The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Allocation and the Transient Dynamics of Succession on Poor Soils
Abstract
Biomass and nitrogen allocation to leaf, root, stem, and reproduction was determined in a 35—field chronosequence that spans the first 60 yr of secondary succession on a Minnesota sand plain. Biomass (grams per square metre) in leaf and root increased during succession, but reproductive biomass declined, and that in stem remained constant. Because root biomass increased twice as rapidly as leaf biomass, the proportion of total biomass in root increased during succession, whereas that in leaf, reproduction, and stem declined. In an additional study, biomass allocation was determined on a species—by—species basis for 46 species common at different times during succession. This study showed a similar pattern of increasing proportional root allocation and declining proportional reproductive and stem allocation during succession. These changes were accompanied by an increase in total soil nitrogen and a decrease in light penetration to the soil surface during succession. Increasing root allocation and decreasing reproductive allocation suggest that succession on these nutrient—poor soils is the transient dynamics of colonization and competitive displacement, with later successional species being superior nitrogen competitors because of higher root allocation. Allocation trade—offs root, stem, leaf, and seed can lead to initial dominance by species with high seed and leaf allocation, presumably because of greater colonization and/or maximal growth rates. Thus, this succession differs markedly from successions on rich soils, for which stem allocation is increasingly important. These results contradict the resource ratio hypothesis as an explanation for the pattern of early succession on impoverished soils.
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
Cites
Secondary succession and the pattern of plant dominance along experimental nitrogen gradients
Tilman, D. (1987) · Ecological Monographs · doi:10.2307/2937080 · Cited by 1,076
Cited by
Competition and Biodiversity in Spatially Structured Habitats
Tilman, D. (1994) · Ecology · doi:10.2307/1939377 · Cited by 2,780
Self-citationPLANT FUNCTIONAL MARKERS CAPTURE ECOSYSTEM PROPERTIES DURING SECONDARY SUCCESSION
Garnier, E., Cortez, J., Billès, G., Navas, M.-L., Roumet, C., Debussche, M., Laurent, G., Blanchard, A., Aubry, D., Bellmann, A., et al. (2004) · Ecology · doi:10.1890/03-0799 · Cited by 2,313
Constraints and Tradeoffs: Toward a Predictive Theory of Competition and Succession
Tilman, D. (1990) · Oikos · doi:10.2307/3565355 · Cited by 750
Self-citationReconciling plant strategy theories of Grime and Tilman
CRAINE, J. M. (2005) · Journal of Ecology · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2745.2005.01043.x · Cited by 634
Dynamics of soil nitrogen and carbon accumulation for 61 years after agricultural abandonment
Knops, J. M. H., & Tilman, D. (2000) · Ecology · doi:10.1890/0012-9658(2000)081[0088:dosnac]2.0.co;2 · Cited by 595
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Gleeson, S. K., & Tilman, D.
- Venue
- Ecology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 1990-06
- Volume
- 71
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 1144-1155
- ISSN
- 0012-9658 (ISSN-L)
- 1939-9170
- OpenAlex
- W2070480106
- Cited by
- 247
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 10.47
- 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: Allocation and the Transient Dynamics of Succession on Poor Soils. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2307/1937382
- The paper
- Gleeson, S. K., & Tilman, D. (1990). Allocation and the Transient Dynamics of Succession on Poor Soils. Ecology. https://doi.org/10.2307/1937382
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.