Access

You are not currently logged in.

Access your personal account or get JSTOR access through your library or other institution:

login

Log in to your personal account or through your institution.

If You Use a Screen Reader

This 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
DOI: 10.1086/657992
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1086/657992
Page Count: 14
  • Read Online (Free)
  • Download ($19.00)
  • Subscribe ($19.50)
  • Cite this Item
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
Preview not available

Abstract

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.

Page Thumbnails

  • Thumbnail: Page 
1
    1
  • Thumbnail: Page 
2
    2
  • Thumbnail: Page 
3
    3
  • Thumbnail: Page 
4
    4
  • Thumbnail: Page 
5
    5
  • Thumbnail: Page 
6
    6
  • Thumbnail: Page 
7
    7
  • Thumbnail: Page 
8
    8
  • Thumbnail: Page 
9
    9
  • Thumbnail: Page 
10
    10
  • Thumbnail: Page 
11
    11
  • Thumbnail: Page 
12
    12
  • Thumbnail: Page 
13
    13
  • Thumbnail: Page 
14
    14