Resource capture by crops.

Interplant competition for capture of the essential resources for plant growth i.e. light, water and nutrients, strongly affects the performance of natural, semi-natural and agricultural ecosystems. Ecologists have studied competition to understand the diversity and stability of plant communities, succession patterns of vegetation, and to help define management strategies for semi-natural ecosystems. Agroecologists have studied competitive phenomena to optimize plant densities of crops, to optimize intercropping systems and to quantify crop-weed interactions to improve weed management systems with minimum herbicide inputs. Similar approaches have been used to study interplant competition in natural and disturbed systems. However, because of the complex nature of interplant competition, it has taken a long time to develop generalized concepts and theories. The first systematic approaches for studying competitive phenomena were developed in the 1960s. For monocultures, much of our current understanding is based on the work of a Japanese group (e.g. Shinozaki and Kira, 1956) whereas de Wit (1960) developed the first systematic approach to study competition in mixtures. He introduced an experimental design (the replacement series in which the mixing ratio varies, but total density remains constant) with a model to analyse the results. These approaches were based on a hyperbolic relationship between plant density and yield, and have been used extensively in agricultural and ecological sciences to study competition between plants, plant population dynamics, and component contributions of intercropping systems (see reviews by Trenbath, 1976; Harper, 1977; Radosevich and Holt, 1984; Grace and Tilman, 1990). Recently, several papers discussed the disadvantages and pitfalls of the replacement series approach, such as its total density dependence ( cf. Connolly, 1986; Taylor and Aarssen, 1989). Only in the early 1980s, approaches were developed to describe competition over a range of population densities with varying mixing ratios and at a range of total densities, generally also based on the hyperbolic yield-density relationship (Suehiro and Ogawa, 1980; Wright, 1981; Spitters, 1983a, b; Cousens, 1985; Spitters, Kropff and de Groot, 1989). Similar approaches have been developed using the neighbourhood approach, in which the number of neighbours of an individual plant in a predefined area is related to the weight of the central plant (Silander and Pacala, 1985; Firbank and Watkinson,

[1]  Susan E. Weaver,et al.  Use of Ecophysiological Models for Crop-Weed Interference: Relations Amongst Weed Density, Relative Time of Weed Emergence, Relative Leaf Area, and Yield Loss , 1992, Weed Science.

[2]  C.J.T. Spitters,et al.  Simulation of competition for light and water in crop-weed associations , 1983 .

[3]  Martin J. Kropff,et al.  Quantitative understanding of the irrigated rice ecosystem and yield potential. , 1994 .

[4]  K. Yoda,et al.  Self-thinning in overcrowded pure stands under cultivated and natural conditions (Intraspecific competition among higher plants. XI) , 1963 .

[5]  L. Aarssen,et al.  On the density dependence of replacement-series competition experiments , 1989 .

[6]  John A. Silander,et al.  Neighborhood interference among velvet leaf, Abutilon theophrasti, and pigweed, Amaranthus retroflexus , 1987 .

[7]  Roger D. Cousens,et al.  An empirical model relating crop yield to weed and crop density and a statistical comparison with other models , 1985, The Journal of Agricultural Science.

[8]  和夫 穂積,et al.  Intraspecific competition among higher plants. IV. , 1956 .

[9]  A Darwinkel,et al.  Patterns of tillering and grain production of winter wheat at a wide range of plant densities. , 1978 .

[10]  B. Graf,et al.  A simulation model for the dynamics of rice growth and development: Part II—The competition with weeds for nitrogen and light , 1990 .

[11]  N. R. Bartlett,et al.  The population biology of plants with clonal growth. III: Analysis of tiller mortality in Carex arenaria , 1985 .

[12]  A. J. Wright The analysis of yield-density relationships in binary mixtures using inverse polynomials , 1981, The Journal of Agricultural Science.

[13]  J. Connolly ON DIFFICULTIES WITH REPLACEMENT-SERIES METHODOLOGY IN MIXTURE EXPERIMENTS , 1986 .

[14]  B. H. Janssen,et al.  A system for quantitative evaluation of the fertility of tropical soils (QUEFTS). , 1990 .

[15]  J. Goudriaan,et al.  Some techniques in dynamic simulation , 1982 .

[16]  M. Kropff,et al.  Use of Ecophysiological Models for Crop-Weed Interference: The Critical Period of Weed Interference , 1992, Weed Science.

[17]  T. Hodges,et al.  Light interception model for estimating the effects of row spacing on plant competition in maize. , 1990 .

[18]  Roger D. Cousens,et al.  The use of Biologically Realistic Equations to Describe the Effects of Weed Density and Relative Time of Emergence on Crop Yield , 1987, Weed Science.

[19]  R. W. Willey Intercropping Its Importance And Research Needs Part 1. Competition And Yield Advantages Vol-32 , 1979 .

[20]  Martin J. Kropff,et al.  An eco-physiological model for interspecific competition, applied to the influence of Chenopodium album L. on sugar beet. I : Model description and parameterization , 1992 .

[21]  H. H. Laar,et al.  Physiological potential of crop production , 1979 .

[22]  B. Trenbath Plant Interactions in Mixed Crop Communities , 1976 .

[23]  C. T. Wit,et al.  Simulation of assimilation, respiration, and transpiration of crops , 1978 .

[24]  S. Yoshida Fundamentals of rice crop science , 1981 .

[25]  F.W.T. Penning de Vries,et al.  Simulation of growth processes and the model BACROS , 1982 .

[26]  J. S. Holt,et al.  Weed ecology : implications for vegetation management , 1984 .

[27]  M. J. Kropff,et al.  Modelling the effects of weeds on crop production , 1988 .

[28]  Andrew R. Watkinson,et al.  Density-dependence in single-species populations of plants , 1980 .

[29]  G. Hoogenboom,et al.  SOYBEAN CROP GROWTH SIMULATION MODEL USER'S GUIDE , 1989 .

[30]  Les G. Firbank,et al.  9 – On the Effects of Competition: From Monocultures to Mixtures , 1990 .

[31]  J. R. Kiniry,et al.  CERES-Maize: a simulation model of maize growth and development , 1986 .

[32]  T. Kira,et al.  Intraspecific competition among higher plants I: Competition-yield-density interrelationship in regularly dispersed populations , 1953 .

[33]  Martin J. Kropff,et al.  A simple model of crop loss by weed competition from early observations on relative leaf area of the weeds , 1991 .

[34]  Susan E. Weaver,et al.  Estimating Yield Losses of Tomatoes (Lycopersicon esculentum) Caused by Nightshade (Solanum spp.) Interference , 1987, Weed Science.

[35]  H. Keulen,et al.  A simple and universal crop growth simulator: SUCROS87. , 1989 .

[36]  M. Kropff,et al.  Competition between maize and Echinochloa crus-galli analysed by a hyperbolic regression model. , 1989 .

[37]  Glyn M. Rimmington,et al.  A model of the effect of interspecies competition for light on dry-matter production , 1984 .

[38]  W. de Groot,et al.  An eco-physiological model for interspecific competition, applied to the influence of Chenopodium album L. on sugar beet. II. Model evaluation , 1992 .

[39]  W. de Groot,et al.  Competition between a maize crop and a natural population of Echinochloa crus-galli (L.) P.B. , 1984 .

[40]  William M. Schaffer,et al.  Plant strategies and the dynamics and structure of plant communities , 1989 .

[41]  John H. Vandermeer,et al.  The Ecology of Intercropping: Critical research directions for the future , 1989 .

[42]  James W. Jones,et al.  SOYWEED: A Simulation Model of Soybean and Common Cocklebur Growth and Competition , 1990 .

[43]  C.J.T. Spitters,et al.  An alternative approach to the analysis of mixed cropping experiments. II. Marketable yield , 1983 .

[44]  C.J.T. Spitters,et al.  An alternative approach to the analysis of mixed cropping experiments. I. Estimation of competition effects , 1983 .