Erica Rubin

Plant Competition Lab Report

Abstract:
Competition can be studied in two different areas. It can be
studied by looking at interspecific competition or competition between
two different species. It can also be studied by looking at intraspecific
competition or competition between the same species. It was
hypothesized that the intraspecific competition would have a larger
proportion of survivors in the smaller density than the larger density
using natural selection as a mechanism for this result. It was also
hypothesized that the interspecific competition that the radishes will
have a larger number of plants than the collards using exploitative
competition as a mechanism for this result. Planting four pots of eight
seeds of radishes, then collards, and then four pots of four radish seed
and four collard seeds together did this experiment. Then, four pots of
sixty-four seeds of radishes, collards and then four pots of thirty-two
radish and collards planted together. The results indicated that
radishes and collards grown alone had a larger number of plants than
when grown together. The results also indicated that the radishes have
higher proportion of survival than the collards in all cases. The
hypothesis regarding interspecific competition could be supported
because the result indicated that there was a decrease in the number
of plants from when each specie was grown alone from when they were
grown together. The hypothesis regarding the intraspecific competition
could be supported as well. The results indicate that each species
would have a larger proportion of survivors in the lower density than
the higher density.
Introduction:
This experiment was centralized around the idea of competition.
According to class notes competition is defined as an interaction
between organisms or species, in which the fitness of one is lowered by
the presence of another. There are many things that cause competition
such as competition for mates, space, or even resources. For this
experiment that competition for resources was studied. These
resources in competition could be light, food, water or even nutrients.
There are two main categories of competition, interspecific and
intraspecific competition. The results of interspecific and intraspecific
competition were looked at. Interspecific competition is the
competition between two or more different species. Intraspecific
competition is competition between the same specie. The purpose of
this experiment is to see the intraspecific competition of radishes and
collards when planted separately, and compare it to the interspecific
competition of the radishes and collards when planted together. From
these results one can see which competition affects specie more and
where the plants would grow better.

For this report the proportion of survivors normalized the data. The
data must be normalized because it controls the variables that could
not be otherwise controlled during the experiment. For this report the
data was normalized to the proportion of survivors. This was calculated
by talking the number of plants divided by the seeds planted.
It was hypothesized that the intraspecific competition would have a
larger proportion of survivors in the smaller density than the larger
density. Natural selection would be the mechanism for the intraspecific
competition because the plants that survive had to have some kind of
advantage over the other plants because they are of the same species.
According to Bolnick, the relationship between intraspecific
competition and diversification is known from theory (Bolnick, 2001).
This is evidence to support the hypothesis that natural selection or
diversification is a mechanism in intraspecific competition (Bolnick,
2001). Bolnicks experiment provides experimental confirmation that
competition in a population can drive niche expansion (Bolnick, 2001).
It was also hypothesized that the interspecific competition that the
radishes will have a larger number of plants than the collards.
Exploitative competition would be the mechanism for the interspecific
competition because exploitative competition is when specie is more
successful than the other.
Exploitative competition is the predicated mechanism for this
experiments interspecific result because it is hypothesized that one
specie will be much more successful than the other. According to
Larkin, when the consequences of exploitation of either or both of a
pair of competing species are examined similar shifts occur when
both species are exploited (Larkin, 1963). In other words as a result of
the interspecific competition by exploitative competition there should
be a difference in both the radish and the collard population than the
control. If the experimental results show a difference in between the
radish and collard population, favoring the radishes, then the
hypothesis can be accepted.
Material and Methods:
This experiment was started on January 22nd 2014. Using small
pots and soil twenty-four pots were planted. Four pots were planted
with eight radish (Raphinus sativa) seeds in each. Four pots were
planted with eight collard Brassica oleraceae) seeds in each. Four pots
were planted with four radish seeds and four collard seeds together in
each pot. Then four pots were planted with 64 radish seeds in each
pot. Four pots were planted with 64 collard seeds in each pot. Four pots
were planted with 32 radish seeds and 32 collard seeds together. When
planting the pots were filled about three-fourths of the way, then the
seeds were added evenly around the pot, and then more soil was
added to fill up the pot. Six weeks later, the plants were observed to
determine the results. The total number of plants in each pot, the total

