Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

Resource-based niches provide a basis for plant species diversity and dominance in arctic tundra

Nature volume 415, pages 68–71 (2002)Cite this article

Abstract

Ecologists have long been intrigued by the ways co-occurring species divide limiting resources. Such resource partitioning, or niche differentiation, may promote species diversity by reducing competition1,2. Although resource partitioning is an important determinant of species diversity and composition in animal communities3, its importance in structuring plant communities has been difficult to resolve4. This is due mainly to difficulties in studying how plants compete for belowground resources5. Here we provide evidence from a 15N-tracer field experiment showing that plant species in a nitrogen-limited, arctic tundra community were differentiated in timing, depth and chemical form of nitrogen uptake, and that species dominance was strongly correlated with uptake of the most available soil nitrogen forms. That is, the most productive species used the most abundant nitrogen forms, and less productive species used less abundant forms. To our knowledge, this is the first documentation that the composition of a plant community is related to partitioning of differentially available forms of a single limiting resource.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Relevant articles

Open Access articles citing this article.

Access options

Rent or buy this article

Prices vary by article type

from$1.95

to$39.95

Learn more

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Figure 1: Aboveground uptake of available soil nitrogen by the five most common species in tussock tundra.
Figure 2: Aboveground net primary production (mean ± standard error) of the five most common species in tussock tundra.

References

  1. Hutchinson, G. E. Homage to Santa Rosalia, or why are there so many kinds of animals? Am. Nat. 93, 145–159 (1959).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Tilman, D. Resource Competition and Community Structure (Princeton Univ. Press, Princeton, New Jersey, 1982).

    Google Scholar 

  3. Schoener, T. W. Resource partitioning in ecological communities. Science 185, 27–39 (1974).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Silvertown, J., Dodd, M. E., Gowing, D. J. G. & Mountford, J. O. Hydrologically defined niches reveal a basis for species richness in plant communities. Nature 400, 61–63 (1999).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Casper, B. B. & Jackson, R. B. Plant competition underground. Ann. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 1997, 545–570 (1997).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Stewart, F. M. & Levin, B. R. Partitioning of resources and the outcome of interspecific competition: a model and some general considerations. Am. Nat. 107, 171–198 (1973).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Armstrong, R. A. & McGehee, R. Competitive exclusion. Am. Nat. 115, 151–170 (1980).

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  8. Connell, J. Diversity in tropical rainforests and coral reefs. Science 199, 1302–1310 (1978).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Huston, M. A general hypothesis of species diversity. Am. Nat. 113, 81–101 (1979).

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  10. Shaver, G. R. & Chapin, F. S., III. Response to fertilization by various plant growth forms in an Alaskan tundra: nutrient accumulation and growth. Ecology 61, 662–675 (1980).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Shaver, G. R. & Chapin, F. S., III. Production: biomass relationships and element cycling in contrasting arctic vegetation types. Ecol. Monogr. 6, 1–31 (1991).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Parrish, J. A. D. & Bazzaz, F. A. Underground niche separation in successional plants. Ecology 57, 1281–1288 (1976).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Kielland, K. Amino acid absorption by arctic plants: implications for plant nutrition and nitrogen cycling. Ecology 75, 2373–2383 (1994).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Shaver, G. R. & Billings, W. D. Root production and root turnover in a wet tundra ecosystem, Barrow, Alaska. Ecology 56, 401–410 (1975).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Chapin, F. S., III, Moilanen, L. & Kielland, K. Preferential use of organic nitrogen for growth by a non-mycorrhizal arctic sedge. Nature 361, 150–153 (1993).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Flanagan, L. B., Ehleringer, J. R. & Marshall, J. D. Differential uptake of summer precipitation among co-occurring trees and shrubs in a pinyon-juniper woodland. Plant Cell Environ. 15, 831–836 (1992).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Raab, T. K., Lipson, D. A. & Monson, R. K. Soil amino acid utilization among species of the Cyperaceae: plant and soil processes. Ecology 80, 2408–2419 (1999).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. McKane, R. B., Grigal, D. F. & Russelle, M. P. Spatiotemporal differences in 15N uptake and the organization of an old-field plant community. Ecology 71, 1126–1132 (1990).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Kielland, K. Landscape patterns of free amino acids in artic tundra soils. Biogeochemistry 31, 85–98 (1995).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Hutchinson, G. E. Concluding remarks. Cold Spring Harbor Symp. Quant. Biol. 22, 415–427 (1957).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. McNaughton, S. J. & Wolf, L. L. Dominance and the niche in ecological systems. Science 167, 131–139 (1970).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Whittaker, R. H. Communities and Ecosystems (Macmillan, New York, 1975).

    Google Scholar 

  23. Rieger, S., Schoephorster, D. B. & Furbush, C. E. Exploratory Soil Survey of Alaska (US Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service, Washington DC, 1979).

    Google Scholar 

  24. Bliss, L. C. & Matveyeva, N. V. in Arctic Ecosystems in a Changing Climate (eds Chapin, F. S., III et al.) 59–89 (Academic, San Diego, California, 1992).

    Book  Google Scholar 

  25. Shaver, G. R. Woody stem production in Alaskan tundra shrubs. Ecology 67, 660–669 (1986).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Owen, A. G. & Jones, D. L. Competition for amino acids between wheat roots and rhizosphere microorganisms and the role of amino acids in plant N acquisition. Soil Biol. Biochem. 33, 651–657 (2001).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank C. Catricala, R. Brooks, J. Compton, J. Gregg, L. Gough, T. Nasholm, S. Perakis, D. Phillips and P. Rygiewicz for comments. This work was supported by the National Science Foundation and US Environmental Protection Agency.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. US Environmental Protection Agency, Corvallis, 97333, Oregon, USA

    Robert B. McKane

  2. Division of Biology, Kansas State University, Manhattan, 66506, Kansas, USA

    Loretta C. Johnson

  3. The Ecosystems Center, Marine Biological Laboratory, Woods Hole, 02543, Massachusetts, USA

    Gaius R. Shaver, Knute J. Nadelhoffer, Edward B. Rastetter, Anne E. Giblin, Bonnie L. Kwiatkowski & James A. Laundre

  4. Institute of Pacific Islands Forestry, USDA Forest Service, Honolulu, 96813, Hawaii, USA

    Brian Fry

  5. Institute of Arctic Biology, University of Alaska, Fairbanks, 99775, Alaska, USA

    Knut Kielland

  6. Appalachian Mountain Club, Gorham, 03581, New Hampshire, USA

    Georgia Murray

Authors
  1. Robert B. McKane
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Loretta C. Johnson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Gaius R. Shaver
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Knute J. Nadelhoffer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Edward B. Rastetter
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Brian Fry
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Anne E. Giblin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Knut Kielland
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Bonnie L. Kwiatkowski
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. James A. Laundre
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  11. Georgia Murray
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Robert B. McKane.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing financial interests.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

McKane, R., Johnson, L., Shaver, G. et al. Resource-based niches provide a basis for plant species diversity and dominance in arctic tundra. Nature 415, 68–71 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1038/415068a

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/415068a

This article is cited by

Comments

By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing