Contents
 	Summary	30	
I.	Allocation in perspective	31	
II.	Topics of this review	32	
III.	Methodology	32	
IV.	Environmental effects	33	
V.	Ontogeny	36	
VI.	Differences between species	40	
VII.	Physiology and molecular regulation	41	
VIII.	Ecological aspects	42	
IX.	Perspectives	45	
 	Acknowledgements	45	
 	References	45	
 	Appendices A1–A4	49	


Summary
We quantified the biomass allocation patterns to leaves, stems and roots in vegetative plants, and how this is influenced by the growth environment, plant size, evolutionary history and competition. Dose–response curves of allocation were constructed by means of a meta-analysis from a wide array of experimental data. They show that the fraction of whole-plant mass represented by leaves (LMF) increases most strongly with nutrients and decreases most strongly with light. Correction for size-induced allocation patterns diminishes the LMF-response to light, but makes the effect of temperature on LMF more apparent. There is a clear phylogenetic effect on allocation, as eudicots invest relatively more than monocots in leaves, as do gymnosperms compared with woody angiosperms. Plants grown at high densities show a clear increase in the stem fraction. However, in most comparisons across species groups or environmental factors, the variation in LMF is smaller than the variation in one of the other components of the growth analysis equation: the leaf area : leaf mass ratio (SLA). In competitive situations, the stem mass fraction increases to a smaller extent than the specific stem length (stem length : stem mass). Thus, we conclude that plants generally are less able to adjust allocation than to alter organ morphology.

https://nph.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/j.1469-8137.2011.03952.x

Biomass allocation to leaves, stems and roots: meta-analyses of interspecific variation and environmental control

Contents
I. Introduction 000
II. Morphological responses  000
III. Root demography 000
IV. Physiological plasticity 000
V. Root plasticity in patches in competition and symbiosis with microorganisms 000
VI. Influence of patch attributes 000
VII. Control of root proliferation 000
VIII. Conclusions 000

Acknowledgements 000


References 000



Summary
When roots encounter a nutrient-rich zone or patch they often proliferate within it. Roots experiencing nutrient-rich patches can also enhance their physiological ion-uptake capacities compared with roots of the same plant outside the patch zone. These plastic responses by the root system have been proposed as the major mechanism by which plants cope with the naturally occurring heterogeneous supplies of nutrients in soil. Various attempts to predict how contrasting species will respond to patches have been made based on specific root length (SRL), root demography and biomass allocation within the patch zone. No one criterion has proved definitive. Actually demonstrating that root proliferation is beneficial to the plant, especially in terms of nitrogen capture from patches, has also proved troublesome. Yet by growing plants under more realistic conditions, such as in interspecific plant competition, and with a complex organic patch, a direct benefit can be demonstrated. Thus, as highlighted in this review, the environmental context in which the root response is expressed is as important as the magnitude of the response itself.

https://www.jstor.org/stable/info/1514473

The plastic plant: root responses to heterogeneous supplies of nutrients

Understanding how terrestrial ecosystems function requires a combined aboveground–belowground approach, because of the importance of feedbacks that occur between herbivores, producers, and the decomposer subsystem. In this paper, we identify several mechanisms by which herbivores can indirectly affect decomposer organisms and soil processes through altering the quantity and quality of resources entering the soil. We show that these mechanisms are broadly similar in nature for both foliar and root herbivory, regardless of whether they operate in the short term as a result of physiological responses of individual plants to herbivore attack or long-term following alteration of plant community structure by herbivores and subsequent changes in the quality of litter inputs to soil. We propose that a variety of possible mechanisms is responsible for the idiosyncratic nature of herbivore effects on soil biota and ecosystem function; positive, negative, or neutral effects of herbivory are possible depending upon the balance of these different mechanisms. However, we predict that positive effects of herbivory on soil biota and soil processes are most common in ecosystems of high soil fertility and high consumption rates, whereas negative effects are most common in unproductive ecosystems with low consumption rates. The significance of multiple-species herbivore communities is also emphasized, and we propose that if resource use complementarity among herbivore species or functional groups leads to greater total consumption of phytomass, and thus greater net herbivory, then both positive and negative consequences of increasing herbivore diversity for belowground properties and processes are theoretically possible. Research priorities are highlighted and include a need for comparative studies of herbivore impacts on above- and belowground processes across ecosystems of varying productivity, as well as a need for experimental testing of the influence of antiherbivore defense compounds on complex multitrophic interactions in the rhizosphere and the significance of multiple herbivore species communities on these plant–soil interactions.

Herbivore-mediated linkages between aboveground and belowground communities

https://www.cell.com/trends/plant-science/pdf/S1360-1385(03)00302-9.pdf

How plants communicate using the underground information superhighway.

Habitat selection, and its associated density and frequency-dependent evolution, has a profound influence on such vital phenomena as population regulation, species interactions, the assembly of ecological communities, and the origin and maintenance of biodiversity. Different strategies of habitat selection, and their importance in ecology and evolution, can often be revealed simply by plots of density in adjacent habitats. For individual species, the strategies are closely intertwined with mechanisms of population regulation, and with the persistence of populations through time. For interacting species, strategies of habitat selection are not only responsible for species coexistence, but provide one of the most convenient mechanisms for measuring competition, and the various community structures caused by competitive interactions. Other kinds of interactions, such as those between predators and prey, demonstrate that an understanding of the coevolution of habitat-selection strategies among strongly interacting species is essential to properly interpret their spatial and temporal dynamics. At the evolutionary scale, the frequency dependence associated with habitat selection may often allow populations to diverge and diversify into separate species. Habitat selection thereby demonstrates how we can map microevolutionary strategies in behavior onto their population and community consequences, and from there, onto macroevolutionary patterns of speciation and adaptive radiation. We can anticipate that future studies of habitat selection will not only help us complete those maps, but that they will also continue to enrich the panoply of ideas that shape evolutionary ecology.

Toward an ecological synthesis: a case for habitat selection

Summary 1 We develop and test a game-theoretic model for considering the effects of intra- and interplant competition on root proliferation and reproductive yield. 2 We predict that if space and resources per individual are held constant, plants should produce more roots per individual and less reproductive yield per individual as the number of plants sharing the combined space increases. 3 We tested the predictions using soybean plants ( Glycine max ) cultivated in the glasshouse either as owners or as two individuals sharing twice the space and nutrients. 4 Sharing individuals produced 85% more root mass than owners. Owners, however, produced 30% more reproductive yield per plant (dry mass of seeds), as a result of significantly more seed pods (8.70 vs. 7.66), more seeds per pod (1.87 vs. 1.72) and larger seeds (0.205 vs. 0.195 g seed ‐1 ), than did sharing individuals. 5 Total plant biomass did not differ between owners and sharing individuals, but owners had significantly higher shoot to root ratios, produced significantly more seeds per unit root mass, and allocated a significantly higher percentage of total biomass production to seeds. 6 Possession of an evolutionarily stable strategy (ESS) of root competition suggests that different roots and parts of a plant assess and respond to opportunities in a manner that maximizes the good of the whole plant. Thus, plants may be more sophisticated and share more in common with animals in their non-cognitive behaviours than previously thought. A plant operating as a co-ordinated whole should, all else being equal, first proliferate roots in unoccupied soil, then in soil occupied by a conspecific competitor, and lastly in soil already occupied by its own roots.

https://besjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1046/j.0022-0477.2001.00609.x

Godfrey M. Maina

Papers

Tragedy of the commons as a result of root competition