You are not currently logged in.
Access your personal account or get JSTOR access through your library or other institution:
If You Use a Screen ReaderThis content is available through Read Online (Free) program, which relies on page scans. Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.
Evolutionarily Stable Strategy Carbon Allocation to Foliage, Wood, and Fine Roots in Trees Competing for Light and Nitrogen: An Analytically Tractable, Individual-Based Model and Quantitative Comparisons to Data
Ray Dybzinski, Caroline Farrior, Adam Wolf, Peter B. Reich and Stephen W. Pacala
The American Naturalist
Vol. 177, No. 2 (February 2011), pp. 153-166
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1086/657992
Page Count: 14
Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.
Preview not available
AbstractWe present a model that scales from the physiological and structural traits of individual trees competing for light and nitrogen across a gradient of soil nitrogen to their community-level consequences. The model predicts the most competitive (i.e., the evolutionarily stable strategy [ESS]) allocations to foliage, wood, and fine roots for canopy and understory stages of trees growing in old-growth forests. The ESS allocations, revealed as analytical functions of commonly measured physiological parameters, depend not on simple root-shoot relations but rather on diminishing returns of carbon investment that ensure any alternate strategy will underperform an ESS in monoculture because of the competitive environment that the ESS creates. As such, ESS allocations do not maximize nitrogen-limited growth rates in monoculture, highlighting the underappreciated idea that the most competitive strategy is not necessarily the “best,” but rather that which creates conditions in which all others are “worse.” Data from 152 stands support the model’s surprising prediction that the dominant structural trade-off is between fine roots and wood, not foliage, suggesting the “root-shoot” trade-off is more precisely a “root-stem” trade-off for long-lived trees. Assuming other resources are abundant, the model predicts that forests are limited by both nitrogen and light, or nearly so.
© 2011 by The University of Chicago. All rights reserved.