Divergent compensatory growth responses within species: linked to contrasting migrations in salmon?

Oecologia ◽  
2007 ◽  
Vol 153 (3) ◽  
pp. 543-553 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dylan J. Fraser ◽  
Laura K. Weir ◽  
Tamara L. Darwish ◽  
James D. Eddington ◽  
Jeffrey A. Hutchings



2012 ◽  
Vol 27 (3) ◽  
pp. 569-576
Author(s):  
Wei Zheng ◽  
Guangdi Li ◽  
Yingxin Huang ◽  
Hongxiang Zhang ◽  
Zhihui Luan ◽  
...  


2005 ◽  
Vol 29 (5) ◽  
pp. 740-746
Author(s):  
LEI Shu-Qing ◽  
◽  
WANG Hai-Yang ◽  
DU Guo-Zhen ◽  
PAN Sheng-Wang


2010 ◽  
Vol 26 (2) ◽  
pp. 163-171 ◽  
Author(s):  
Horacio Salomón Ballina-Gómez ◽  
Silvia Iriarte-Vivar ◽  
Roger Orellana ◽  
Louis S. Santiago

Abstract:Defoliation, often caused by herbivory, is a common cause of biomass loss for plants that can affect current and future growth and reproduction. There are three models that predict contrasting compensatory growth responses of plants to herbivory and resource availability: (1) Growth rate model, (2) Compensatory continuum hypothesis and (3) Limiting resource model. The predictions of these three models were tested on the tree Brosimum alicastrum and the liana Vitis tiliifolia. Seedlings were subjected to three levels of experimental defoliation (0%, 50% and 90% leaf removal) along a light resource gradient (1%, 9% and 65% of full sun). In both species, defoliation significantly increased leaf production rate and relative growth rate of leaf area, but not of biomass. Net assimilation rate was the strongest driver of biomass growth in both species, but leaf area ratio and specific leaf area were also important in B. alicastrum. Compensatory responses of leaf area growth in B. alicastrum were significantly greater in higher than lower light availability, consistent with the compensatory continuum hypothesis predictions, but in contrast to the growth rate model predictions. The limiting resource model offered an explanation for all possible experimental outcomes by directly considering the effects of environmental differences in resource availability.



2019 ◽  
Vol 121 ◽  
pp. 486-493
Author(s):  
A.D. Lama ◽  
T. Klemola ◽  
E. Tyystjärvi ◽  
P. Niemelä ◽  
T. Vuorisalo




2014 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 7-23 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nurul Izza Ab Ghani ◽  
Juha Merilä


1970 ◽  
Vol 50 (3) ◽  
pp. 611-616 ◽  
Author(s):  
P. R. CHEEKE ◽  
W. H. KENNICK

The response of growing pigs receiving a low energy diet (LE ration) to periodic exposures to a high energy diet (HE ration) was studied. Forty-eight Berkshire × Yorkshire barrows of approximately 23 kg body weight were divided into six equal groups receiving one of the following treatments: HE control, LE control, and alternations between the LE and HE rations in cycles of 5 days LE: 1 day HE. 4 days LE: 1 day HE, 3 days LE: 1 day HE, and 2 days LE: 1 day HE. The average daily gain of the HE control was significantly greater (P < 0.01) than that of the LE control. The alternated groups did not grow significantly faster than the LE control; thus, compensatory growth responses did not occur. Feed intake of the LE control was higher than that of the HE control. The alternated groups reduced their intake of the LE ration relative to the LE control, and consumed significantly greater amounts (P < 0.001) of the HE diet than did the HE controls. The pigs may have learned to anticipate their period of exposure to the HE diet, since the consumption of the HE ration as a proportion of the total feed intake tended to increase as the experiment progressed. In spite of the differences in amount and pattern of feed consumption, the calculated total energy intake was similar in all groups. The only carcass measurements significantly affected by treatment were dressing percentage and backfat thickness; the possible implications of these effects are discussed.



1980 ◽  
pp. 407-410 ◽  
Author(s):  
D. GÄDEKEN ◽  
H. BÖHME ◽  
H.J. OSLAGE


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document