
Citation: Andrew V. Nguyen, Yuan-Yuan Wu, Elaine Y. Lin. The regulatory function of sphingosine-1-phosphate signaling axis on regulatory T cells in colorectal cancer[J]. AIMS Molecular Science, 2015, 1(1): 34-47. doi: 10.3934/molsci.2015.1.34
[1] | Christian Cortés García, Jasmidt Vera Cuenca . Impact of alternative food on predator diet in a Leslie-Gower model with prey refuge and Holling Ⅱ functional response. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2023, 20(8): 13681-13703. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2023610 |
[2] | Claudio Arancibia–Ibarra, José Flores . Modelling and analysis of a modified May-Holling-Tanner predator-prey model with Allee effect in the prey and an alternative food source for the predator. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2020, 17(6): 8052-8073. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2020408 |
[3] | Kunlun Huang, Xintian Jia, Cuiping Li . Analysis of modified Holling-Tanner model with strong Allee effect. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2023, 20(8): 15524-15543. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2023693 |
[4] | Peter A. Braza . A dominant predator, a predator, and a prey. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2008, 5(1): 61-73. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2008.5.61 |
[5] | Gunog Seo, Mark Kot . The dynamics of a simple Laissez-Faire model with two predators. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2009, 6(1): 145-172. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2009.6.145 |
[6] | Shuangte Wang, Hengguo Yu . Stability and bifurcation analysis of the Bazykin's predator-prey ecosystem with Holling type Ⅱ functional response. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2021, 18(6): 7877-7918. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2021391 |
[7] | Eduardo González-Olivares, Betsabé González-Yañez, Jaime Mena-Lorca, José D. Flores . Uniqueness of limit cycles and multiple attractors in a Gause-typepredator-prey model with nonmonotonic functional response and Allee effecton prey. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2013, 10(2): 345-367. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2013.10.345 |
[8] | Christian Cortés García . Bifurcations in a discontinuous Leslie-Gower model with harvesting and alternative food for predators and constant prey refuge at low density. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2022, 19(12): 14029-14055. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2022653 |
[9] | Saheb Pal, Nikhil Pal, Sudip Samanta, Joydev Chattopadhyay . Fear effect in prey and hunting cooperation among predators in a Leslie-Gower model. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2019, 16(5): 5146-5179. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2019258 |
[10] | Jinxing Zhao, Yuanfu Shao . Bifurcations of a prey-predator system with fear, refuge and additional food. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2023, 20(2): 3700-3720. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2023173 |
In recent years, Leslie-Gower type predator-prey models appear in various fields of the Mathematical Ecology, which have been proposed and studied extensively due to their increasing importance [1,2]. Among the most widely used mathematical predation models of this type, the Holling-Tanner model [3] (or May-Holling-Tanner [4,5]) plays a special role in view of the interesting dynamics it possesses [5]. It was proposed by James T. Tanner in 1975 [6] and based on the Leslie-Gower scheme [7], which was raised by the ecologist Patrick H. Leslie in 1948 [8].
These models are described by an autonomous bidimensional differential equation system characterized by the following aspects:
ⅰ) The prey-dependent functional response or predator consumption rate (depending only on the prey population) is hyperbolic, a particular form of Holling type Ⅱ [9,10]. It is described by the function $ h\left(x\right) = \frac{qx}{x+a} $, where $ x = x\left(t\right) $ is the prey population size. This function is known as the Michaelis-Menten function in Biochemical Kinetic.
ⅱ) The equation for predators is a logistic-type growth function [12,11,10]. So, the conventional environmental carrying capacity for predators $ K_{y} $ is expressed by a function of the available prey quantity [10]; in the seminal paper of P. H. Leslie [8], $ K_{y} $ is assumed proportional to prey abundance, i.e., $ K_{y} = K(x) = nx $. Implicitly, this formulation presupposes that the predator is a specialist.
In the logistic predator model, the quotient $ \frac{y}{nx} $, called the Leslie-Gower term, measures the loss in the predator population due to rarity (per capita $ \frac{y}{x} $) of its favorite food [13], where $ y = y\left(t\right) $ the predator population size. The importance of the Holling-Tanner model is highlighted by J. B. Collings in 1997 [14], who assured that it provides a way to avoid the biological control paradox wherein classical prey-dependent exploitation models generally do not allow for a pest (the prey) equilibrium density that is both low and stable [14].
The May-Holling-Tanner model [15,5,10] is studied partially in [3] and in the Murray's book [16]; it has been used in [17] to investigate numerically the dynamics of a predator-prey system for a pest in fruit-bearing trees, under the hypothesis that the parameters depend on the temperature; it has also shown its efficacy for describing the real ecological systems like mite/spider mite, canadian lynx/ snowshoe hare, sparrow/sparrow hawk and more [15].
In the paper by Saez and González-Olivares (1999) [5], its bifurcation diagram is described, establishing the existence of two limit cycles, surrounding the unique positive equilibrium point. Moreover, it is demonstrated that locally asymptotic stability of that equilibrium point does not imply global stability in this predator-prey model. This result implies the coexistence of a stable equilibrium and persistent oscillations [5]. Nevertheless, some authors have achieved conditions under which local stability of a positive equilibrium point implies its global stability [18].
The interesting phenomenon that local and global stability are not equivalent has also been shown in Leslie-Gower type models considering other mathematical form to describe the consumption function, as is shown in [12,19,4,20], where a non-monotonic functional response is assumed.
But the Leslie-Gower type models may present anomalies in its predictions, because it predicts that even in very low prey population density, when the consumption rate per predator is almost zero, predator population might increase, yet if the predator/prey ratio is very small [10]. Even so, it has been used to describe the interaction of certain populations [14,21].
Nonetheless, in the case of severe scarcity, some predator species can switch over to other available food, although its populational growth could be limited by the fact that its most favorite food is not available in abundance. This ability can be modelled by adding a positive constant $ c $ to the environmental carrying capacity for predators [22,13]. Thus, the $ c > 0 $ indicates the quantity of alternative aliment available for the predators.
Then, we have that environmental carrying capacity for predators $ K(x) = nx+c $; in that case, it is said that the model is represented by a Leslie-Gower scheme and it is also known as modified Leslie-Gower model [23,24]; if $ x = 0 $, then $ K(0) = c $, concluding that the predator is generalist since it choices an alternative food to avoid its extinction.
At the approach of the Leslie-Gower type predator-prey model [25] (with $ c = 0 $, considering implicitly a specialist predator), is assumed that a reduction in a predator population has a reciprocal relationship with per capita availability of its favorite food [13].
When $ c > 0 $, the modified May-Holling-Tanner model here analyzed has not these abnormalities and it enhances the predictions about the interactions. This model was proposed in [13], but focused on demonstrating the global stability of a unique positive equilibrium point.
On the other hand, one of the main elements of the predator-prey relationship is the predator functional response or consumption function, which refers to the change in attacked prey density per unit of time per predator when the prey population size changes [9]. In many predator-prey models is assumed that the functional response grows monotonic, being the inherent assumption the more prey in the environment, the better for the predators [10].
We will consider that the predator consumption function is prey-dependent and expressed by the hyperbolic function $ h(x) = \ \frac{q\ x}{x\ +\ a} $ [26,27] a particular case of a Holling type Ⅱ functional response [9]. The parameter $ a $ is a abruptness measure of the functional response [28]. If $ a\rightarrow 0 $, the curve grows quickly, while if $ a\rightarrow K $, the curve grows slowly, that is, a bigger amount of prey is needed to obtain $ \frac{q}{2} $.
The behavior of the system will be described according to the obtained constraints on the parameter values and classifying the different and rich dynamics resulting that have not been exposed on earlier works.
Although there are various works in which the model here proposed has been partially analyzed [23,24,1,29,30,2], new and novel properties of the model are here established such as: the existence of different class of bifurcations (Bogdanov-Takens, generalized Hopf, homoclinic and heteroclinic bifurcations); the existence up to two positive equilibrium points (see Figure 1), depending on the relative positions of isoclines, being one of them always a saddle point; the existence of at least one limit cycle encircling a stable positive equilibrium point; a separatrix curve in the phase plane which divides the behavior of the trajectories, that implies the existence of solutions nearest to that separatrix having different $ \omega -limit $, i.e., they are highly sensitives to the initial conditions [4,31].
Furthermore, using the computation of Lyapunov numbers (or quantities) [32,33], we were able to demonstrate the existence of two limit cycles, when a weak (or fine) focus occurs, being the innermost unstable and the outermost stable, showing examples to illustrate this property for different obtained cases.
Hence, our analysis allows to extend the properties of the model proposed in a highly cited article [13] and we complement the outcomes of the Holling-Tanner model established in [5], showing the existence of the phenomenon of multistability, when it exists: a local attractor positive equilibrium, a stable limit cycle and a stable equilibrium point over the $ y-axis $.
