ (1925) Elements of Physical Biology, Baltimore, Williams and Wilkins.

    Google Scholar 

  • Love RM ed. (1975) The California Annual Grasiland Ecosystem. Univ. California. Davis. Inst, of Ecology Publ 7.

    Google Scholar 

  • MacArthur Rll and Levins R (1967) The limiting similarity, convergence and divergence of coexisting species. Am. Nat. 101. 377–385.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Major J (1977) California climate in relation to vegetation. In Barbour MG and Major J. eds. Terrestrial Vegetation of California, New York. Wiley Interscience.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marshall DR and Jain SK (1967) Cohabitation and relative abundance of two species of wild oats. Ecology 48. 656–659.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • May RM and MacArthur RH (1972) Niche overlap as a function of environmental variability. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci USA 69. 1109–1113.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Mclntirc CD and Colby JA (1978) A hierarchical model of lotic ecosystems, Ecol. Monogr. 48, 167–190.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Noble IR and Slatyer RO (1980) The use of vital attributes to predict succesuonal changes in plant communities subject to recurrent disturbances. Vegetatio 43. 5–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Noy-Meir I (1975) Stability of grazing systems: an application of predator-prey graphs, J. Ecol. 63. 459–481.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Noy-Meir I (1978) Stability in simple grazing models: effects of explicit functions. J. Theor Biol. 71, 347–380.

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Neill RV and JM Giddings (1979) Population interactions and ecosystem function: phytoplankton competition and community production. In Innis GS and O’Neill RV. eds Systems Analysis of Ecosystems. Fairland, Maryland. International Cooperative Publishing House.

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Neill RV. DeAngelis DL. Waide JB and Allen TFH (1986) A Hierarchical Concept of Ecosystems. Princeton, Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pacala SW (1986) Neighborhood models of plant population dynamics. 2. Multi species models of annuals. Theor. Pop Biol 29. 262–292.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pacala SW and Silander JA (1985) Neighborhood models of plant population dynamic. 1. Single-species models of annuals. Am. Nat 125, 385–411.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Park RA and 26 others (1974) A generalized model for simulating lake ecosystems, Simulation 23. 33–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Patten BC (1983) On the quantitative dominance of indirect effects in ecosystcms. In Jorgensen SE. ed. 3rd International Conference on the State of the Art in Ecological Modeling. Oxford, Pergamon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Patten BC and 38 others (1975) Total ecosystem model for a cove in Lake Texoma. In Patten BC, ed. Systems Analysis and Simulation in Ecology. Vol. 3. New York. Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peart DR and Foin TC (1985) Analysts and prediction of population and community change: a grassland case study. In White J, ed. The Population Structure of Vegetation, Dordrecht. Netherlands. Junk

    Google Scholar 

  • Pendleton DF. Menke JW, Williams WA and Woodmansee RO (1983) Annual grassland ecosystem model, Hilgardia 51. 1–44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Penning de Vries FWT (1972) A model for simulating transpiration of leaves with special attention to stomatal functioning. J. Appl Ecol. 9. 57–77.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pielou EC (1981) The usefulness of ecological models: a stock-taking. Quart Rev. Biol 50. 17–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pitt MD and Heady HF (1978) Responses of annual vegetation to temperature and rainfall patterns in northern California. Ecology 59. 336–350.

