Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences
You have access

Size symmetry of competition alters biomass–density relationships

Peter Stoll

Peter Stoll

Institute for Plant Sciences, University of Bern, Altenbergrain 21, CH-3013 Bern, Switzerland

[email protected]

Google Scholar

Find this author on PubMed

,
Jacob Weiner

Jacob Weiner

Department of Ecology, Royal Veterinary and Agricultural University, DK-1958 Frederiksberg, Denmark

Google Scholar

Find this author on PubMed

,
Helene Muller-Landau

Helene Muller-Landau

Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, Princeton University, Princeton, NJ 08544-1003, USA

Google Scholar

Find this author on PubMed

,
Elke Müller

Elke Müller

Institute for Plant Sciences, University of Bern, Altenbergrain 21, CH-3013 Bern, Switzerland

Google Scholar

Find this author on PubMed

and
Toshihiko Hara

Toshihiko Hara

Institute for Low Temperature Science, Hokkaido University, Sapporo 060-0818, Japan

Google Scholar

Find this author on PubMed

Published:https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2002.2137

    As crowded populations of plants develop, the growth of some plants is accompanied by the death of others, a process called density–dependent mortality or ‘self–thinning’. During the course of density–dependent mortality, the relationship between total population biomass (B) and surviving plant density (N) is allometric: B = aNb. Essentially, increasing population biomass can be achieved only through decreasing population density. Variation in the allometric coefficient a among species has been recognized for many years and is important for management, assessment of productivity and carbon budgets, but the causes of this variation have not been elucidated. Individual–based models predict that size–dependent competition causes variation in the allometric coefficient. Using transgenic Arabidopsis with decreased plasticity, we provide experimental evidence that morphological plasticity of wild–type populations decreases the size asymmetry of competition for light and thereby decreases density–dependent mortality. This decrease in density–dependent mortality results in more biomass at a given density under size–symmetric compared with size–asymmetric competition.