The rest of the paper is organized as follows: In the next Section, the modified May-Holling-Tanner model is presented; in Section 3, the main properties of the model are proved; in Section 4 we discuss the obtained results, giving the ecological meanings of them. To reinforce these results, some numerical simulations are shown in the last section.
The modified May-Holling-Tanner model [4,5] to be analyzed, considering a generalist predator, is described by the following autonomous bidimensional differential equation system of Kolmogorov type [34] :
$ Xμ:{dxdt=(r(1−xK)−qyx+a)xdydt=s(1−ynx+c)y $
|
(2.1) |
where $ x = x(t) $ and $ y = y(t) $ indicate the prey and predator population sizes respectively, for $ t\geq 0 $, measured as the number of individuals, biomass, density by unit of area or volume. The parameters are all positives, i. e., $ \mu = (r, K, q, a, s, n, c)\in \mathbb{R}{}{}_{+}^{7} $ and for ecological reasons $ a < K $; the parameters have their meanings are given in the following table:
Parameters | Meanings |
$ r $ | intrinsic prey growth rate or biotic potential |
$ K $ | prey environmental carrying capacity |
$ q $ | maximum number of prey that can be eaten by a predator in each time unit |
$ a $ | amount of prey to achieve one-half of the maximum rate $ q $ |
$ s $ | intrinsic predator growth rate |
$ n $ | measure of the food quality |
$ c $ | amount of alternative food available for predators |
The parameter $ n $ indicates also how the predators turn eaten prey into new predator births, and $ c $ is expresses that the predator is generalist, i.e., if it does not exist available prey, it switch to an alternative food. We note if $ c = 0 $ the May-Holling-Tanner model is obtained which is not defined in $ x = 0 $ and whose dynamics was described in [5].
In system $ \left(2.1\right) $, the growth population rate of predators, expressed by $ \frac{dy}{dt} $, becomes larger when $ c $ increases. This is in accordance with the ecological fact that if the predator is more capable of changing from its favorite prey to other food options, it can survive more easily when the prey is lacking severely [13].
As system $ \left(2.1\right) $ is of Kolmogorov type, the coordinates axis are invariable sets and the model is defined at
$ \Omega = \left\{ \left( x,y\right) \in \mathbb{R}^{2}/\ x\geq 0,\ y\geq 0\right\} = \mathbb{R}_{0}^{+}\times \mathbb{R}_{0}^{+} . $ |
The equilibrium points of system $ \left(2.1\right) $ or vector field $ X_{\mu } $ are $ (K, 0) $, $ (0, 0) $, $ (0, c) $ and $ (x_{e}, y_{e}) $, where $ x_{e} $ and $ y_{e} $ satisfy the equation of the isoclines $ y = nx+c $ and $ y = \frac{r}{q}\left(1-\frac{x}{K}\right) \left(x+a\right) $. Clearly, $ (x_{e}, y_{e}) $ can be a positive equilibrium point (equilibrium at the interior of the first quadrant) or cannot exists there, depending on the sign of factor $ 1-\frac{x}{K} $.
System $ \left(2.1\right) $ has been used to study non-autonomous versions by incorporating delay [29] or impulses [35,2] as well as autonomous model considering partial derivatives [36]. In spite of these recent studies, the dynamics of the system $ \left(2.1\right) $ have not fully analyzed and some obtained results are not true or well established.
In this paper, we show that local and global stabilities are not equivalent to this class of predator-prey models. The existence of subsets on the parameter space is proved for which there exist a bifurcation manifold of semistable limit cycles and an open manifold, where a positive equilibrium point is locally stable and surrounded by at least two limit cycles.
In order to simplify the calculations, it is convenient to reduce system $ \left(2.1\right) $ to a normal form; so, we follow the methodology used in [37,20,11,5], making a change of variable and a time rescaling, by means of a diffeomorphism [32]. So we have the following:
Proposition 1. (Topological equivalent system)
System $ \left(2.1\right) $ is topologically equivalent to the polynomial system given by
$ Yη(u,v):{dudτ=((1−u)(u + A)−Qv)u(u+C)=M(u,v)dvdτ=S(u+C−v)(u+A) v=N(u,v) $
|
(2.2) |
where $ \eta = \left(A, S, C, Q\right) \in $ $ \left] 0, 1\right[ \times \mathbb{R} _{+}^{3} $ with $ A = \frac{a}{K} < 1 $, $ \ S = \frac{s}{r} $, $ C = \frac{c}{Kn} $ and $ Q = \frac{nq}{r} $.
Moreover, system $ \left(2.2\right) $ is defined on the set $ \bar{\Omega} = \left\{ \left(u, v\right) \in \mathbb{R} ^{2}:0\leq u\mathit{\text{, }}0\leq v\right\} $.
Proof. Let $ x = Ku $ and $ y = $ $ nKv $; substituting into the system $ \left(2.1\right) $, simplifying and factoring, we obtain
$
U_{\mu }\left( x,y\right) :\left\{ dudt=r((1−u)−qu+aKnrv)udvdt=s(1−vu+cnK)v
\right.
$
|
Now, using the time rescaling given by $ \tau = \frac{r}{\left(u+\frac{a}{K} \right) \left(u+\frac{c}{nK}\right) }t $;
then,
$ \frac{du}{dt} = \frac{du}{d\tau }\frac{d\tau }{dt} = \frac{du}{d\tau } \frac{r}{\left(u+\frac{a}{K}\right) \left(u+\frac{c}{nK}\right) } \; {\rm{and}} \; \frac{dv}{dt} = \frac{dv}{d\tau }\frac{d\tau }{dt} = \frac{dv}{dt}\frac{r}{ \left(u+\frac{a}{K}\right) \left(u+\frac{c}{nK}\right) }. $ |
Rearranging and simplifying
$
V_{\mu }\left(x, y\right) :\left\{ dudt=((1−u)(u+aK)−qnrv)udvdt=sr(u+cnK−v)v(u+aK)
\right.
$
|
Making the above indicated substitution, system $ \left(2.2\right) $ is obtained.
Remark 2. 1. We have constructed the diffeomorphism$ \ $ $ \varphi :\bar{\Omega}\times \mathbb{R}\longrightarrow \Omega \times \mathbb{R} $, so that
$ \varphi (u,v,\tau ) = \left( Ku,nKv,\frac{1}{r}\left( u+\frac{c}{nK}\right) \left( u\ +\ \frac{a}{K}\right) \tau \right) = (x,y,t). $ |
The Jacobian matrix of $ \varphi $ is
$
D\varphi \left( u,v,\tau \right) = \left( K000nK01Knr(c+an+2Knu)τ01r(u+cnK)(u + aK)
\right)
$
|
and we have that $ \det D\varphi (u, v, \tau)\; = \frac{nK^{2}}{r}\left(u+\frac{ c}{nK}\right) \left(u\ +\ \frac{a}{K}\right) > 0 $.
Then, the diffeomorphism $ \varphi $ is a smooth change of variables with a rescaling of the time preserving the time orientation; thus, the vector field $ X_{\mu }\left(x, y\right) $, is topologically equivalent to the vector field $ Y_{\eta }\; = \; \varphi \circ X_{\mu } $ with $ Y_{\eta }\left(u, v\right) = M(u, v) \frac{\partial }{\partial u}+N(u, v) \frac{\partial }{ \partial v} $ and the associated differential equation system is given by the polynomial system of fourth degree of Kolmogorov type [34].
2. With this parameterization and time rescaling we have obtained a representative system with the least quantity of parameters possible; system $ \left(2.2\right) $ describes the dynamical behaviors of all those systems topologically equivalent to the system $ \left(2.1\right) $. Therefore, more important than knowing the influence of a specific parameter in the dynamical behavior of the system $ \left(2.1\right) $, it may be best to know the relationships between some of them, which also permits a simple description of the system properties.
The equilibrium points of system $ \left(2.2\right) $ or singularities of vector field $ Y_{\eta } $ are $ (1, 0) $, $ (0, 0) $, $ (0, C) $ and the points $ \left(u_{e}, v_{e}\right) $ which lie over the curves:
$ v = \frac{1}{Q}\left( 1-u\right) (u\ +\ A) \; {\rm{and}} \; v = u+C . $ |
Then, the abscissa $ u $ of the positive equilibrium points is a solution of the second-degree equation:
$ u2−(1−A−Q)u+(CQ−A)=0, $
|
(2.3) |
Considering the Descartes' Rule of Signs and according to the sign of the factors $ B_{1} = 1-A-Q $ and $ B_{0} = CQ-A $ and $ \Delta \left(\eta \right) = \left(1-A-Q\right) ^{2}-4\left(CQ-A\right) $, the equation $ \left(2.3\right) $ has two, one or none positive roots. In the following, we describe the diverse cases existing for the equation $ \left(2.3 \right) $.
1) Assuming $ B_{1} = 1-A-Q > 0 $, $ B_{0} = $ $ CQ-A > 0 $ and
1.1 $ \Delta \left(\eta \right) > 0 $, the solutions are:
$ u1=12(1−A−Q−√Δ(η)) and u2=12(1−A−Q+√Δ(η)), $
|
(2.4) |
1.2 $ \Delta \left(\eta \right) = 0 $, the solution is $ u^{\ast } = \frac{1}{2} \left(1-A-Q\right) $,
1.3 $ \Delta \left(\eta \right) < 0 $, there is no positive solution.
2) The solutions are $ u_{1} < 0 < u_{2} $, if and only if,
2.1)$ \qquad 1-A-Q > 0 $ and $ CQ-A < 0 $, or else,
2.2)$ \qquad 1-A-Q < 0 $ and $ CQ-A < 0 $.
3) If $ 1-A-Q > 0 $ and $ CQ-A = 0 $, there are two solutions
$ \qquad u_{1} = 0 $ and $ u_{2} = \ G = 1-A-Q = 1-A-\frac{A}{C} > 0 $.
4) If $ 1-A-Q = 0 $ and $ CQ-A < 0 $, we have two solutions, $ u_{1} < 0 < u_{2} $.
5) Moreover, equation $ \left(2.3\right) $ does not have real roots, if and only if,
5.1 $ 1-A-Q = 0 $ and $ CQ-A > 0 $, or
5.2 $ 1-A-Q < 0 $ and $ CQ-A > 0 $.
According to the above analysis of equation $ \left(2.3\right) $ we have:
1. Assuming $ B_{1} = 1-A-Q > 0 $ and $ B_{0} = CQ-A > 0 $, then, there exists three possibilities for system $ \left(2.2\right) $:
1.1. There are two equilibrium points at interior of the first quadrant, if and only if, $ C < \frac{1}{4Q}\left(4A+\left(1-A-Q\right) ^{2}\right) $, which are $ P_{1} = \left(u_{1}, u_{1}+C\right) $ and $ P_{2} = \left(u_{2}, u_{2}+C\right) $ with $ 0 < u_{1} < u_{2} < 1 $.
We note that the coordinates of the points $ P_{1} $ and $ P_{2} $ do not depend on the parameter $ S $.
1.2. There is a unique equilibrium point at interior of the first quadrant, if and only if, $ \Delta \left(\eta \right) = 0 $. In this case, the points $ P_{1} $ and $ P_{2} $ coincide, i.e.,
$ \left( u_{1},u_{1}+C\right) = \left( u_{2},u_{2}+C\right) = \left( E,E+C\right) $ |
with $ E = \frac{1-A-Q}{2} $ and $ C = \frac{1}{4Q}\left(4A+\left(1-A-Q\right) ^{2}\right) $.
1.3. For $ 1-A-Q > 0 $ and $ CQ-A = 0 $, there are not equilibrium points at interior of the first quadrant, if and only if, $ C > \frac{1}{4Q}\left(4A+\left(1-A-Q\right) ^{2}\right) $.
The case 1.1 is shown in the Figure 1.
2. In this case, the unique equilibrium point at interior of the first quadrant is, $ P_{2} = \left(u_{2}, u_{2}+C\right) = \left(L, L+C\right) $
with $ L = \frac{1}{2}\left(1-A-Q+\sqrt{\Delta \left(\eta \right) }\right) $. According to the relation between $ C $ and $ L $, the point $ P_{1} $ lies in the second or the third quadrant.
3. Clearly, the point $ P_{1} $ coincides with $ \left(0, C\right) $. Then, $ \left(\frac{C-A-AC}{C}, \frac{\left(C-A\right) \left(C+1\right) }{C} \right) $ is the unique equilibrium point at interior of the first quadrant.
4. For $ 1-A = Q $, the unique equilibrium point at interior of the first quadrant is $ P_{2} = \left(F, F+C\right) $ with $ F = \sqrt{A-C\left(1-A\right) } $, and $ A-C\left(1-A\right) > 0 $. So, $ C < \frac{A}{1-A} $. Moreover, the point $ P_{1} = \left(-F, -F+C\right) $ lies in the second or the third quadrant.
5. There are not equilibrium points at interior of the first quadrant, if and only if,
5.1. $ 1-A-Q = 0 $ and $ CQ-A\geq 0 $, or
5.2. $ 1-A-Q < 0 $ and $ CQ-A\geq 0 $.
The above classification 1-5 implies the study of different cases in this family of systems, according to the quantity of the equilibrium points and the relations between the parameters $ A $, $ C $ and $ Q $. We note that $ A $ is the intercept of the prey isocline with the $ v-axis $; then, the relative position among $ C $ and $ A $ over this axis, influences the quantity of positive equilibrium points and the nature of these equilibriums.
In short, we summarize the different cases to study in the following table (Table 2).
Case | sg$\left(B_{1}\right) $ | sg$\left(B_{0}\right) $ | sg$\left(\Delta \left(\eta \right) \right) $ | Number of Positive equilibrium |
1.1 | $+$ | $+$ | $+$ | $2$ |
1.2 | $+$ | $+$ | $0$ | $1$ |
1.3 | $+$ | $+$ | $-$ | $0$ |
2.1 | $+$ | $-$ | $+$ | $1$ |
2.2 | $-$ | $+$ | $+$ | $1$ |
3 | $+$ | $0$ | $+$ | $1$ |
4 | $0$ | $-$ | $+$ | $1$ |
5.1 | $0$ | $+$ | $-$ | $0$ |
5.2 | $-$ | $+$ | $-$ | $0$ |
We note system $ \left(2.1\right) $ has a significant difference with May-Holling-Tanner model (when $ C = 0 $), respect to the quantity of equilibrium points [5], since system $ \left(2.1\right) $ can have up to two positive equilibrium points, apart from of the new equilibrium $ \left(0, C\right) $ (see Figure 1). Meanwhile, in the May-Holling-Tanner model [3,5] there exists a unique positive equilibrium point (the point $ P_{1} $ lies in the third quadrant); nevertheless, other dynamical differences between both models will be established.
To determine the local nature of the equilibrium points we will use the Jacobian matrix of system $ \left(2.2\right) $ which is:
$ DYη(u,v)=(DYη(u,v)11−Qu(u+C)Sv(A+C+2u−v)S(A+u)(C+u−2v)) $
|
with
$ DY_{\eta }\left(u, v\right)_{11} = -4u^{3}+3\left(1-C-A\right) u^{2}+2\left(\left(A+C\left(1-A\right) -Qv\right) \right) u+C\left(A-Qv\right) . $ |
For system $ \left(2.2\right) $ we have the following general properties:
Lemma 3. (Existence of positevely invariant region)
The set $ \tilde{\Gamma} = \left\{ \left(u, v\right) \in \bar{\Omega}/\ 0\leq u\leq 1, \; v\geq 0\right\} $ is a region positevely invariant.
Proof. Clearly the $ u-axis $ and the $ v-axis $ are invariant sets because the system is a Kolmogorov type. If $ u = 1 $, we have
$ \frac{du}{d\tau } = -Qv\left( 1+C\right) \lt 0 $ |
and whatever it is the sign of
$ \frac{dv}{d\tau } = S\left( 1+A\right) \left( \ 1+C-\ v\right) \ v $ |
the trajectories enter and remain in the region $ \tilde{\Gamma} $.
Lemma 4. (Boundedness of solutions)
The solutions are bounded
Proof. See [13] or else, applying the Poincaré compactification and the directional blowing-up method [32,33], using the change of variables $ X = rw $ and $ Y = w $ and the time rescaling given by $ \zeta = w^{2}T $; after doing a large algebraic work ([38,39]) a new system is obtained, in which the point $ \left(0, \infty \right) $ is a non-hyperbolic saddle point.
Lemma 5. For all $ \eta = (A, S, C, Q)\in ]0, 1[\times \mathbb{R}_{+}^{3} $
1. The equilibrium $ \left(1, 0\right) $ is a saddle point.
2. The equilibrium $ \left(0, 0\right) $ is a repeller point.
Proof. Evaluating the Jacobian matrix in each point is immediate that
1) $ \det DY_{\eta }\left(1, 0\right) = -S\left(A+1\right) ^{2}\left(1+C\right) ^{2} < 0 $.
Therefore, the equilibrium $ \left(1, 0\right) $ is saddle point.
2) $ \det DY_{\eta }(0, 0) = A^{2}C^{2}S > 0 $ and tr$ DY_{\eta }(0, 0) = AC\left(1+S\right) > 0 $.
Then, the equilibrium $ \left(0, 0\right) $ is a repeller point.
Lemma 6. The equilibrium $ \left(0, C\right) $ is
i) a saddle point, if and only if, $ CQ-A < 0 $.
ii) an attractor point, if and only if, $ CQ-A > 0 $.
iii) a non hyperbolic attractor point, if and only if, $ CQ-A = 0 $.
