[
Abbott, J.M., Stachowicz, J.J., 2016. The relative importance of trait vs. genetic differentiation for the outcome of inter actions among plant genotypes. Ecology, 97: 84–94. https://doi.org/10.1890/15-148.1
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Adler, P.B., Smull, D., Beard, K.H., Choi, R.T., Furniss, T., Kulmatiski, A., Meiners, J.M., Tredennick, A.T., Veblen, K.E., 2018. Competition and coexistence in plant communities: intraspecific competition is stronger than interspecific competition. Ecology Letters, 21: 1319–1329. https://doi.org/10.1111/ele.1309829938882
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Callaway, R.M., Ridenour, W.M., 2004. Novel weapons: invasive success and the evolution of increased competitive ability. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 2: 436. https://doi.org/10.2307/3868432
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Cardinale, B.J., Wright, J.P., Cadotte, M.W., Carroll, I.T., Hector, A., Srivastava, D.S., Loreau, M., Weis, J.J. 2007. Impacts of plant diversity on biomass production increase through time because of species complementarity. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. U. S. A., 104: 18123–18128. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0709069104208430717991772
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Casper, B.B., Jackson, R.B., 1997. Plant competition underground. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics, 28: 545–570.10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.28.1.545
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Chesson, P., 2000. Mechanisms of maintenance of species diversity. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics, 31: 343–366.10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.31.1.343
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Cruz, S.S. da, Andreotti, M., Pascoaloto, I.M., Lima, G.C. de, Soares, C. de A., 2020. Production in forage sorghum intercropped with grasses and pigeon pea at crop cutting. Revista Ciência Agronômica, 51: 1–10. https://doi.org/10.5935/1806-6690.20200031
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Ebeling, A., Klein, A.M., Schumacher, J., Weisser, W.W., Tscharntke, T., 2008. How does plant richness affect pollinator richness and temporal stability of flower visits? Oikos, 117: 1808–1815. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0706.2008.16819.x
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Fargione, J., Tilman, D., 2005. Niche differences in phenology and rooting depth promote coexistence with a dominant C4 bunchgrass. Oecologia, 143: 598–606. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00442-005-0010-y15791430
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Felker-Quinn, E., Schweitzer, J.A., Bailey, J.K., 2013. Meta-analysis reveals evolution in invasive plant species but little support for Evolution of Increased Competitive Ability (EICA). Ecology and Evolution, 3: 739–751. https://doi.org/10.1002/ece3.488360586023531703
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Fort, F., Cruz, P., Jouany, C., 2014. Hierarchy of root functional trait values and plasticity drive early-stage competition for water and phosphorus among grasses. Functional Ecology, 28: 1030–1040. https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2435.12217
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Foster, B.L., 1999. Establishment, competition and the distribution of native grasses among Michigan old-fields. Journal of Ecology, 87: 476–489.10.1046/j.1365-2745.1999.00366.x
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Fowler, N., 1986. The role of competition in plant communities in arid and semiarid regions. Annual Revue of Ecology and Systematics, 17: 89–110. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.es.17.110186.000513
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Foxx, A., Fort, F., 2019. Root and shoot competition lead to contrasting competitive outcomes under water stress: A systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS One, 14: 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1101/712208
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Haidet, M., Olwell, P., 2015. Seeds of Success: a national seed banking program working to achieve long-term conservation goals. Natural Areas Journal, 35: 165–173. https://doi.org/10.3375/043.035.0118
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Hedges, L. V, Gurevitch, J., Curtis, P.S., 1999. The meta-analysis of response ratios in experimental ecology. Ecology, 80: 1150–1156.10.1890/0012-9658(1999)080[1150:TMAORR]2.0.CO;2
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Herben, T., Hadincová, V., Krahulec, F., Pecháčková, S., Skálová, H., 2020. Which traits predict pairwise interactions in a mountain grassland? Journal of Vegetation Science, 31: 699–710. https://doi.org/10.1111/jvs.12872
]Search in Google Scholar
[
HilleRisLambers, J., Adler, P.B., Harpole, W.S., Levine, J.M., Mayfield, M.M., 2012. Rethinking community assembly through the lens of coexistence theory. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution and Systematics, 43: 227–248.https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-ecolsys-110411-160411
