SEARCH

SEARCH BY CITATION

References

  • Abrams MM, Jarrell WM. 1992. Bioavailability index for phosphorus using ion exchange resin impregnated membranes. Soil Science Society of America Journal 154: 15321537.
  • Bell RL, Binkley D. 1989. Soil nitrogen mineralization and immobilization in response to periodic prescribed fire in a loblolly pine plantation. Canadian Journal of Forest Research 19: 816820.
  • Beveridge C. 2000. The ups and downs of signaling between root and shoot. New Phytologist 147: 413416.
  • Burger JA, Pritchett WL. 1984. Effects of clearfelling and site preparation on nitrogen mineralization in a southern pine stand. Soil Science Society of America Journal 48: 14321437.
  • Cahill JF Jr, Casper BB. 1999. Growth consequences of soil nutrient heterogeneity for two old-field herbs, Ambrosia artemesisiifolia and Phytolacca Americana, grown individually and in combination. Annals of Botany 83: 471478.
  • Caldwell MM, Manwaring JH, Durham SL. 1991. The microscale distribution of neighboring plant roots in fertile soil microsites. Functional Ecology 5: 765772.
  • Campbell BD, Grime JP, Mackey JML. 1991. A trade-off between scale and precision in resource foraging. Oecologia. 87: 532538.
  • Casper BB, Cahill JF. 1996. Limited effects of soil nutrient heterogeneity on populations of Abutilon theophrasti (Malvaceae). American Journal of Botany 83: 333341.
  • Casper BB, Cahill JF, Jackson RB. 2000. Plant competition in spatially heterogeneous environments. In: HutchingsMJ, JohnEA, StewartAJA, eds. The ecological consequences of environmental heterogeneity. Oxford, UK: Blackwell Science, 111130.
  • Einsmann JC, Jones RH, Mou P, Mitchell RJ. 1999. Nutrient foraging traits in 10 co-occurring plant species of contrasting life forms. Journal of Ecology 87: 609619.
  • Farley RA, Fitter AH. 1999. Temporal and spatial variation in soil resources in a deciduous woodland. Journal of Ecology 87: 688696.
  • Fransen B, DeKroon H. 2001. Long-term disadvantages of selective root placement: root proliferation and shoot biomass of two perennial grass species in a 2-year experiment. Journal of Ecology 89: 711722.
  • Fransen B, DeKroon H, Berendse F. 1998. Root morphological plasticity and nutrient acquisition of perennial grass species from habitats of different nutrient availability. Oecologia 115: 351358.
  • Fransen B, DeKroon H, Berendse F. 2001. Soil nutrient heterogeneity alters competition between two perennial grass species. Ecology 82: 25342546.
  • Goldberg DE. 1994. Influence of competition at the community level: an experimental version of the null models approach. Ecology 75: 15031506.
  • Gonzalez OJ, Zak DR. 1994. Geostatistical analysis of soil properties in a secondary tropical dry forest, St Lucia, West Indies. Plant and Soil 163: 4554.
  • Grace JB, Tilman D, eds. 1990. Perspectives on plant competition. New York, USA: Academic Press.
  • Grime JP. 1977. Evidence for the existence of three primary strategies in plants and its relevance to ecological and evolutionary theory. American Naturalist 111: 11691194.
  • Grime JP, Crick JC, Rincon JE. 1986. The ecological significance of plasticity. In: JenningsDH, TrewavasA, eds. Plasticity in plants. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 729.
  • Gross KL, Pregitzer KS, Burton AJ. 1995. Spatial variation in nitrogen availability in three successional plant communities. Journal of Ecology 83: 357367.
  • Hutchings MJ, Wijesinghe DK, John EA. 2000. The effects of heterogeneous nutrient supply on plant performance: a survey of responses, with special reference to clonal herbs. In: HutchingsMJ, JohnEA, StewartAJA, eds. The Ecological Consequences of Environmental Heterogeneity. Oxford, UK: Blackwell Science, 91110.
  • Jackson RB, Caldwell MM. 1993. The scale of nutrient heterogeneity around individual plants and its quantification with geostatistics. Ecology 74: 612614.
  • Keddy PA. 1989. Competition. London, UK: Chapman & Hall.
  • Lister AJ, Mou P, Jones RH, Mitchell RJ. 2000. Spatial patterns of soil and vegetation in a 40-year-old slash pine (Pinus elliottii) forest in the coastal plain of South Carolina, USA. Canadian Journal of Forest Research 30: 145155.
  • Mou P, Jones RH, Mitchell RJ, Zutter B. 1995. Spatial distribution of roots in sweetgum and loblolly pine monocultures and relations with above-ground biomass and soil nutrients. Functional Ecology 9: 689699.
  • Mou P, Mitchell RJ, Jones RH. 1997. Root distribution of two tree species under a heterogeneous nutrient environment. Journal of Applied Ecology. 34: 645656.
  • Rees M, Grubb PJ, Kelly D. 1996. Quantifying the impact of competition and spatial heterogeneity on the structure and dynamics of a four species guild of winter annuals. American Naturalist 147: 132.
  • Robinson D, Hodge A, Griffiths BS, Fitter A. 1999. Plant root proliferation in nitrogen-rich patches confers competitive advantage. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. 266: 431435.
  • Schlesinger WH, Raikes JA, Hartley AE, Cross AF. 1996. On the spatial pattern of soil nutrients in desert ecosystems. Ecology 77: 364374.
  • Tilman D. 1985. The resource-ratio hypothesis of plant succession. American Naturalist 125: 827852.
  • Topp GG, Davis JL, Annan AP. 1980. Electromagnetic determination of soil water content: measurement in coaxial transmission lines. Water Resource Research 16: 574582.
  • Wijesinghe DK, Hutchings MJ. 1997. The effects of spatial scale of environmental heterogeneity on the growth of a clonal plant: an experimental study with Glechoma hederacea. Journal of Ecology 85: 1728.
  • Wu H, Sharpe JH, Walker J, Penridge LK. 1985. Ecological field theory: a spatial analysis of resource interference among plants. Ecological Modeling. 29: 215243.
  • Zhang H, Forde BG. 1998. An Arabidopsis MADS box gene that controls nutrient-induced changes in root architecture. Science 279: 407409.