Proof. It is immediate, since evaluating the Jacobian matrix in the point $ \left(0, C\right) $ we obtain
$ {\rm{det}} DY_{\eta }\left(0, C\right) = AC^{2}S\left(CQ-A\right) \; {\rm{and}} $ |
$ {\rm{tr}} DY_{\eta }\left(0, C\right) = C\left(A-AS-CQ\right) . $ |
Therefore, the point $ \left(0, C\right) $ is
ⅰ) a saddle point, if and only if, $ CQ-A < 0 $, because $ \det DY_{\eta }\left(0, C\right) < 0 $.
ⅱ) an attractor point, if and only if, $ CQ-A > 0 $, since $ \det DY_{\eta }\left(0, C\right) > 0 $ and tr$ DY_{\eta }\left(0, C\right) < 0 $.
ⅲ) If$ \ CQ-A = 0 $, then, we obtain that $ \det DY_{\eta }\left(0, C\right) = 0 $, tr$ DY_{\eta }\left(0, C\right) < 0 $ and the Jacobian matrix has an eigenvalue zero.
Remark 7. 1. These above results confirm the fact that the predator population is generalist; then, its extinction is avoided.
When the favorite prey is scarse($ u = 0 $), the predators attain their environmental carrying capacity $ C $.
2. Let us $ W^{u}\left(1, 0\right) $, the unstable manifold of the hyperbolic saddle point $ \left(1, 0\right) $, and $ \bar{\Sigma} = W^{s}\left(0, C\right) $, the stable manifold of the saddle point $ \left(0, C\right) $ (hypebolic or not).
Then, the relative position of both manifold determines a heteroclinic curve, when $ W^{u}\left(1, 0\right) \cap \bar{\Sigma}\neq \phi $.
3. We note that the positive equilibria lie in the region
$ ˉΛ={(u,v)∈ˉΓ / 0≤u≤1,0≤v≤vΣ,suchthat(u,vΣ)∈ˉΣ}. $
|
In the following, we consider only the case 1, in which there exists two positive equilibrium point at interior of the first quadrant, they collapse or they do not exist there. In this case, the point $ \left(0, C\right) $ is a local attractor.
The positive singularities must fulfill the equation of the predator isocline $ v = u+C $ and the prey isocline $ \left(1-u\right) \left(u\ +\ A\right) -Qv = 0 $; so. we obtain
$
DY_{\eta }\left(u, u+C\right) = \left(C+u\right) \left(−u(A+2u−1)−QuS(A+u)−S(A+u)
\right) .
$
|
Thus,
$ {\rm{det}} DY_{\eta }\left( u,u+C\right) = S\left( C+u\right) ^{2}\left( A+u\right) u\left( A+Q+2u-1\right) {\rm{and}} $ |
$ {\rm{tr}} DY_{\eta }\left( u,u+C\right) = \left( C+u\right) \left( u\left( 1-2u-A\right) -S\left( A+u\right) \right) $ |
Remark 8. Remembering $ B_{1} = 1-A-Q > 0 $, the sign of det$ DY_{\eta }\left(u, u+C\right) $ depends on the factor $ 2u-\left(1-A-Q\right) $.
At once, the sign of tr$ DY_{\eta }\left(u, u+C\right) $ depends on the sign of
$ T\left(u, A, S\right) = u\left(1-2u-A\right) -S\left(A+u\right) $.
We have,
a) If $ u > \frac{1-A-Q}{2} $ implies that det$ DY_{\lambda }\left(u, u+C\right) > 0 $ and the nature of singularity depends on the sign of the tr$ DY_{\lambda }(u, u+C) $.
b) If $ u < \frac{1-A-Q}{2} $, then det$ DY_{\lambda }\left(u, u+C\right) < 0 $ and $ \left(u, u+C\right) $ is a saddle point.
c) If $ u = \frac{1-A-Q}{2} $, then the two equilibrium points coincide.
Theorem 9. Nature of the first positive equilibrium
The equilibrium point $ P_{1} = \left(u_{1}, u_{1}+C\right) $ is a saddle point.
Proof. As det$ DY_{\eta }\left(u_{1}, u_{1}+C\right) = Su_{1}\left(C+u_{1}\right) ^{2}\left(A+u\right) \left(2u_{1}-\left(1-A-Q\right) \right) $, then
$ u_{1}-\frac{1-A-Q}{2} = \frac{1}{2}\left( 1-A-Q-\sqrt{\Delta \left( \eta \right) }\right) -\frac{1-A-Q}{2} = -\frac{1}{2}\sqrt{\Delta \eta } \lt 0 $ |
Therefore, the equilibrium $ \left(u_{1}, u_{1}+C\right) $ is a saddle point.
We note that the point $ \left(u_{1}, u_{1}+C\right) $ is not in the interior of the first quadrant, if and only if, $ CQ-A < 0 $, and it coincides with $ \left(0, C\right) $, if and only if, $ CQ-A = 0 $.
Remark 10. Existence of a separatrix curve
Let $ W_{+}^{s}\left(P_{1}\right) $ be the superior stable manifold of $ P_{1} = \left(u_{1}, u_{1}+C\right) $; it originates a separatrix curve $ \bar{\Sigma} $, in the phase plane, whose $ \alpha -limit $ can stay out or inside $ \bar{\Gamma} $. Any solutions having initial conditions above this separatrix has the point $ \left(0, C\right) $ as its $ \omega -limit $.
Theorem 11. (Existence of a heteroclinic curve)
A subset of parameter exists for which a heteroclinic curve joining the equilibrium points $ \left(1, 0\right) $ and $ \left(u_{1}, u_{1}+C\right) $.
Proof. Let $ W^{u}\left(1, 0\right) $ the unstable manifold of the saddle point $ \left(1, 0\right) $ and $ W_{+}^{s}\left(P_{1}\right) $ the superior stable manifold of $ P_{1} = \left(u_{1}, u_{1}+C\right) $. It is clear that the curve determined by the unstable manifold $ W^{u}\left(1, 0\right) $ remains at $ \bar{\Gamma} $ by Lemma 3 and its $ \omega -limit $ can be the point $ P_{2} = \left(u_{2}, u_{2}+C\right) $ or a stable limit cycle surrounding that point.
Assuming that the $ \alpha -limit $ of $ W_{+}^{s}\left(P_{1}\right) $ is out of $ \bar{\Gamma} $, then the curve $ \bar{\Sigma} $, is above the curve determined by $ W^{u}\left(1, 0\right) $. If the $ \alpha -limit $ of $ W_{+}^{s}\left(P_{1}\right) $ is inside of $ \bar{\Gamma} $, then the curve $ \bar{\Sigma} $ is below the curve determined by $ W^{u}\left(1, 0\right) $.
Then, by the Existence and Uniqueness Theorem of solutions [32], there exists a subset on the parameter space for which the two manifolds coincide, forming a heteroclinic curve.
Remark 12. The nature of the equilibrium $ P_{2} = \left(u_{2}, u_{2}+C\right) $ depends of the relation between $ v_{u} $ and $ v_{s} $, the ordinate of the points $ \left(u^{\ast }, v_{u}\right) \in W^{u}\left(1, 0\right) $ and $ \left(u^{\ast }, v_{s}\right) \in \bar{\Sigma} $, respectively.
Theorem 13. (Nature of the second positive equilibrium)
Let us $ u = u^{\ast } $, any value of $ u $ such that $ u_{1} < u^{\ast } < 1 $.
Considering $ \left(u^{\ast }, v^{s}\right) \in W^{s}\left( u_{1}, v_{1}\right) = \bar{\Sigma} $ and $ \left(u^{\ast }, v^{u}\right) \in W^{s}\left(1, 0\right) $, and
a) Assuming $ v^{u} < v^{s} $, we have:
The equilibrium point $ P_{2} = \left(u_{2}, u_{2}+C\right) $ is
a1) an attractor point, if and only if, $ S > \frac{u_{2}\left( 1-2u_{2}-A\right) }{u_{2}+A} $,
a2) a repeller, if and only if, $ S < \frac{u_{2}\left(1-2u_{2}-A\right) }{ u_{2}+A} $; furthermore, there exists, at least a limit cycle surrounding this equilibrium point.
a3) a weak focus, if and only if, $ \ S = \frac{u_{2}\left(1-2u_{2}-A\right) }{u_{2}+A} $ and a Hopf bifurcation occurs.
b) Assuming $ v^{u} > v^{s} $, it has that: The equilibrium $ P_{2} = \left(u_{2}, u_{2}+C\right) $ is
b1) an attractor surrounded by a unstable limit cycle, if and only if, $ S > \frac{u_{2}\left( 1-2u_{2}-A\right) }{u_{2}+A} $,
b2) a repeller (node or focus) and the trajectories have the point $ \left(0, u_{2}+C\right) $ as their $ \omega -limit $, being this point an almost globally stable equilibrium [45,43].