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Hortal, S., Lozano, Y.M., Bastida, F., Armas, C., Moreno, J.L., Garcia, C., Pugnaire, F.I., 2017. Plant-plant competition outcomes are modulated by plant effects on the soil bacterial community. Scientific Reports, 7: 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-18103-5
]Search in Google Scholar
[
James, J.J., Svejcar, T.J., Rinella, M.J., 2011. Demographic processes limiting seedling recruitment in arid grassland restoration. Journal of Applied Ecology, 48: 961–969. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2664.2011.02009.x
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Keddy, P., Nielsen, K., Weiher, E., Lawson, R., 2002. Relative competitive performance of 63 species of terrestrial herbaceous plants. Journal of Vegetation Science, 13: 5–16. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1654-1103.2002.tb02018.x
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Kiaer, L.P., Weisbach, A.N., Weiner, J., 2013. Root and shoot competition: a meta-analysis. Journal of Ecology, 101: 1298–1312. https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2745.12129
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Knops, M.H.J., Tilman, D., Haddad, N.M., Naeem, S., Mitchell, C.E., Haarstad, J., Ritchie, M.E., Howe, K.M., Reich, P.B., Siemann, E., Groth, J., 1999. Effects of plant species richness on invasion dynamics, disease outbreaks, insect abundances and diversity. Ecology Letters, 2: 286–293.10.1046/j.1461-0248.1999.00083.x33810630
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Kraft, N.J.B., Crutsinger, G.M., Forrestel, E.J., Emery, N.C. 2014. Functional trait differences and the outcome of community assembly: an experimental test with vernal pool annual plants. Oikos, 123: 1391–1399. https://doi.org/10.1111/oik.01311
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Kunstler, G., Lavergne, S., Courbaud, B., Thuiller, W., Vieilledent, G., Zimmermann, N.E., Kattge, J., Coomes, D. 2012. Competitive interactions between forest trees are driven by species’ trait hierarchy, not phylogenetic or functional similarity: implications for forest community assembly. Ecology Letters, 15: 831–840. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1461-0248.2012.01803.x400353122625657
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Li, S., Evers, J.B., van der Werf, W., Wang, R., Xu, Z., Guo, Y., Li, B., Ma, Y., 2020. Plant architectural responses in simultaneous maize/soybean strip intercropping do not lead to a yield advantage. Annals of Applied Biology, 177: 195–210. https://doi.org/10.1111/aab.12610
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Makumba, W., Akinnifesi, F.K., Janssen, B.H., 2009. Spatial rooting patterns of gliricidia, pigeon pea and maize intercrops and effect on profile soil N and P distribution in southern Malawi. African Journal of Agricultural Research, 4: 278–288.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Mayfield, M.M., Levine, J.M., 2010. Opposing effects of competitive exclusion on the phylogenetic structure of communities. Ecology Letters, 13: 1085–1093. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1461-0248.2010.01509.x20576030
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Pustejovsky, J., 2018. Using response ratios for meta-analyzing single-case designs with behavioral outcomes. Journal of School Psychology, 68: 99–112. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2018.02.00329861034
]Search in Google Scholar
[
R Core Team, 2021. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Ravenek, J.M., Bessler, H., Engels, C., Scherer-Lorenzen, M., Gessler, A., Gockele, A., De Luca, E., Temperton, V.M., Ebeling, A., Roscher, C., Schmid, B., Weisser, W.W., Wirth, C., de Kroon, H., Weigelt, A., Mommer, L., 2014. Long-term study of root biomass in a biodiversity experiment reveals shifts in diversity effects over time. Oikos, 123: 1528–1536. https://doi.org/10.1111/oik.01502
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Read, J.J., Morgan, J.A., 1996. Growth and partitioning in Pascopyrum smithii (C3) and Bouteloua gracilis (C4) as influenced by carbon dioxide and temperature. Annals of Botany, 77: 487–496. https://doi.org/10.1006/anbo.1996.0059
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Schenk, H.J., Jackson, R.B., 2002. Rooting depths, lateral root spreads and below-ground/above-round allometries of plants in water-limited ecosystems. Journal of Ecology, 90: 480–494. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2745.2002.00682.x
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Schlaepfer, M.A., Sax, D.F., Olden, J.D., 2011. The potential conservation value of non-native species. Conservation Biology, 25: 428–437. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1523-1739.2010.01646.x
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Suding, K., Goldberg, D., Hartman, K., 2003. Relationships among species traits: separating levels of response and identifying linkages to abundance. Ecology, 84: 1–16.10.1890/0012-9658(2003)084[0001:RASTSL]2.0.CO;2
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Utah’s Watershed Restoration Initiative, n.d. [cit. 2022-01-21]. https://wri.utah.gov/wri/.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Venables, W., Ripley, B., 2002. Modern applied statistics with S. Fourth edition. New York: Springer. 495 p.10.1007/978-0-387-21706-2
]Search in Google Scholar
