The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Competitive Responses of Eight Old‐Field Plant Species in Four Environments
Abstract
Variation in relative competitive abilities among environments has been proposed to control the species composition of plant communities. We tested whether the competitive responses of eight species varied with fertility and disturbance in an old field. We also tested whether the competitive effects of vegetation varied with fertility and disturbance in an old field. We also tested whether the competitive effects of vegetation varied with fertility and disturbance. Plots received one of four combinations of nitrogen (added or not) and disturbance (tilled or not) in each of five years. There were 10 replicates of each treatment. In the fifth summer, transplants of eight species comprising annual and perennial forbs and grasses were grown in all four combinations of the N and disturbance treatments. Transplants were grown in subplots with all neighbors, with only roots of neighbors, or with no neighbors. Transplant roots and shoots were harvested after one summer and individual growth rates were determined. Growth rate varied significantly with the interaction among species, competition, and N, suggesting that species differed in their competitive responses and that these differences varied with N availability. Comparisons among competition treatments at each level of N showed six distinct responses in the eight species examined. The competitive effect of neighboring vegetation shifted from roots to shoots as N increased, but decreased in disturbed plots. The total effect of competition increased significantly with neighbor mass in 4 of the 32 examined (eight species in four combinations of N and disturbance). All four cases involved annuals in annual neighborhoods. The results for eight species confirmed earlier single—species diverged in their responses to competition as soil N availability varied.
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
Taylor, D. R., Aarssen, L. W., & Loehle, C. (1990) · Oikos · doi:10.2307/3545432 · Cited by 470
Cited by
Goldberg, D. E., Rajaniemi, T., Gurevitch, J., & Stewart-Oaten, A. (1999) · Ecology · doi:10.1890/0012-9658(1999)080[1118:eatqii]2.0.co;2 · Cited by 485
Resource competition in plant invasions: emerging patterns and research needs
Gioria, M., & Osborne, B. A. (2014) · Frontiers in Plant Science · doi:10.3389/fpls.2014.00501 · Cited by 437
Does phylogenetic relatedness influence the strength of competition among vascular plants?
Cahill, J. F., Kembel, S. W., Lamb, E. G., & Keddy, P. A. (2008) · Perspectives in Plant Ecology, Evolution and Systematics · doi:10.1016/j.ppees.2007.10.001 · Cited by 356
Competitive ability: definitions, contingency and correlated traits
Goldberg, D. E. (1996) · Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences · doi:10.1098/rstb.1996.0121 · Cited by 295
Metadata
- Authors
- Wilson, S. D., & Tilman, D.
- Venue
- Ecology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 1995-06
- Volume
- 76
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 1169-1180
- ISSN
- 0012-9658 (ISSN-L)
- 1939-9170
- OpenAlex
- W2037108547
- Cited by
- 177
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 9.22
- 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: Competitive Responses of Eight Old‐Field Plant Species in Four Environments. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2307/1940924
- The paper
- Wilson, S. D., & Tilman, D. (1995). Competitive Responses of Eight Old‐Field Plant Species in Four Environments. Ecology. https://doi.org/10.2307/1940924
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.