Proof. a) As the Jacobian matrix is
$
DY_{\eta }(u_{2},u_{2}+C) = \left( u_{2}+C\right) \left( −(A+2u2−1)u2−Qu2S(u2+A)−S(u2+A)
\right)
$
|
then,
det$ DY_{\eta }(u_{2}, u_{2}+C) = S\left(u_{2}+C\right) ^{2}\left(u_{2}+A\right) \left(2u_{2}-M\right) u_{2} > 0 $.
Since $ 2u_{2}-\left(1-A-Q\right) = 1-A-Q+\sqrt{\Delta \left(\eta \right) } -\left(1-A-Q\right) = \sqrt{\Delta \left(\eta \right) } > 0 $
the nature of $ \left(u_{2}, u_{2}+C\right) $ depends on the sign of
$ {\rm{tr}} DY_{\eta }(u_{2},u_{2}+C) = \left( C+u_{2}\right) \left( u_{2}\left( 1-2u_{2}-A\right) -S\left( u_{2}+A\right) \right) $ |
i.e., the sign depends on the factor
$ T\left(u_{2}, A, S\right) = u_{2}\left(1-2u_{2}-A\right) -S\left(u_{2}+A\right) . $ |
We have,
a1) tr$ DY_{\eta }\left(u_{2}, u_{2}+C\right) < 0 $, if and only if, $ S > \frac{ u_{2}\left(1-2u_{2}-A\right) }{u_{2}+A} $; therefore, the point $ \left(u_{2}, u_{2}+C\right) $ is an attractor.
a2) tr$ DY_{\eta }\left(u_{2}, u_{2}+C\right) > 0 $, if and only if, $ S < \frac{ u_{2}\left(1-2u_{2}-A\right) }{u_{2}+A} $; then, the point $ \left(u_{2}, u_{2}+C\right) $ is a repeller.
As the trace changes sign, a Hopf bifurcation occurs [32] at the equilibrium point $ \left(u_{2}, u_{2}+C\right) $; then, the point $ \left(u_{2}, u_{2}+C\right) $ is surrounded by a stable limit cycle.
Furthermore, the transversality condition [32] is verified, since we have that
$ \frac{\partial }{\partial S}\left( \text{tr}DY_{\eta }(u_{2},u_{2}+C)\right) = -\left( u_{2}+A\right) $ |
a3) tr$ DY_{\eta }\left(u_{2}, u_{2}+C\right) = 0 $, if and only if, $ S = \frac{ u_{2}\left(1-2u_{2}-A\right) }{u_{2}+A} $; thus, the point $ \left(u_{2}, u_{2}+C\right) $ is a weak focus, whose weakness must be determined.
b) When $ v^{u} > v^{s} $, the $ \alpha-limit $ of the $ W^{s}\left(u_{1}, v_{1}\right) $ can be the repeller equilibrium $ P_{2} = \left(u_{2}, u_{2}+C\right) $ or an unstable limit cycle surrounding the point $ P_{2} $, when this is an attractor equilibrium.
In the first situation, the $ W_{+}^{u}\left(P_{1}\right) $ must coincide with the $ W_{+}^{u}\left(1, 0 \right) $, since the Existence and Uniqueness Theorem applies in the region $ \bar{\Lambda} $, or its $ \omega -limit $ is the equilibrium $ \left(0, C\right) $.
Assuming the existence of the an unstable limit cycle surrrounding the point $ P_{2} $, therefore this point must be an attractor equilibrium. Then, when the parameters change, that limit cycle coincides with the $ W_{+}^{s}\left(P_{1}\right) $, and after is broken. Thus, all the trajectories, except the point $ P_{2} $, tends to the equilibrium $ \left(0, C\right) $, which is an almost global attractor [45,43].
Remark 14. The equilibrium $ P_{2} = \left(u_{2}, u_{2}+C\right) $ can be node or focus depending of the quantity
$ H = \left( \text{tr}DY_{\eta }(u_{2},u_{2}+C)\right) ^{2}-4\left( \det DY_{\eta }(u_{2},u_{2}+C)\right) . $ |
After a few algebraic manipulations it has that the sign of $ H $ depends on the factor
$ H_{1} = \left(A+u_{2}\right) ^{2}S^{2}+ 2u_{2}\left(A+u_{2}\right) \left(A+2\left(1-A-Q\right) -2u_{2}-1\right) S+ u_{2}^{2}\left(A+2u_{2}-1\right) ^{2} $
As it is well-known, the point $ \left(u_{2}, u_{2}+C\right) $ is a focus, if and only if, $ H_{1} < 0 $; it is a node, if and only if, $ H_{1} > 0 $.
Theorem 15. (Existence of homoclinic curve)
There are conditions on the parameter values for which:
a) It exists a homoclinic curve determined by the stable and unstable manifold of point $ P_{1} = \left(u_{1}, u_{1}+C\right) $.
b) It exists a non-infinitesimal limit cycle that bifurcates from the homoclinic [41,44] surrounding the point $ P_{2} = \left( u_{2}, u_{2}+C\right) $.
Proof. We note that if the point $ \left(u, v\right) \in \overline{P_{1}P_{2}} $, then $ \frac{du}{dt} > 0 $; clearly, the direction of the vector field at the point lying in the straight line $ v = u+C $ is to the right, since
$ \frac{du}{dt} = \left(\ \left(1-u\right) \left(u\ +\ A\right) -Q\left(u+C\right) \right) u\left(u+C\right) \gt 0 $ and $ \frac{dv}{dt} = 0. $ |
Considering $ W_{+}^{s}\left(P_{1}\right) $ and $ W_{+}^{u}\left(P_{1}\right) $, the superior stable manifolds and the right unstable manifolds of $ P_{1} $, we have:
a) As $ \bar{\Gamma} $ is an invariant region, the orbits cannot cross the straight line $ u = 1 $ towards the right. The trajectory determined by the right unstable manifold $ W_{+}^{u}\left(P_{1}\right) $ cannot cut or cross the trajectory determined by the superior stable manifold $ W_{+}^{s}\left(P_{1}\right) $, by Theorem of existence and uniqueness (see Figure 2).
Moreover, the $ \alpha -limit $ of the $ W_{+}^{s}\left(P_{1}\right) $ can lie at the point $ \left(1, 0\right) $ by lemma 3 or at infinity in the direction of $ u-axis $.
On the other hand, the $ \omega -limit $ of the right unstable manifold $ W_{+}^{u}\left(P_{1}\right) $ must be:
ⅰ) the point $ P_{2} $, when this is an attractor;
ⅱ) a stable limit cycle, if $ P_{2} $ is a repeller.
ⅲ) the point $ \left(0, C\right) $.
Then, there is a subset on the parameter space for which $ W_{+}^{u}\left(P_{1}\right) $ intersects with $ W_{+}^{s}\left(P_{1}\right) $ and a homoclinic curve is obtained. In this case, the same point $ P_{1} $ is the $ \omega -limit $ of the right unstable manifold $ W_{+}^{u}\left(P_{1}\right) $.
b) When the point $ P_{2} = \left(u_{2}, u_{2}+C\right) $ is an attractor and the $ \omega -limit $ of the right unstable manifold $ W_{+}^{u}\left(P_{1}\right) $ is the point $ \left(0, C\right) $, there exists an unstable limit cycle dividing the behavior of trajectories in the neighborhood of $ P_{2} = \left(u_{2}, u_{2}+C\right) $, which is the frontier of the basin of attraction of that point.
In Figure 2 we show the relative position of the upper stable manifold $ W_{+}^{s}\left(P_{1}\right) $ and the right unstable manifold $ W_{+}^{u}\left(P_{1}\right) $, meanwhile in Figure 3 the homoclinic curve is shown.
Remark 16. An interesting aspect happens when the homoclinic curve is broken, since a non-infinitesimal limit cycle is generated [41]. To determine the nature (stability) of this non-infinitesimal limit cycle, we will consider $ R $, the absolute value of the ratio between the negative and positive eigenvalues of the Jacobian matrix evaluated in the saddle point $ P_{1} = \left(u_{1}, u_{1}+C\right) $, denoted by $ \lambda ^{-} $ and $ \lambda ^{+} $, respectively, i.e., $ R = \left\vert \frac{\lambda ^{-}}{\lambda ^{+}}\right\vert $.
Considering a little modification of the criterion described in [26] it has that if $ R > 1 $, the non-infinitersimal limit cycle generated by homoclinic bifurcation is stable (orbitally); if $ R < 1 $, this limit cycle is unstable and if $ R = 1 $ the limit cycle is neutrally stable [26]. So, $ R $ depends on the sign of the difference $ \nabla = \left\vert \lambda ^{-}\right\vert -\lambda ^{+} $.
