Importance: an overlooked concept in plant interaction research

By Rob W. Brooker, Z. Kikvidze. 2008

351 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Ecology, Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics, Nature and Landscape Conservation

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/804280bb0dfb831ff0f9dc1c466849548a6e1305

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Ecology

In Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics

In Nature and Landscape Conservation

Citations in the corpus

How to quantify competitive ability (2018, background): “The ecological literature on competition is vast, covering decades of empirical research, many reviews of both empirical methods (Brooker & Kikividze, 2008; Connolly, 1997; Cousens, 1991; Freckleton & Watkinson, 1999, 2000; Gibson, Connolly, Hartnett, & Weidenhamer, 1999; Goldberg & Scheiner, 2001;…”
Plant traits related to competition: how do they shape the functional diversity of communities? (2009, background): “…environmental factors, namely the importance of competition (Welden and Slauson 1986), increases with environmental favourability, i.e. when biomass accumulates as physical constraints decrease (Pennings and Callaway 1992, Brooker et al. 2005, Gaucherand et al. 2006, Brooker and Kikividze 2008).”
Designing resilient and sustainable grasslands for a drier future: Adaptive strategies, functional traits and biotic interactions (2013, background): “An important point is the strong interdependency of local environmental conditions and plant interaction processes (Brooker and Kikividze 2008; Spasojevic and Suding 2012).”
Linking individual response to biotic interactions with community structure: a trait-based framework (2009, background): “The importance of biotic interactions has been firstly defined for competition (Welden & Slauson 1986) as ‘the impact of competition relative to that of all the factors in the environment that influence individual plant success’ ( Brooker & Kikividze 2008 ).”
Measuring the importance of competition in plant communities (2009, methodology): “For comparisons along a gradient, Brooker & Kikvidze (2008) suggest using an index of the form: eqn 5 where w MAX is the maximum weight mass of an isolated plant along the gradient, and w m and w ( N ) are as defined above.”
Shoot, but not root, competition reduces community diversity in experimental mesocosms (2009, background): “The distinction between the two is a longstanding issue in plant ecology (Welden & Slauson 1986; Brooker & Kikvidze 2008).”
Effects of competition on tree radial‐growth vary in importance but not in intensity along climatic gradients (2011, background): “There is also the difficulty of evaluating how plant–plant interactions influence the structure of plant communities (Goldberg et al. 1999; Brooker et al. 2005; Brooker & Kikvidze 2008; Freckleton, Watkinson & Rees 2009; Gross et al. 2009).”