The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Underground Niche Separation in Successional Plants
Abstract
Weekly root extension of six successional annuals in glass—faced boxes was measured over a growing season in 42 soil resource states. Niche breadth and overlap were calculated and compared to values obtained from publish root diagrams of eight tall grass prairie species. Differences in use of soil resources by the successional species were found and interpreted as primitive niche separation to avoid competition. Temporal displacement in absorption of moisture and nutrients is apparently important only to one species (Ipomoea hederacea). The six species showed marked differences in total composition of N, K, Ca, and Mg, although proportional similarities in nutrient use were high. The dominants of the successional community, Setaria faberii, Polygonum pensylvanicum and Ambrosia artemisiifolia had broader niches than the species with lower biomass and density. Two—dimensional overlap matrices in time and space showed Chenopodium album and Setaria to be highest in mean overall overlap, Polygonum and Ambrosia to be intermediate, and Abutilon theophrasti and Ipomoea to be lowest. The use of multidimensional resource states in the construction of an overlap matrix incorporating more than one parameter of the niche hypervolume was shown to be more useful than the multiplication of overlaps along each of the two parameters, space and time. Mean overlap in the use of underground space was considerably lower in the mature community (prairie) than in the successional community (oldfield). This corroborates the hypothesis that competition is less important in the evolution of fugitive species of the oldfield than of equilibrium species of the prairie.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
The Physiological Ecology of Plant Succession
Bazzaz, F. A. (1979) · Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics · doi:10.1146/annurev.es.10.110179.002031 · Cited by 1,310
Self-citationFreschet, G. T., Pagès, L., Iversen, C. M., Comas, L. H., Rewald, B., Roumet, C., Klimešová, J., Zadworny, M., Poorter, H., Postma, J. A., et al. (2021) · New Phytologist · doi:10.1111/nph.17572 · Cited by 668
Coexistence of plant species with similar niches
Shmida, A., & Ellner, S. (1984) · Vegetatio · doi:10.1007/bf00044894 · Cited by 513
Ravenek, J. M., Bessler, H., Engels, C., Scherer‐Lorenzen, M., Gessler, A., Gockele, A., De Luca, E., Temperton, V. M., Ebeling, A., Roscher, C., et al. (2014) · Oikos · doi:10.1111/oik.01502 · Cited by 258
Metadata
- Authors
- Parrish, J. A. D., & Bazzaz, F. A.
- Venue
- Ecology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 1976-11
- Volume
- 57
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 1281-1288
- ISSN
- 0012-9658 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2119863531
- Cited by
- 244
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 6.73
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Underground Niche Separation in Successional Plants. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2307/1935052
- The paper
- Parrish, J. A. D., & Bazzaz, F. A. (1976). Underground Niche Separation in Successional Plants. Ecology. https://doi.org/10.2307/1935052
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.