Asymmetric competition between plant species

By R. Freckleton, A. Watkinson. 2001

138 citations recorded by the source corpus.

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

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/8666c5bcef74eb1a7ed922a2c34f1df40aeadc28

How researchers see this paper

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

In Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics

1. R. Freckleton
2. J. Weiner
3. Brian S. Cade
4. Roger Mundry
5. Jerome K. Vanclay
6. Victor Kuperman
7. Joan Bresnan

In Nature and Landscape Conservation

1. R. Freckleton
2. J. Weiner
3. Madhur Anand
4. Chris T. Bauch
5. P. Caplat
6. Liam J. Revell
7. B. Hawkins
8. L. Garamszegi

In Plant Science

1. R. Freckleton
2. J. Weiner
3. B. Chauhan

Citations in the corpus

• Growth traits of diverse rice cultivars under severe competition: implications for screening for competitiveness (2003, background): “The least productive cv was consistently IRAT216, probably because its much greater RWR (Tables 3 and 4) made it especially vulnerable to asymmetric competition for light (Freckleton and Watkinson, 2001).”
• Symmetric competition causes population oscillations in an individual-based model of forest dynamics (2008, background): “Most studies have focussed on how variability in individual growth rates affects size hierarchy formation (Freckleton and Watkinson, 2001).”
• Constant Final Yield (2010, background): “Variation in the degree of asymmetry of resource removal at the individual level, for example, should influence the parameters of a model of CFY because it affects the rate at which the asymptotic yield is approached as density increases (e.g., Firbank & Watkinson 1985, Freckleton & Watkinson 2001).”