Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Use of Canopy Models to Analyze Light Competition Among Plants

  • Chapter
Canopy Photosynthesis: From Basics to Applications

Part of the book series: Advances in Photosynthesis and Respiration ((AIPH,volume 42))

Summary

Competition for light among plants is an important factor determining plant trait evolution and community dynamics. It may also strongly modulate crop production. Canopy models provide a useful means of analyzing light competition. This use however entails that these models take account of the interactions between individual plants in vegetation stands, which is challenging. Here we first discuss how light acquisition and photosynthesis by individual plants in vegetation stands can be modeled focusing on relatively simple approaches to this problem. We then give examples of how such canopy models have been used to analyze plant light competition in natural vegetation and in crops. We first analyze the extent to which competition for light is size asymmetric. We demonstrate that, contrary to common belief, this is not always the case. Notably competition between plants of different species tends to be more symmetric than competition among plants of the same species. We then focus on crop-weed interactions, and show how canopy models have enabled us to identify the traits that make crops most effective in competing with weeds. Together these examples illustrate how canopy models can strongly contribute to our mechanistic understanding of plant competition for light.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 229.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 299.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 299.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Abbreviations

f SL :

Fraction of sunlit leaf area

G :

Whole-plant growth

h :

Height in the canopy

h pt :

Plant height

i :

Counter in subscripts indicating canopy layers

I bsa :

Scattered component of direct radiation

I da :

Diffuse sky photon flux density

I L :

Absorbed photon flux per unit leaf area

I o :

General indicator for amounts of light above the canopy

I ob :

Direct beam photon flux density above a canopy layer

I od :

Diffuse sky photon flux density above a canopy layer

j :

Counter in subscripts indicating individual plant within species

k :

Counter in subscripts indicating species

K b :

Extinction coefficient for direct beam radiation

K d :

Extinction coefficient for diffuse light

L :

Cumulative leaf area index measured from the top of the canopy

l :

Counter in subscripts indicating elevation zones on the sky dome

LAI :

Amount of leaf area per unit soil area

LAR:

Leaf area per unit plant mass

LMR:

Leaf mass per unit plant mass

LUE :

Whole-plant photosynthesis per unit of absorbed light

M :

Whole-plant mass

O :

Projection of a leaf into the direction of the sun

P :

Indicator of photosynthesis

P L :

Photosynthesis per unit leaf area

p max :

Light saturated photosynthesis per unit leaf area

p 0 p 1 p 2 :

Parameters indicating the shape of the leaf area distribution

r d :

Dark respiration per unit leaf area

RGR :

Growth per unit plant mass

RUE:

Growth per unit of absorbed light

SH:

Subscript referring to leaves being shaded

SL:

Subscript referring to leaves being sunlit

SLA :

Leaf area per unit leaf mass

Zl :

Fraction of diffuse sky radiation coming from elevation zone l on the sky dome

α:

Leaf absorption coefficient

β:

Solar inclination angle

γ:

Canopy reflectance

ϕ:

Initial slope of the light response curve

Φ:

General indicator of light capture

Φ area :

Whole-plant light capture per unit leaf area

Φ mass :

Whole-plant light capture per unit plant mass

λ:

Amount of leaf area per unit air volume

θ:

Curvature of the light response curve

ζ:

Cumulative leaf area index counted from the top of a canopy layer

References

  • Aan A, Hallik LEA, Kull O (2006) Photon flux partitioning among species along a productivity gradient of an herbaceous plant community. J Ecol 94:1143–1155

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anten NPR (2016) Optimization and game theory in canopy models. In: Hikosaka K, Niinemets Ü, Anten N (eds) Canopy Photosynthesis: From Basics to Applications. Springer, Berlin, pp 355–377

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Anten NPR, Hirose T (1998) Biomass allocation and light partitioning among dominant and subordinant individuals in Xanthium canadense stands. Ann Bot 82:665–673

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anten NPR, Hirose T (1999) Interspecific differences in above-ground growth patterns result in spatial and temporal partitioning of light among species in a tall-grass meadow. J Ecol 87:583–597

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anten NPR, Hirose T (2003) Shoot structure, leaf physiology and daily carbon gain of plant species in a tallgrass meadow. Ecology 84:955–968