We know that
$ {\rm{ det}} DY_{\eta }\left( u_{1},u_{1}+C\right) = Su_{1}\left( C+u_{1}\right) ^{2}\left( A+u\right) \left( 2u_{1}-\left( 1-A-Q\right) \right) \; {\rm{ and}} $ |
$ {\rm{tr}} DY_{\eta }\left( u_{1},u_{1}+C\right) = \left( C+u_{1}\right) \left( u_{1}\left( 1-2u_{1}-A\right) -S\left( A+u_{1}\right) \right) $ |
Then, the eigenvalues of the Jacobian matrix evaluated on $ P_{1} $ are:
$ \lambda ^{-} = \frac{1}{2}\left( C+u_{1}\right) \left( \text{tr} DY_{\eta }\left( u_{1},u_{1}+C\right) -\sqrt{\Delta \left( \rho \right) } \right) $ |
$ \lambda ^{+} = \frac{1}{2}\left( C+u_{1}\right) \left( \text{tr} DY_{\eta }\left( u_{1},u_{1}+C\right) +\sqrt{\Delta \left( \rho \right) } \right) $ |
with $ \lambda ^{-} < 0 < \lambda ^{+} $ and
$\Delta \left( \rho \right) = \left( \text{tr}DY_{\eta }\left( u_{1},u_{1}+C\right) \right) ^{2}-4 $det$ DY_{\eta }\left( u_{1},u_{1}+C\right) $ |
We have the following:
Theorem 17. (Stability of the non-infinitesimal limit cycle)
The non-infinitesimal limit cycle is:
a) stable, if and only if, $ T\left(u_{1}, A.S\right) > 0 $, i.e., $ S < \frac{ u_{1}\left(1-2u_{1}-A\right) }{A+u_{1}} $.
b) unstable, if and only if, $ T\left(u_{1}, A.S\right) < 0 $, i.e., $ S > \frac{ u_{1}\left(1-2u_{1}-A\right) }{A+u_{1}} $.
c) neutrally stable, if and only if, $ T\left(u_{1}, A.S\right) = 0 $, i.e., $ S = \frac{u_{1}\left(1-2u_{1}-A\right) }{A+u_{1}} $.
Proof. Clearly, $ \nabla = $ $ \left\vert \lambda ^{-}\right\vert -\lambda ^{+} = $ $ \left(C+u_{1}\right) $tr$ DY_{\eta }\left(u_{1}, u_{1}+C\right) = 0 $.
By remark the sign of tr$ DY_{\eta }\left(u_{1}, u_{1}+C\right) $ depends on the sign of the factor
$ T\left( u_{1},A.S,\right) = u_{1}\left( 1-2u_{1}-A\right) -S\left( A+u_{1}\right) . $ |
Considering $ R = 1 $, we have $ S = \frac{u_{1}\left(1-2u_{1}-A\right) }{A+u_{1}} $ and the non-infinitesimal limit cycle is neutrally stable.
Then, the other possibles cases a) and b) are obtained with $ R > 1 $ and $ R < 1 $, respectively.
Remark 18. 1. The breaking of the homoclinic curve determined by the intersection of the upper stable manifold and the unstable right manifold of the saddle point $ P_{1} = \left(u_{1}, u_{1}+C\right) $, i.e., $ W_{+}^{s}\left(P_{1}\right) \cap W_{+}^{u}\left(P_{1}\right) $, generates a non-infinitesimal limit cycle (originating a homoclinic bifurcation), which could coincide with other limit cycle obtained via Hopf bifurcation (infinitesimal limit cycle), when $ P_{2} = \left(u_{2}, u_{2}+C\right) $ is a center-focus.
2. The non-infinitesimal limit cycle increases until concide with $ W_{+}^{s}\left(P_{1}\right) $; then is broken, and the point $ P_{2} $ becomes to a repeller focus or node; so, the point $ \left(0, C\right) $ an almost global attractor [45,43].
In the next Theorem we determine the weakness of the focus $ P_{2} = \left(u_{2}, u_{2}+C\right) $, i. e., the number of the limit cycles bifurcating of a weak (fine) focus [32,33]; for this we will use the calculations of the Lyapunov numbers (or quantities) [32,44].
Theorem 19. (Order of the weak focus)
The singularity $ P_{2} = \left(u_{2}, u_{2}+C\right) $ of vector field $ Y_{\eta } $ is at least a two order weak focus, if and only if, $ S = \frac{ L\left(1-2L-A\right) }{A+L} $, with $ u_{2} = L = \frac{1}{2}\left(1-A-Q+\sqrt{ \Delta \left(\eta \right) }\right) $ and $ \eta _{2} $ can change of sign.
Proof. As $ S = \frac{L\left(1-2L-A\right) }{A+L} $ and $ Q = \frac{1}{L+C}\left(1-L\right) \left(L+A\right) $, system $ \left(2.2\right) $ can be expressed by
$ Zν(u,v):{dudτ=( (1−u)(u+A) −(1−L)(L+A)L+Cv) u(u+C)dvdτ=L(1−2L−A)A+L(u +C−v )(u+A) v $
|
where $ \nu = \left(A, L, C\right) \in \left(\left] 0, 1\right[ \right) ^{2}\times \mathbb{R} ^{+} $.
Setting $ u = U+L $ and $ v = V+C+L $, then the new system translated to origin of coordinates system is
$ Zν(U,V):{dUdτ=((1−U−L)(U+L+A)−(1−L)(L+A)L+C(V+C+L))(U+L)(U+L+C)dVdτ=L(1−2L−A)A+L(U−V)(U+L+A)(V+C+L) $
|
The Jacobian matrix of the vector field $ Z_{\nu } $ at the point $ \left(0, 0\right) $ is
$ DZ_{\nu }(0, 0) = \left(L(1−2L−A)(C+L)−(1−L)(A+L)LL(1−2L−A)(C+L)−L(1−2L−A)(C+L)
the same that $ DY_{\eta }\left(L, L+C\right) $. Denoting
$ W^{2} = $ det$ DZ_{\nu }(0,0) = L^{2}\left( C+L\right) \left( 1-2L-A\right) \left( A-C\left( 1-2L-A\right) +L^{2}\right) , $ |
it has
$ L\left( C+L\right) \left( 1-2L-A\right) = \frac{W^{2}}{L\left( A-C+AC+2CL+L^{2}\right) } ; $ |
the first Lyapunov quantity [32] is
$ \eta _{1} = $ tr$ DY_{\eta }\left( L,L+C\right) = {\rm{tr}} DZ_{\nu }(0,0) = \alpha = 0 . $ |
The Jordan matrix associated [3] to vector field $ Z_{\nu } $ is
$
J = \left( 0−WW0
\right) .
$
|
Then, the matrix change of basis [3] is given by
$
M = \left( Z11−α−βZ210
\right) = \left( L(1−2L−A)(C+L)−WL(1−2L−A)(C+L)0
\right) .
$
|
Now consider the change of variables given by
$
\left( UV
\right) = \left( L(1−2L−A)(C+L)−WL(1−2L−A)(C+L)0
\right) \left( xy
\right)
$
|
that is,
$ U = L\left( 1-2L-A\right) \left( C+L\right) x-Wy $ |
$ V = L\left( 1-2L-A\right) \left( C+L\right) x $ |
or
$ x = $ $ \frac{1}{L\left( 1-2L-A\right) \left( C+L\right) }V $ |
$ y = \frac{-U+V}{W}. $ |
Then the new system is
$
\tilde{Z}_{\nu }:\left\{ dxdτ=1L(1−2L−A)(C+L)dVdτdydτ=−1WdUdτ+1WdVdτ
\right.