number of leaves per pot, the total leaf weight (g) per pot, total stem
weight (g) per pot, the average stem length (cm) (average of five
randomly selected stems), total belowground biomass (g) per pot, were
each measured and recorded. Tables of the results were created in
Excel. Tables of the number of plants of collards, collard mix, radish,
and radish mix were used for this report. Other tables were made for
the proportion of survivors for collards, collard mix, radish, and radish
were also made and used for this report. Then, the table was run
through the software on Excel called Anova to determine key results.
Anova tests were run on the radish number of plants in low and high
density. They were also run on the collard, radish mix, and collard mix
number of plants in high density and low density. Then Anova tests
were run on the proportion of survivors for the radish and collards in
high and low densities. This data addresses the hypothesis because
the interspecific competition factor was addresses with the data about
the mixed pots and the intraspecific competition was addressed in the
high and low-density results.
Results:
The average number of radish plants that successful grew from
the low-density pot was seven plants per pot (Figure 1). The average
number of radish plants that successful grew from the high-density pot
was about 47 plants per pot (Figure 1). The p value for the comparison
between the low and high-density radish plants was 6.3E-14 (Figure 1).
The average number of collard plants that successful grew from the
low-density pot was about 5 plants per pot (Figure 2). The average
number of collard plants that successful grew from the high-density pot
was about 16 plants per pot (Figure 2. The p value for the comparison
between the low and high-density collard plants was 0.002 (Figure 2).
Figure 1: This figure shows the effect of radish growth on high density
and low density. The p value is less than 0.05 so there is a significant
difference between the two groups.
Anova: Single Factor
Radish
SUMMARY
Groups

Count

Low
High

ANOVA
Source of Variation
Between Groups
Within Groups

Sum
16
16

Average

112
749

7
46.8125

12680.28125

2224.4375

30

MS
12680.2812
5
74.1479166
7

SS

df

Variance
0.93333333
3
147.3625

F
171.013318

P-value
6.32344E14

F crit
4.17087678
6

Total

14904.71875

31

Figure 2: This figure shows the effect of collard growth on high density
and low density. The p value is less than 0.05 so there is a significant
difference between the two groups.
Anova: Single Factor
Collard
SUMMARY
Groups
Count

Sum

Low

16

High

16

ANOVA
Source
of
Variation
Between
Groups
Within
Groups

SS
1029.4453
13
2756.5468
75

Total

3785.9921
88

81
262.
5

df
1
30

Average
5.0625
16.40625

MS
1029.44531
3
91.8848958
3

Variance
9.1291666
67
174.64062
5

F
11.2036402

P-value
0.00220957
7

F crit
4.1708767
86

31

The high-density radishes had a higher average number of plants than

the plants (Figure 3). The radish and collard plants that were grown
alone have higher average number of plants than the radish and
collard plants that were grown together (Figure 3).
Figure 3: This figure shows the effects of density and species
competition on radishes grown alone, collards grown alone, radishes
grown with collards and collards grown with radishes. This graph shows
the affect of intraspecific competition. The low density was when eight
seeds were planted and high density was when sixty-four seeds were
planted.

The effects of density and species competition

radish

collard

radish mix

collard mix

Pot Species Composition

Low Density

High Density

The average number of collard plants that successfully grew from the
low-density pot was about 5 plants per pot (Figure 2 and 4). The
average number of collard plants that successfully grew from the lowdensity collard mix was about 1.25 plants (Figure 4). The p value for
the comparison between the low -density collard and collard mix plants
was 7.9E-5 (Figure 4). The average number of radish plants that
successfully grew from the low-density pot was about 7 plants per pot
(Figure 1 and 5). The average number of radish plants that
successfully grew from the low-density radish mix was about 4.6 plants
(Figure 5). The p value for the comparison between the low -density
radish and radish mix plants was 6.2E-7 (Figure 5).
Figure 4: This figure shows the difference between collards grown alone
and collards grown with radishes. The p value is less than 0.05 that
means that there is a significant difference between the two groups.
Anova: Two-Factor With Replication
SUMMA
RY