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barneix AJ (1990) Yield variation in wheat: nitrogen accumulation, light interception and harvest index. In: Lambers H, Cambridge ML, Konings H, Pons TL (eds) Causes and Consequences of Variation in Growth Rate and Productivity of Higher Plants. SPB Academic Publishing, The Hague, pp 87–100

    Google Scholar 

  • Bastiaans L, Kropff MJ, Kempuchetty N, Rajan A, Migo TR (1997) Can simulation models help design rice cultivars that are more competitive against weeds? Field Crop Res 51:101–111

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bastiaans L, Kropff MJ, Goudriaan J, Van Laar HH (2000) Design of weed management systems with a reduced reliance on herbicides poses new challenges and prerequisites for modeling crop-weed interactions. Field Crop Res 67:161–179

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bastiaans L, Paolini R, Baumann DT (2008) Focus on ecological weed management: what is hindering adoption? Weed Res 48:481–491

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baumann DT, Bastiaans L, Goudriaan J, Van Laar HH, Kropff MJ (2002) Analysing crop yield and plant quality in an intercropping system using an eco-physiological model for interplant competition. Agric Syst 73:173–203

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berntson GM, Wayne PM (2000) Characterizing the size dependence of resource acquisition within crowded plant populations. Ecology 81:1072–1085

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bongers FJ, Evers JB, Anten NPR, Pierik R (2014) From shade avoidance responses to plant performance at vegetation level: using virtual plant modelling as a tool. New Phytol 204:268–272

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Caton BP, Foin TC, Hill JE (1999) A plant growth model for integrated weed management in direct- seeded rice. III. Interspecific competition for light. Field Crop Res 63:47–61

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clements FE, Weaver JE, Hanson HC (1929) Plant Competition: An Analysis of Community Functions. Carnegie Institution, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Coble HD, Mortensen DA (1992) The threshold concept and its application in weed science. Weed Technol 6:191–195

    Google Scholar 

  • Cousens R (1985) An empirical model relating crop yield to weed and crop density and a statistical comparison with other models. J Agric Sci 105:513–521

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Pury DGG, Farquhar GD (1997) Simple scaling of photosynthesis from leaves to canopies without the errors of big-leaf models. Plant Cell Environ 20:537–557

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • de Wit M, Pierik R (2016) Photomorphogenesis and photoreceptors. In: Hikosaka K, Niinemets Ü, Anten N (eds) Canopy Photosynthesis: From Basics to Applications. Springer, Berlin, pp 171–186

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • DeJong TM, Da Silva D, Vos J, Escobar-Gutiérrez AJ (2011) Using functional–structural plant models to study, understand and integrate plant development and ecophysiology. Ann Bot 108:987–989

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Evers JB (2016) Simulating crop growth and development using functional-structural plant modeling. In: Hikosaka K, Niinemets Ü, Anten N (eds) Canopy Photosynthesis: From Basics to Applications. Springer, Berlin, pp 219–236

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Evers JB, Vos J, Chelle M, Andrieu B, Fournier C, Struik PC (2007) Simulating the effects of localized red:far-red ratio on tillering in spring wheat (Triticum aestivum) using a three-dimensional virtual plant model. New Phytol 176:325–336

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Falster DS, Westoby M (2003) Plant height and evolutionary games. Trends Ecol Evol, 18: 337–343

    Google Scholar 

  • Farquhar GD, von Caemmerer S, Berry JA (1980) A biochemical model for photosynthetic CO2 assimilation in leaves of C3 species. Planta 149:78–90

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Givnish TJ (1982) On the adaptive significance of leaf height in forest herbs. Am Nat 120:353–381

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goudriaan J (1977) Crop Micrometeorology: A Simulation Study, Simulation monographs. Pudoc, Wageningen

    Google Scholar 

  • Goudriaan J (1988) The bare bones of leaf angle distribution in radiation models for canopy photosynthesis and energy exchange. Agric For Meteorol 43:155–169

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goudriaan J (2016) Light distribution. In: Hikosaka K, Niinemets Ü, Anten N (eds) Canopy Photosynthesis: From Basics to Applications. Springer, Berlin, pp 3–22

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Hara T (1993) Mode of competition and size-structure dynamics in plant communities. Plant Species Biol 8:75–84

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hikosaka K, Hirose T (2001) Nitrogen uptake and use by competing individuals in Xanthium canadense stand. Oecologia 126:174–181

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hikosaka K, Sudoh S, Hirose T (1999) Light acquisition and use of individuals competing in dense stand of an annual herb Xanthium canadense. Oecologia 118:388–396

