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.
Clonal Growth in Grassland Perennials: I. Density and Pattern-Dependent Competition Between Plants with Different Growth Forms
Bernhard Schmid and John L. Harper
Journal of Ecology
Vol. 73, No. 3 (Nov., 1985), pp. 793-808
Published by: British Ecological Society
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2260147
Page Count: 16
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
(1) Bellis perennis and Prunella vulgaris are grassland perennials with contrasting growth forms. Clones of Bellis perennis have tightly aggregated rosettes (phalanx type) and vary little in size. Rosette populations grow logistically, probably regulated by change in birth rate. Branches of Prunella vulgaris are only loosely aggregated within clones (guerrilla type). The frequency distribution of clone sizes in P. vulgaris is hierarchical. Branch populations grow exponentially and exceed the equilibrium density before regulation, through increased death rate, occurs. (2) This pair of species was used to investigate competition between and within clones and between species as functions of growth form, planting pattern, and planting density. (3) No differences in intensity of competition within and between clones were found in either species. (4) Plants of P. vulgaris showed a more fugitive behaviour in mixed than in pure populations. (5) Competition was density-dependent; in mixtures of Bellis perennis and Prunella vulgaris the phalanx species was aggressive at high but suppressed at low densities and the guerrilla species was aggressive at low but suppressed at high densities. This outcome is caused by the differences in growth form of the two species. (6) Different planting patterns had little influence on the competitive relationship of the two species.
Journal of Ecology © 1985 British Ecological Society