Low

High

Total

16
81
5.0625
9.1291666
67

16
262.5
16.40625
174.64062
5

32
343.5
10.734375
122.12878
02

16
20
1.25
1.1333333
33

16
68
4.25

32
88
2.75
23.290322
58

collard

Count
Sum
Average
Variance
collard
mix

Count
Sum
Average
Variance

42.2

Total

Count
Sum
Average

32
101
3.15625
8.7167338
71

32
330.5
10.328125
143.05821
57

df

Within

SS
1020.0039
06
822.97265
63
278.47265
63
3406.5468
75

Total

5527.9960
94

Variance
ANOVA
Source
of
Variation
Species
Density
Interactio
n

1
1
1
60

MS
1020.0039
06
822.97265
63
278.47265
63
56.775781
25

F
17.965475
49
14.495135
75
4.9047789
41

P-value
7.87637E05
0.0003325
45
0.0305916

F crit
4.0011913
77
4.0011913
77
4.0011913
77

63

Figure 5: This figure shows the analysis between the radishes grown
alone and the radishes grown with the collards. The p value is less than
0.005 which means that there is a significant different between the two
groups.
Anova: Two-Factor With Replication
SUMMA
RY

Low

High

Total

radish

Count
Sum
Average
Variance

16
112
7
0.9333333
33

16
749
46.8125
147.3625

32
861
26.90625
480.79737
9

16
74
4.625
5.7166666
67

16
427
26.6875
106.62916
67

32
501
15.65625
179.97479
84

32
186
5.8125
4.6733870
97

32
1176
36.75
227.41935
48

radish mix

Count
Sum
Average
Variance
Total

Count
Sum
Average
Variance

ANOVA
Source
of
Variation
Species
Density
Interactio
n
Within
Total

SS

df

MS

2025
15314.062
5

1260.25

3909.625

60

22508.937
5

63

2025
15314.062
5
1260.25
65.160416
67

F
31.077149
34
235.02094
19
19.340729
61

P-value
6.22532
E-07
2.03053
E-22
4.54614
E-05

F crit
4.0011913
77
4.0011913
77
4.0011913
77

The average proportion of survival for a collard in low-density was

0.645 or 64% (Figure 6). The average proportion of survival for a
collard in low-density was 0.89 or 89% (Figure 6). The p value for the
comparison between the proportion of survival of the radish and
collard grown alone was 1.9E-7 (Figure 6). The radishes have a higher
proportion of survival than the collards overall (Figure 7).
Figure 6:This figure represents the analysis of the radish and collard
proportion of survival in low density and high density. Since the p value
was less than 0.05 that shows that there is a significant difference
between the two groups.
Anova: Two-Factor
With Replication
Survival in
Low Density

SUMMARY

Survival in
High Density

Total

collard

Count
Sum

16
10.16

16
4.12

Average

0.635

0.2575

Variance

0.14228

0.043446667

16
14.01

16
11.71

Average

0.875625

0.731875

Variance

0.01458625

0.03589625

32
14.28
0.4462
5
0.1266
43548

radish

Count
Sum

Total

32
25.72
0.8037
5
0.0297
59677

Count
Sum
Average
Variance

32
24.17
0.7553125
0.09084506

32
15.83
0.4946875
0.096464415

ANOVA
Source of Variation

SS

df

MS

Species

2.0449

Density

1.08680625

Interaction

0.21855625

3.5431375

60

6.8934

63

Within
Total

2.0449
1.0868
0625
0.2185
5625
0.0590
52292

F
34.628
6307
18.404
13334
3.7010
6297

Pvalue
1.9133
7E-07
6.6017
5E-05
0.0591
2545

F crit
4.0011
91377
4.0011
91377
4.0011
91377

Figure 7: This figure shows the effect of density in each species on the
proportion of survival of the plants. The proportion of survival is larger
in Radishes in both low and high density. The low-density plants also
have larger portions of survival than the high-density plants. In the
low-density plants eight seeds were planted and in the high-density
plants sixty-four seeds were planted. The bars represent the standard
deviation.

The effects of density on Proportion of Surivial

Collards

Radish

Discussion:
The results of the experiment have lead to a variety of different
conclusions. The first result made was about high and low densities
and interspecific competition. The radishes at the higher density grew

the most amounts of plants over the higher density collard plants
(Figure 1,2, 3). The radishes also grew the most amounts of plants at
the lower density as well (Figure 1,2, 3). The radishes grown alone had
a higher number of plants than the radishes grown with the collards
(Figure 4 and 5). This finding proves that that the competition affected
the growth of the plants. The results also indicated that the radishes
had a larger number of plants when the two species were grown
together (Figure 3). This shows that the radishes are dominate over the
collards and when faced with interspecific competition.
The second result was made about intraspecific competition.
The radish and collards grown alone in the lower density had a high
proportion of survival than the radish and collards grown alone in the
higher density (Figure 6, 7). This finding proves that there is more
intraspecific competition going on at the higher density level than the
lower density level. This finding also proves that each specie had more
difficult surviving against their own specie when grown in higher
density.
With the acceptance of the p value results (Figure 1,2,4,5,6), all
of the groups compared using Excels ANOVA program showed that the
two groups had a conclusive difference. Since the p values were less
than 0.005 and the results indicated that the hypothesis could be
supported. The hypothesis regarding interspecific competition could be
supported because the result indicated that there was a decrease in
the number of plants from when each specie was grown alone from
when they were grown together. This shows that there was an effect of
competition that causes the plants to decrease their growth. The
hypothesis can also be supported because the radishes did have a
larger number of plants than the collards when they were grown
together. Based on the experimental results and other evidence, it is
clear that the interspecific competition would favor the radishes. From
the reference gathered, exploitative competition is a logical
mechanism for this interspecific competition case (see references).
The hypothesis regarding the intraspecific competition could be
supported as well. The results indicate that each species would have a
larger proportion of survivors in the lower density than the higher
density. This is due to the fact that there is more intraspecific
competition when the species are at higher density than when the
species are at lower density. Based on the experimental results and the
results and other evidence, it is clear that the intraspecific competition
would have a more drastic impact on the higher density plants. From
the reference gathered, natural selection is a logical mechanism for
this intraspecific competition case (see references).
A scheme for future research in the field of intraspecific
competition research could be testing the affects of plant growth when
a resource is limiting. One can then study how the specie adapted and
was able to survive the limiting resource and the competition. A

scheme for future research in the field of interspecific competition

research could be testing two species that would increase their growth
when growing together. This research would show positive interspecific
competition.
This experiment provided accepted results that lead to the big
concepts of ecology. The big picture of this experiment was to study
the effects of specie interaction with others and itself. This experiment
can show the effects of two different species interaction with each
other. In this result, as well as in many other cases, when two species
interact with each other they have negative impacts on themselves.
This can be used to show the drastic implications that could happen in
two species that are not natural supposed to be grown with each other
are grown with each other. This can also show the impact unnatural
invasive specie can do.
Acknowledgements:
There were a few other people to thank with the execution of this
experiment. Faith and I were all partners and completed the lab
together. The lab assistant Scott and teacher assistant Marvin also
helped with this experiment as well. Scott and Marvin helped get the
materials to complete the lab together.
References:
Daniel I. Bolnick, (2001). Intraspecific competition favours niche width
expansion in Drosophila melanogaster. Nature. 410, pp.463-466
Larkin, P.A, (1963). Interspecific Competition and Exploitation. Journal
of the Fisheries Research Board of Canada. 20 (3), pp.647-678
Lab Handout: Plant competition worksheet (found on Blackboard)
Class notes: Week 2 Competition Notes
Software Programs used: Microsoft Excel