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hikosaka K, Yamano T, Nagashima H, Hirose T (2003) Light acquisition and use of individuals as influenced by elevated CO2 in even-aged monospecific stands of Chenopodium album. Funct Ecol 17:786–795

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hirose T, Werger MJA (1987) Nitrogen use efficiency in instantaneous and daily photosynthesis of leaves in the canopy of a Solidago altissima stand. Physiol Plant 70:215–222

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hirose T, Werger MJA (1995) Canopy structure and photon flux partitioning among species in a herbaceous plant community. Ecology 76:466–474

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kamiyama C, Oikawa S, Kubo T, Hikosaka K (2010) Light interception in species with different functional groups coexisting in moorland plant communities. Oecologia 164:591–599

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Keddy PA (1989) Competition. Chapman and Hall, London

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Kohyama T (1992) Size-structured multi-species of rain forest trees. Func Ecology 6:206–212

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kropff MJ (1988) Modelling the effects of weeds on crop production. Weed Res 28:465–471

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kropff MJ, Spitters CJT (1991) A simple model of crop loss by weed competition from early observations on relative leaf area of the weeds. Weed Res 31:97–105

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kropff MJ, Vossen FJH, Spitters CJT, de Groot W (1984) Competition between a maize crop and a natural population of Echinochloa crus-galli (L.). Neth J Agric Sci 35:525–528

    Google Scholar 

  • Lambers H, Chapin FS III, Pons TL (1998) Plant Physiological Ecology. Blackwell, Malden

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Liebman M (2001) Weed management: a need for ecological approaches. In: Liebman M, Mohler CL, Staver CP (eds) Ecological Management of Agricultural Weeds. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 1–39

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Łomnicki A (1980) Regulation of population density due to individual differences and patchy environment. Oikos 35:185–193

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marshall B, Biscoe PV (1980) A model for C3 leaves describing the dependence of net photosynthesis on irradiance. J Exp Bot 31:29–39

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Monsi M, Saeki T (1953) Über den Lichtfaktor in den Pflanzengesellschaften und seine Bedeutung für die Stoffproduktion. Jpn J Bot 14:22–52. Translated as: Monsi M, Saeki T (2005) On the factor light in plant communities and its importance for matter production. Ann Bot 95:549–567

    Google Scholar 

  • Mortensen DA, Bastiaans L, Sattin M (2000) The role of ecology in the development of weed management systems: an outlook. Weed Res 40:49–62

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moss SR (2003) Herbicide resistance in weeds: current status in Europe and guidelines for management. Pestic Outlook 14:164–167

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Niklas KJ (1992) Plant Biomechanics: An Engineering Approach to Plant Form and Function. University of Chicago Press, Chicago

    Google Scholar 

  • Oerke EC (2006) Crop losses to pests. J Agric Sci 144:31–43

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Onoda Y, Salunga E, Anten NPR, Yahara T (2014) Tradeoff between light interception efficiency and light use efficiency – implication for species coexisting in one-sided light competition. J Ecol 102:167–175

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pronk TE, Schieving F, Anten NPR, Werger MJA (2007) Plants that differ in height investment can coexist if they are distributed non-uniformly within an area. Ecol Complex 4:182–191

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ryan M, Yoder B (1997) Hydraulic limits to tree height and tree growth. Bioscience 47:235–241

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ryel RJP, Barnes W, Beyschlag W, Caldwell MM, Flint SD (1990) Plant competition for light analyzed with a multispecies canopy model. I. Model development and influence of enhanced UV-B conditions on photosynthesis in mixed wheat and wild oat canopies. Oecologia 82:304–310

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schwinning S, Weiner J (1998) Mechanisms determining the degree of size asymmetry in competition among plants. Oecologia 113:447–455

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Selaya NG, Anten NPR (2010) Leaves of pioneer and late successional species have similar life time carbon gain in tropical secondary forest. Ecology 91:1102–1113

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Selaya NG, Anten NPR, Mathies M, Oomen RJ, Werger MJA (2007) Aboveground biomass investments and light interception of tropical forest trees and lianas early in succession. Ann Bot 99:141–151

    Article  PubMed  CAS  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Selaya NG, Oomen RJ, Netten J, Werger MJA, Anten NPR (2008) Biomass allocation and leaf life span in relation to light interception by tropical forest plants during the first years of secondary succession. J Ecol 96:1211–1221