    Google Scholar 

  • Risser PG, Birney EC. Blocker HD. May SW. Parton WJ and Wiens JA (1981) The True Prairie Ecosystem. US/IBP Synthesis Series No. 16. Stroudsburg. Pennsylvania, Hutchinson Ross Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rossiter RC (1966) Ecology of the Mediterranean Annual-type pasture. Adv. Agronomy 18, 1–56.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Royama T (1971) A comparative study of models for predation and parasitism. Res. Pop. Ecol., Suppl. I, 91 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Salt GW (1979) A comment on the use of the term “emergent properties.” Am. Nat. 113. 145–161.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seligman NG and Arnold GW (1980) Simulation of intensively managed grazing systems. In Breymeyer AI and Van Dyne GM. eds. Grasslands, Systems Analysis, and Man. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shoemaker CA (1977) Pest management models of crop ecosystems. In Hall CAS and Day JW, eds. Ecosystem Modeling in Theory and Practice. New York, Wiley Interscience.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shugart HH (1984) A theory of forest dynamics. New York, Springer-Verlag.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Shugart HH and Noble IR (1981) A computer model of succession and fire response of the high-altitude Eucalyptus forest of the Brindabella Range. Australian Capital Territory. Aust J. Ecol. 6. 149–164.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Silander JA and Pacala SW (1985) Neighborhood predictions of plant performance. Oecologia 66. 256–263.

    Google Scholar 

  • Singh JS,Trlica MJ, Risser PG, Redman RE and Marshall JK (1980) Autotrophic suhsystem. In Breymeyer AI and Van Dyne GM. eds. Grasslands, Systems Analysis, and Man. Cambridge. Cambridge University Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Solomon DL. (1979) On a paradigm for mathematical modeling. In Patil GP and Rosenzweig ML. eds. Contemporary Quantitative Ecology and Related Ecometrics. Fairland, Maryland, International Cooperative Publishing House.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spitters CJT (1983) An alternative approach to the analysis of mixed cropping experiments. I. Estimation of competition effects, Neth. J. Agric. Sci. 31, 1–11.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thomas VJ (1970) A mathematical approach to fitting parameters in a competition model. J. Appl Ecol. 7, 483–496

    Google Scholar 

  • Tilman D (1982) Resource Competition and Community Structure. Princeton, New Jersey. Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Dyne GM, Brockington NR, Szocs Z, Duck J, and Ribic CA (1980) Large herbivore subsystem In Breymcyer AI and Van Dyne GM, eds. Grasslands. Systems Analysis and Man. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walker BH. Ludwig D. Holling CS and Peterman RM (1981) Stability of semi-arid savanna grazing systems, J. Ecol. 69, 473–498.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Watkinson AR. Loasdale WM and Firbank I.G (1983) A neighborhood approach to self-thinning. Occologia 56. 381–384.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Watt KEF (1975) Critique and comparison of biome ecosystem modeling. In Patten BC. cd. Systems analysis and simulation in ecology. Vol. 3. New York. Academic Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Westoby M and Howell J (1982) Self-thinning in Trifolium subterraneum populations transferred between full daylight and shade. J. Ecol. 70. 615–621.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Whittakcr RH (1975) Communities and Ecosystems. 2nd Edition. New York, MacMillan

    Google Scholar 

  • Woodmanscc RG (1978) Critique of analyses of the grassland ecosystem model ELM. In Innis GS. ed Grassland Simulation Model. Berlin, Springer-Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Woodmanscc RG and Lauenroth WK (1983) Modeling reality-fact, fancy, fiction. In Jorgensen SE, ed. 3rd International Conference on State of the Art in Ecological Modeling. Fairland, Maryland. International Cooperative Publishing House

    Google Scholar 

  • Yoda K. Ogawa H and Hozumi K (1963) Self-thinning in over crowdcd pure stands under cultivated and natural conditions. J. Biol, Osaka University 14. 107–129.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Division of Environmental Studies, University of California, Davis, 95616, USA

    T. C. Foin & G. A. J. Platenkamp

Authors
  1. T. C. Foin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. G. A. J. Platenkamp
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Stanford University, Stanford, Calif., USA

    Harold A. Mooney

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1989 Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Foin, T.C., Platenkamp, G.A.J. (1989). The Importance of Species Differences in the Development of Mathematical Models of California Grasslands. In: Huenneke, L.F., Mooney, H.A. (eds) Grassland structure and function. Tasks for vegetation science, vol 20. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-3113-8_9

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-3113-8_9

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht

  • Print ISBN: 978-94-010-7900-6

  • Online ISBN: 978-94-009-3113-8

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation