A Model of Competition Incorporating Plasticity through Modular Foliage and Crown Development

The model of competition for light presented here uses modular autonomy to incorporate plasticity in plant growth under competition. Once plants are characterized as composed of modules, then model structure for competition changes in a fundamental way. Interactions between the plant module and its local resource environment must be modeled rather than the traditionally viewed interactions between whole plants and their neighbors. We assume that a plant module interacts with its local resource environment regardless of whether this environment was altered by a neighbor or by the same plant. Two spatial processes are considered: resource acquisition and growth. The spatial pattern of resource acquisition by a module determines a growth and allocation pattern, e.g., the elongation of branches into a gap. The spatial structure of a module and its connection to the whole tree then determines the pattern of resource distribution and resource acquisition of the next time step.Plasticity of plant growth is incorporated by variation in both the efficiency of resource capture of modules and patterns of resource allocation for individuals of different canopy positions and results in individuals in the community having different spatial structures. The model simulates the three—dimensional development of tree crown structure over time. It is applied to the 30—yr development of a dense, spatially aggregated stand of Abies amabilis beginning with an initial pattern of seedlings. The importance of incorporation of plasticity is apparent when the model output is compared to observed height distribution and crown structure data. Simulations indicate that asymmetrical crown development, one form of plasticity, is advantageous to stand productivity and becomes more advantageous as the degree of spatial aggregation in the initial spacing of trees increases.

[1]  Boris Zeide,et al.  Tolerance and self-tolerance of trees , 1985 .

[2]  Richard F. Daniels,et al.  A comparison of competition measures for predicting growth of loblolly pine trees , 1986 .

[3]  E. D. Ford,et al.  Simulation of branch growth in the Pinaceae: Interactions of morphology, phenology, foliage productivity, and the requirement for structural support, on the export of carbon† , 1990 .

[4]  J. Norman,et al.  Radiative Transfer in an Array of Canopies1 , 1983 .

[5]  D. Ehrhardt,et al.  Light-Depedent Dominance and Suppression in Experimental Radish Populations , 1986 .

[6]  A. Walden,et al.  On the evaluation of geophysical models , 1987 .

[7]  Photosynthesis in Sitka spruce (Picea sitchensis (Bong.) Carr.) X. Acclimation to quantum flux density within and between trees. , 1980 .

[8]  John L. Harper.  A DARWINIAN APPROACH TO PLANT ECOLOGY , 1967 .

[9]  John L. Harper,et al.  INTERFERENCE IN DUNE ANNUALS: SPATIAL PATTERN AND NEIGHBOURHOOD EFFECTS , 1977 .

[10]  S. Sultan.  Evolutionary Implications of Phenotypic Plasticity in Plants , 1987 .

[11]  Peter J. Diggle,et al.  Competition for Light in a Plant Monoculture Modelled as a Spatial Stochastic Process , 1981 .

[12]  Gordon B. Bonan,et al.  The size structure of theoretical plant populations: spatial patterns and neighborhood effects , 1988 .

[13]  Jacob Weiner,et al.  Size variability and competition in plant monocultures , 1986 .

[14]  S. Pacala,et al.  Neighborhood Models of Plant Population Dynamics. I. Single-Species Models of Annuals , 1985, The American Naturalist.

[15]  T. Pukkala,et al.  Competition indices and the prediction of radial growth in Scots pine. , 1987 .

[16]  P. Marks,et al.  STAND STRUCTURE AND ALLOMETRY OF TREES DURING SELF-THINNING OF PURE STANDS , 1978 .

[17]  M. Westcott,et al.  Partitioning the union of disks in plant competition models , 1979, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. A. Mathematical and Physical Sciences.

[18]  N. C. Kenkel,et al.  Pattern of Self‐Thinning in Jack Pine: Testing the Random Mortality Hypothesis , 1988 .

[19]  E. D. Ford,et al.  Competition and stand structure in some even-aged plant monocultures , 1975 .

[20]  J. Antonovics,et al.  Adaptation to heterogeneous environments. III.* The inheritance of response to spacing in flax and linseed (Linum usitatissimum) , 1976 .

[21]  P. Oker-Blom,et al.  Photosynthetic radiation regime and canopy structure in modeled forest stands. , 1986 .

[22]  I. Bella,et al.  A New Competition Model for Individual Trees , 1971 .

[23]  J. A. Moore,et al.  A New Index Representing Individual Tree Competitive Status , 1973 .

[24]  J. Norman,et al.  Photosynthesis in Sitka spruce (Picea sitchensis (Bong.) Carr.). V. Radiation penetration theory and a test case , 1975 .

[25]  E. David Ford,et al.  Theory and Models of Inter-Plant Competition as a Spatial Process , 1992 .

[26]  P. Rothery,et al.  Competition Within Stands of Picea sitchensis and Pinus contorta , 1984 .

[27]  John A. Silander,et al.  Field Tests of Neighborhood Population Dynamic Models of Two Annual Weed Species , 1990 .

[28]  S. Gentil,et al.  Validation of complex ecosystems models , 1981 .

[29]  Peter J. Diggle.  A spatial stochastic model of inter-plant competition , 1976 .

[30]  E. D. Ford,et al.  Growth of a Sitka Spruce Plantation: Analysis and Stochastic Description of the Development of the Branching Structure , 1978 .