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spitters CJT (1986) Separating the diffuse and direct component of global radiation and its implications for modelling canopy photosynthesis. II. Calculation of canopy photosynthesis. Agric For Meteorol 38:239–250

    Google Scholar 

  • Spitters CJT, Aerts R (1983) Simulation of competition for light and water in crop weed associations. Asp Appl Biol 4:467–484

    Google Scholar 

  • Stern VM, Smith RF, van den Bosch R, Hagen KS (1959) The integrated control concept. Hilgardia 29:81–101

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • van Ittersum MK, Leffelaar PA, van Keulen H, Kropff MJ, Bastiaans L, Goudriaan J (2003) On approaches and applications of the Wageningen crop models. Eur J Agron 18:204–231

    Google Scholar 

  • van Kuijk M, Anten NPR, Oomen RJ, Werger MJA (2008) The limited importance of size-asymmetric light competition and growth of pioneer species in early secondary forest succession. Oecologia 157:1–12

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Vermeulen PJ, Stuefer JF, During HJ, Anten NPR (2008) Leaf investment and light partitioning among leaves of different genotypes of the clonal plant Potentilla reptans in dense stands after five years of competition. Ann Bot 102:935–943

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Vos J, Evers JB, Buck-Sorlin GH, Andrieu B, Chelle M, de Visser PHB (2010) Functional-structural plant modelling: a new versatile tool in crop science. J Exp Bot 61:2102–2115

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wall R, Begon M (1985) Competition and fitness. Oikos 44:356–360

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weiner J (1986) How competition for light and nutrients affects size variability in Ipomoea tricolor populations. Ecology 67:1425–1427

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weiner J (1990) Asymmetric competition in plant populations. Trends Ecol Evol 5:360–364

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Werger MJA, Hirose T, During HJ, Heil GW, Hikosaka K, Ito T, Nachinshonhor UG, …, Anten NPR (2002) Light partitioning among species and species replacement in early successional grassland. J Veg Sci 13:615–626

    Google Scholar 

  • Werner C, Ryel RJ, Correia O, Beyschlag W (2001) Effects of photoinhibition on whole-plant carbon gain assessed with a photosynthesis model. Plant Cell Environ 24:27–40

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Wright IJ, Reich PB, Westoby M, Ackerly DD, Baruch Z, Bongers F, Cavendar-Bares J, …, Villar R (2004) The worldwide leaf economics spectrum. Nature 428:821–827

    Google Scholar 

  • Yasumura Y, Hikosaka K, Matsui K, Hirose T (2002) Leaf-level nitrogen use efficiency of canopy and understorey species in a beech forest. Funct Ecol 16:826–834

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yin X, Struik PC (2010) Modelling the crop: from systems dynamics to systems biology. J Exp Bot 61:2171–2183

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Zhao DL, Atlin GN, Bastiaans L, Spiertz JHJ (2006) Cultivar weed-competitiveness in aerobic rice: heritability, correlated traits, and the potential for indirect selection in weed-free environments. Crop Sci 46:372–380

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Part of this work was supported by a Japan Society for Promotion of Science Research Fellowship to NPRA.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Crop and Weed Ecology, Centre for Crop Systems Analysis, Wageningen University, Wageningen, The Netherlands

    Niels P. R. Anten

  2. Crop and Weed Ecology, Centre for Crop Systems Analysis, Wageningen University, 430, 6700 AK, Wageningen, The Netherlands

    Lammert Bastiaans

Authors
  1. Niels P. R. Anten
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Lammert Bastiaans
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Niels P. R. Anten .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Graduate School of Life Sciences, Tohoku University, Sendai, Japan

    Kouki Hikosaka

  2. Environmental Sciences, Estonian University of Life Sciences Institute of Agricultural and, Tartu, Estonia

    Ülo Niinemets

  3. Crop and Weed Ecology, Centre for Crop Systems Analysis, Wageningen University, Wageningen, Gelderland, The Netherlands

    Niels P.R. Anten

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Anten, N.P.R., Bastiaans, L. (2016). The Use of Canopy Models to Analyze Light Competition Among Plants. In: Hikosaka, K., Niinemets, Ü., Anten, N. (eds) Canopy Photosynthesis: From Basics to Applications. Advances in Photosynthesis and Respiration, vol 42. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-7291-4_14

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation