Quantifying Microbial Competition on Leaves

  • Linda L. Kinkel
  • Miriam R. Newton
  • Kurt J. Leonard


The concept of competition occupies a central place in theories of ecology and evolution. Over the last three decades, extensive studies of the role of competition in regulating the population dynamics of various organisms have been accompanied by the development of a rich body of theory relating to competition (Diamond, 1978; Grime, 1979; Tilman, 1982; Roughgarden, 1983). However, not all ecologists have accepted the supremacy of competition as a mechanism for regulating natural populations (Roughgarden, 1985; Connell, 1983; Connor and Simberloff, 1986; Goldberg and Barton, 1992). In response to the intense focus on competition by some ecologists, a vociferous debate has erupted about the significance of interspecific competition in natural communities (Lewin, 1983 a, Lewin, 1983 b). In recent years, researchers have provided strong evidence for the importance of disturbance, the physical environment, and extra-population movement (immigration and emigration) in determining the dynamics of specific populations (Dayton, 1971; Roughgarden, 1986). Today this debate continues, and the tension generated by the competing hypotheses has provided a fertile ground for both theory and experimentation.


Competitive Ability Reproductive Output Interaction Coefficient Relative Fitness Spore Production 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Adee, S. R., Pfender, W. F., and Hartnett, D. C. 1990, Competition between Pyrenophora tritici-repentis and Septoria nodorum in the wheat leaf as measured with de Wit replacement series. Phytopathology 80:1177–1182.Google Scholar
  2. Blakeman, J. P and Brodie, I. D. S. 1977, Competition for nutrients between epiphytic micro-organisms and germination of spores of plant pathogens on beetroot leaves. Phys. Pl. Pathol. 10:29–42.Google Scholar
  3. Campbell, C. L. and Madden, L. V. 1990, Introduction to Plant Disease Epidemiology. John Wiley and Sons, Inc., New York.Google Scholar
  4. Connell, J. H. 1983, On the prevalence and relative importance of interspecific competition: evidence from field experiments. Am. Nat. 122:661–696.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Connor, E. F. and Simberloff, D. 1986, Competition, scientific method, and null models in ecology. Am. Sci. 74:155–162.Google Scholar
  6. Dayton, P. K. 1971. Competition, disturbance, and community organization: the provision and subsequent utilization of space in a rocky intertidal community. Ecol. Monogr. 41:351–389CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Diamond, J. M. 1978, Niche shifts and the rediscovery of interspecific copmetition. Am. Sci. 66:322–331.Google Scholar
  8. Firbank, L. G. and Watkinson, A. R. 1985, On the analysis of competition within two-species mixtures of plants. J. Appl. Ecol. 22:503–517.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Fokkema, N. J., Riphagen, I., Poot, R. J., and deJong, C. 1983, Aphid honeydew, a potential stimulant of Cochliobolus sativus and Septoria nodorum and the competitive role of saprophytic mycoflora. Trans. Br. mycol. Soc. 81:355–363.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Goldberg, D. E., and Barton, A. M. 1992, Patterns and consequences of interspecific competition in natural communities: A review of field experiments with plants. Am. Nat. 139:771–801.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Hamilton, T. H. 1967, Process and Pattern in Evolution. Macmillan, New York.Google Scholar
  12. Holmer, L. and Stenlid, J. 1993, The importance of inoculum size for the competitive ability of wood composing fungi. FEMS Microbiol. Ecol. 12:169–176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Kardin, M. K., and Groth, J. V. 1989, Density-dependent fitness interactions in the bean rust fungus. Phytopathology 79:409–412.Google Scholar
  14. Kinkel, L. L., Andrews, J. H., and Nordeheim, E. V. 1989, Fungal immigration dynamics and community development on apple leaves. Microb. Ecol. 18:45–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Kinkel, L. L. and Lindow, S. E. 1993, Invasion and exclusion among coexisting Pseudomonas syringae strains on leaves. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 59:3447–3454.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Kinkel, L. L. and Lindow, S. E. 1996, Microbial competition and plant disease biocontrol. In: Andow, D., Ragsdale, D. and Nyvall, R. (eds.), Ecological Interactions and Biological Control. Westview Press, Boulder, Colorado (in press).Google Scholar
  17. Lewin, R. 1983, Santa Rosalia was a goat. Science 221:636–639.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Lewin, R. 1983, Predators and hurricanes change ecology. Science 221:737–740.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Lindemann, J. and Suslow, T. V. 1987, Competition between ice nucleation active wild-type and ice nucleation deficient deletion mutant strains of Pseudomonas syringae and P. fluorescens biovar I and biological control of frost injury on strawberry blossoms. Phytopathology 77:882–886.Google Scholar
  20. Lindow, S. E. 1987, Competitive exclusion of epiphytic bacateria by Ice-mutants of Pseudomonas syringae. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 53:2520–2527.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Rieger, R., Michaelis, A., and Green, M. M. 1991, Glossary of Genetics, 5th Edition. Springer-Verlag, Berlin.Google Scholar
  22. Roughgarden, J. 1979, Theory of Population Genetics and Evolutionary Ecology: An Introduction. Macmillan, New York.Google Scholar
  23. Roughgarden, J. 1986, A comparison of food-limited and space-limited communities, pp. 492–516 In: Diamond, J. and Case, T.J. (eds.). Community Ecology. Harper and Row, New York.Google Scholar
  24. Roughgarden, J., Iwasa, Y. and Baxter, C. 1985, Demographic theory for an open marine population with space-limited recruitment. Ecology 66:54–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Rouse, D. I., MacKenzie, D. R. and Nelson, R. R. 1984, Density dependent sporulation of Erysiphe graminis f. sp. tritici. Phytopathology 74:1176–1180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Snaydon, R. W. 1991, Replacement or additive designs for competition studies? J. Appl Ecol. 28:930–946.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Thompson, K. 1987, The resource ratio hypothesis and the meaning of competition. Functional Ecol. 1:297–303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Tilman, D. 1987, On the meaning of competition and the mechanisms of competitive superiority. Functional Ecol. 1:304–315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Wilson, M. and Lindow, S. E. 1994a, Ecological similarity and coexistence of epiphytic ice-nucleating (Ice+) Pseudomonas syringae strains and a non-ice-nucleating (Ice-) biological control agent. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 60:3128–3137.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Wilson, M. and Lindow, S. E. 1994b, Coexistence among epiphytic bacterial populations mediated through nutritional resource partitioning. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 60:4468–4477.PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Press, New York 1996

Authors and Affiliations

  • Linda L. Kinkel
    • 1
  • Miriam R. Newton
    • 1
  • Kurt J. Leonard
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Plant PathologyUniversity of MinnesotaSaint Paul
  2. 2.USDA ARS Cereal Rust LaboratorySaint Paul

Personalised recommendations