$
|
After a large algebraic calculations and by means of a time rescaling given by $ \gamma = W\tau $, we obtain the normal form $ \tilde{Z}_{\nu } $ [32] to vector field $ Z_{\nu } $ given by
$
\begin{array}{lcl} \begin{array}{l} \frac{dx}{d\gamma } \\ \\ \end{array} & = & −y−H(A+C+2L)A+Lxy+WA+Ly2−H2(C+L)A+Lx2y+WHA+Lxy2 \\ \frac{dy}{d\gamma } & = & x+H2(C+L)(AC2+7CL2+3C2L+AC+2AL−2CL−C2+3L3+2ACL)W2x2−b11xy+A2C+6AL2+2A2L+CL2−AC−2AL−L2+3L3+3ACL(A+L)y2+H3(C+L)2(A−C+AC+5CL+C2+3L2)W2x3−b21x2y+b12xy2−W(A+C+4L−1)y3+H4(C+L)4W2x4−4H3(C+L)3Wx3y+6H2(C+L)2x2y2−4WH(C+L)xy3+W2y4
\end{array}
$
|
with
$ H = L\left( 1-2L-A\right) $ |
$ b_{11} = \frac{H\left( 4L^{4}+\left( 6A+9C\right) L^{3}+\left( 4C^{2}+\left( 15A-2\right) C+A\left( A+1\right) \right) L^{2}+\left( \left( 7A-1\right) C^{2}+ A\left( 4A-3\right) C+2A^{2}\right) L+AC\left( A-2C+2AC\right) \right) }{W\left( A+L\right) } , $ |
$ b_{21} = \frac{H^{2}\left( C+L\right) \left( 3AC^{2}+3A^{2}C+10AL^{2}+A^{2}L+13CL^{2}+3C^{2}L-3AC+AL-2CL+2A^{2}+8L^{3}+17ACL\right) }{W\left( A+L\right) } $ |
$ b_{12} = \frac{H\left( 3AC^{2}+3A^{2}C+12AL^{2}+2A^{2}L+13CL^{2}+3C^{2}L-3AC-AL-2CL+A^{2}-L^{2}+9L^{3}+17ACL\right) }{A+L} $ |
Using the Mathematica package [46] for the symbolic calculus, we obtain that the second Lyapunov quantity [32] is given by
$ \eta _{2} = \frac{L^{2}H^{2}\left( C+L\right) ^{2}}{8\left( A+L\right) ^{2}W^{3}}f_{1}\left( A,C,L\right) $ |
with $ f_{1}\left(A, C, L\right) = f_{10}\left(A, L\right) +Cf_{11}\left(A, L\right) +C^{2}f_{12}\left(A, L\right) +C^{3}f_{13}\left(A, L\right) $
where
$ f_{10}\left( A,L\right) = -8L^{7}+ 4\left( 1-2A\right) L^{6}-A\left( A+11\right) L^{5}+ A\left( A^{2}-8A+5\right) L^{4}+\\ A^{2}\left( 7A-34\right) L^{3}+A^{2}\left( 7A^{2}+4\right) L^{2}+A^{3}\left( A^{2}-10A+3\right) L+A^{4}\left( 1-A\right). $ |
$ f_{11}\left( A,L\right) = -36L^{6}+16\left( 2-3A\right) L^{5}-\left( 13A^{2}+15A+6\right) L^{4}+A\left( 11A^{2}-64A+37\right) L^{3}\\+A\left( 7A^{3}-46A^{2}+39A-8\right) L^{2}+A^{2}\left( 1-A\right) \left( 11A-A^{2}-4\right) L+\left( A-A^{2}-2\right) A^{3} . $ |
$ f_{12}\left( A,L\right) = -50L^{5}+22\left( 3-4A\right) L^{4}+\left( 75A-61A^{2}-28\right) L^{3}+ \left( 33A^{2}-19A^{3}-12A+4\right) L^{2}+\\ A\left( 1-A\right) \left( -4A+2A^{2}-1\right) L+A^{2}\left( 1-A\right) . $ |
$ f_{13}\left( A,L\right) = \left( -16L^{3}+24\left( 1-A\right) L^{2}-12\left( 1-A\right) ^{2}L+ 2\left( 1-A\right) ^{3}\right) L. $ |
Because to the difficulty in deciding whether a change of sign occurs in the factor $ f_{1}\left(A, C, L\right) $, a numerical evaluation will be made for the factor $ f_{10}\left(A, L\right) $, considering it is most influential when $ C $ tends to $ 0 $.
Choosing $ A = 0.1 $ we have
$ f_{10}\left( 0.1,L\right) = -\frac{1}{100\,000}f_{101}\left( L\right) $ |
with
$ f_{101}\left( L\right) = -201.0L-4070.0L^{2}+33300.0L^{3}-42100.0L^{4}+1.\, 11\times 10^{5}L^{5}-3.\, 2\times 10^{5}L^{6}+8.0\times\\ 10^{5}L^{7}-9.0 $ |
and choosing $ L = 0.175 $ it has,
$ f_{101}\left( L\right) = $ $ -16.\, 788 , $ |
then,
$ f_{10}\left( 0.1,0.175\right) = -\frac{1}{100\,000}\left( -39.\, 84\right) \gt 0 . $ |
Analogously, choosing $ A = 0.1 $ and $ L = 0.2 $, we have
$ f_{10}\left( 0.1,0.2\right) = -\frac{1}{100\,000} f_{101}\left( 0.2\right) = -\frac{1}{100\,000}\left( 12.\, 32\right) \lt 0 . $ |
So, $ \eta _{2}\ $change the sign depending of the above relations, existing at least, two limit cycles when $ \eta _{2} = 0 $.
Then, the sign of $ \eta _{3} $ must be obtained to prove the existence of exactly two limit cycles.
Remark 20. 1. As we have seen, the computation of weakness of the focus $ P_{2} = \left(L, L+C\right) $ requires the fulfilment of two strict relationships between the parameters of the model; a little deviation in one of them causes the condition for the existence of one or more limit cycles. So, these relations determine a subset of measure non-zero for the existence of two limit cycles.
2. This is ecologically important, inasmuch as in reality none of the equalities given in the above Theorem will be possible to maintain for a long time; thus, any tiny change in some of the involved parameters will imply inequality rather than equality; hence, we have a structurally unstable system.
3. We note that the proof of the above theorem does not depend on the sign of $ a_{0} = CQ-A $.
Case 1.2 By considering $ \Delta \left(\eta \right) = \left(1-A-Q\right) ^{2}-4\left(CQ-A\right) = 0 $, the points $ P_{1} = \left(u_{1}, u_{1}+C\right) $ and $ P_{2} = \left(u_{2}, u_{2}+C\right) $ are coincident.
So, $ u_{1} = u_{2} = E = \frac{1-A-Q}{2} $, if and only if, $ C = \frac{\left(1-A-Q\right) ^{2}+4A}{4Q} $. The point $ \left(u_{2}, u_{2}+C\right) $ lies in the first quadrant, if and only if, $ 1 > A+Q $.
Theorem 21. (Collapse of the positive equilibria)
The equilibrium point $ \left(E, E+C\right) $ with $ E = \frac{1-A-Q}{2} $, is:
i) a saddle-node attractor, if and only if, $ \ S > \frac{Q\left( 1-A-Q\right) }{A-Q+1} $,
ii) a saddle-node repeller, if and only if, $ \ S < \frac{Q\left( 1-A-Q\right) }{A-Q+1} $,
iii) a cusp point, if and only if, $ \ S = \frac{Q\left( 1-A-Q\right) }{A-Q+1} $.
Proof. The Jacobian matrix is
$
DY_{\eta }\left( E,E+C\right) = \left( E(E+C)(1−2E−A)−QE(E+C)S(E+A)(E+C)−S(E+A)(E+C)
\right) .
$
|
Then, det$ DY_{\eta }\left(E, E+C\right) = $ $ 0 $, and
$ {\rm{tr}} DY_{\eta }\left( E,E+C\right) = \left( C+E\right) \left( \left( -A-E\right) S+\left( E-AE-2E^{2}\right) \right) $ |
which depends on the sign of factor
$ T_{1}\left( A,Q,S\right) = -\left( \left( A-Q+1\right) S+Q\left( A+Q-1\right) \right) $ |
Then, the point $ \left(E, E+C\right) $ is
ⅰ) a saddle-node attractor, if and only if, $ S > \frac{Q\left(1-A-Q\right) }{A-Q+1} $,
ⅱ) a saddle-node repeller, if and only if, $ S < \frac{Q\left(1-A-Q\right) }{A-Q+1} $,
c) If $ S = \frac{Q\left(1-A-Q\right) }{A-Q+1} $, the Jacobian matrix is
$
DY_{\eta }\left( E,E+C\right) = \frac{1}{4}Q\left( A+Q-1\right) \left( A-2C+Q-1\right) \left( 1−11−1
\right) ,
$
|
whose Jordan form matrix is $ J = \left(0100
In this case, the point $ \left(0, C\right) $ is an attractor almost globally asymptotically stable [45,43], since an unique trajectory exists in the phase plane having the point $ \left(E, E+C\right) $ as its $ \omega -limit $.
Case 1.3 If $ B_{1} = 1-A-Q > 0 $ and $ B_{2} = CQ-A > 0 $ and $ \Delta \left(\eta \right) < 0 $, there were not exist positive equilibrium points.
Theorem 22. (Non-existence of positive equilibria)
When there exists no positive equilibria, the point $ \left(0, C\right) $ is globally asymptotically stable.
Proof. By lemma $ 5, $ we know the solutions are bounded; by lemma 3, $ \bar{\Gamma} $ is invariant region. As it was stated before, the equilibrium $ \left(1, 0\right) $ is a saddle point, then the Poincaré-Bendixon Theorem applies and the unique $ \omega -limit $ of the trajectories is the point $ \left(0, C\right) $.
In order to reinforce the obtained results, we show some numerical simulations (Figures 4–9), considering only the case 1, i.e., $ B_{1} = 1+A-Q > 0 $, $ B_{0} = CQ-A > 0 $ and $ \Delta > 0 $, being in this case the point $ \left(0, C\right) $ always attractor (local or global).
In the following picture (Figure 10) the bifurcation diagram of system $ \left(2.2\right) $ is shown.
Considering $ A $ and $ Q $ fixed it was created with the numerical bifurcation package MaTCont [40] showing that the bifurcation curves divide the $ \left(C, S\right) $-parameter space into five parts. Modifying the parameter $ C $ impacts the number of positive equilibrium points of system $ \left(2.2\right) $.
The modification of the parameter $ S $ changes the stability of the positive equilibrium point $ P_{2} $ of system $ \left(2.2\right) $, while the other equilibrium points do not change their behaviour.
There are no positive equilibrium points in system $ \left(2.2\right) $ when the parameters $ C $ and $ S $ are located in the red area where $ \Delta < 0 $. In this case, the origin is a global attractor.
For $ C = C^{\ast } $, which is the saddle-node curve $ SN $, the equilibrium points $ P_{1} $ and $ P_{2} $ collapse since $ \Delta = 0 $. So that, system $ \left(2.2\right) $ experiences a Bogdanov-Takens bifurcation. When the parameters $ C $ and $ S $ are located in the green, grey or blue area, system $ \left(2.2\right) $ has two equilibrium points $ P_{1} $ and $ P_{2} $.
The equilibrium point $ P_{1} $ is always a saddle point, while $ P_{2} $ can be unstable (grey area) or stable (blue area). For $ C $ and $ S $ in the green area the stable equilibrium point $ P_{2} $ can be surrounded by an unstable limit cycle (green Region IV(1)) or surrounded by two limit cycle (green Region IV(2)).
In this work, a modified May-Holling-Tanner predator-prey model was studied, particularly a modified Leslie-Gower model [13,25,5], considering that predators can eat other prey in the case of severe scarcity of its most favorite food. This situation was taken into account by adding a positive constant $ c $ in the function $ K_{y} $ representing the environmental carrying capacity for predators. This implies the existence of a new equilibrium point $ \left(0, c\right) $ in the $ y-axis $.
By means of a diffeomorphism, we analyzed a topologically equivalent system depending only on four parameters. It was shown that the model has a rich dynamic since this model can exhibit various kinds of bifurcations (e.g. saddle-node, Hopf-Andronov, Bogdanov-Takens, homoclinic, Hopf multiple bifurcations) as likewise infinitesimal and non-infinitesimal limit cycles, generated by Hopf and homoclinic bifurcation, respectively.
Conditions for the existence of equilibrium points and their nature were established. We proved that the equilibrium point $ \left(0, 0\right) $ is always a repeller for all parameter values, which means that there is no extinction of both populations simultaneously; moreover, $ \left(1, 0\right) $ is a saddle point, implying that the predator population can go to depletion, meanwhile the prey attains its maximum population size in the common environmental.
Also, a wide subset of the parameter values was determined, for which there exist two positive equilibrium points $ P_{1} = \left(u_{1}, u_{1}+C\right) $ and $ P_{2} = \left(u_{2}, u_{2}+C\right) $, being the first of them always a saddle point. The other equilibrium can be an attractor, a repeller or a weak focus, depending on the sign of the trace of its Jacobian matrix. Furthermore, both equilibrium points can collapse, obtaining a cusp point, i.e., Bogdanov-Takens bifurcation or codimension 2 bifurcation [47].
When two equilibrium points exist at the interior of the first quadrant in the system $ \left(2.2\right) $, the singularity $ (0, C) $ is an attractor and the stable manifold $ W^{s}\left(P_{1}\right) $ of $ P_{1} $ determines a separatrix curve which divides the phase plane into two regions. The trajectories having initial conditions above this curve have the point $ \left(0, C\right) $ as their $ \omega -limit $, meanwhile, those that lie below the separatrix can have a positive equilibrium point or a stable limit cycle as their $ \omega -limit $. This implies that there exists a great possibility for the prey population to go to extinction, although the ratio prey-predator is high (many prey and little predators).
We also prove the existence of a homoclinic curve determined by the stable and unstable manifolds of the positive saddle point $ P_{1} $, encircling the second positive equilibrium point $ P_{2} $; when it breaks up it originates a non-infinitesimal limit cycle.
The dynamics of the studied model, in which the predators have an alternative food to low densities of prey, differs from the May-Holling-Tanner model [3,5], since:
ⅰ) System $ \left(2.1\right) $ can have one, two or none positive equilibrium points at the interior of the first quadrant with a more varied dynamic; whereas, the May-Holling-Tanner model has a unique positive equilibrium point, which can never be a cusp point, then there no exists Bogdanov-Takens bifurcation for this model.
ⅱ) In system $ \left(2.1\right) $ there is a parameter constraint for which a homoclinic curve exists, something that does not appear in the May-Holling-Tanner model.
ⅲ) Each model has a separatrix curve dividing the behavior of the trajectories, which are originated by, the non-hyperbolic saddle point $ \left(0, 0\right) $, in the May-Holling-Tanner model, and in the modified model is created by the hyperbolic attractor point $ \left(0, C\right) $.
ⅳ) Both models have in common the existence of triple or bi-stability since two limit cycles can bifurcate of a weak focus, surrounding an attractor positive equilibrium point, being the innermost unstable (frontier of the attraction basin) and the outermost stable.
But, in the model here analyzed, this situation also can appear when exist two positive equilibria (see Figure 7) or when exists a unique equilibrium at the interior of the first quadrant (For instance, when $ A = 0.2 $, $ C = 0.4 $, $ Q = 0.5 $ and $ S = 0.12005 $, i.e., $ CQ-A = 0 $, when $ A = 0.2000001 $, $ C = 0.39999925 $, $ Q = 0.5 $ and $ S = 0.12005 $, i.e., $ CQ-A < 0 $). In the Holling-Tanner model, the two limit cycles appear when there is one positive equilibrium point.
The triple-stability phenomenon exists in the system $ \left(2.2 \right) $ when simultaneously are stable: (1) the point $ \left(0, C\right) $; (2) the positive equilibrium $ P_{2} $; and (3) a limit cycle, for a determined set of parameters; then, for these parameter values, both populations can coexist, oscillate around specific population sizes or prey population can be depleted and the predators survive as an alternative food.
It can conclude that for certain parameters values in the system $ \left(2.2\right) $, there exists self-regulation since the species can coexist experimenting oscillations of their population sizes surrounded a fix point, or else, the population sizes can tend to that fix point. But, depending on the ratio prey/predator the prey population can go to extinction for the same parameters values.
Moreover, system $ \left(2.2\right) $ is sensitive to disturbances of the parameter values, since there exist changes of the basin of attraction of $ P_{2} $ as it is shown in Figures 4–8.
The self-regulation depends mainly on the parameter $ S = $ $ \frac{s}{r} $. This implies that increasing the intrinsic predator growth rate $ s $ or decreasing the intrinsic prey growth rate $ r $, the possibility of oscillations of the population sizes increase. Similar statements can be derived for other parameters values of the system $ \left(2.2\right) $.
The complex dynamic of the analyzed model is a prominent issue to be considered by the ecologists and agencies responsible for conservation and management of renewable resources, as the open access fisheries.
This concern must be especially with those populations more sensitive to disturbances of the environment, considering that for given initial condition the dynamic of the model predicts the long term persistence of the populations, or else, the extinction of one of them.
On the other hand, the system $ \left(2.1\right) $ could have a behavior nearest to the model studied in [22], where $ c = 0 $, or with the model analyzed in [37], since the Allee effect implies a closer dynamic, due to the existence of two positive equilibria.
In short, in this article, we extend the dynamical properties of the model proposed in [13] and the partial results obtained in previous papers [23,24,1,29,2]; we also complement the outcomes obtained in [5] for the May-Holling-Tanner model, showing that the modified model has interesting and rich mathematical dynamics, describing different possible ecological behaviors.
This work was partially financed by DIEA PUCV 124.720/2012.
All authors declare no conflicts of interest in this paper.
[1] |
Curotto de Lafaille MA, Lafaille JJ (2009) Natural and adaptive foxp3+ regulatory T cells: more of the same or a division of labor? Immunity 30: 626-635. doi: 10.1016/j.immuni.2009.05.002
![]() |
[2] | Sakaguchi S (2005) Naturally arising Foxp3-expressing CD25+CD4+ regulatory T cells in immunological tolerance to self and non-self. Nat Immunol 6: 345-352. |
[3] |
Maggi E, Cosmi L, Liotta F, et al. (2005) Thymic regulatory T cells. Autoimmun Rev 4: 579-586. doi: 10.1016/j.autrev.2005.04.010
![]() |
[4] |
Mougiakakos D, Choudhury A, Lladser A, et al. (2010) Regulatory T cells in cancer. Adv Cancer Res 107: 57-117. doi: 10.1016/S0065-230X(10)07003-X
![]() |
[5] |
Jonuleit H, Schmitt E (2003) The regulatory T cell family: distinct subsets and their interrelations. J Immunol 171: 6323-6327. doi: 10.4049/jimmunol.171.12.6323
![]() |
[6] |
Mucida D, Kutchukhidze N, Erazo A, et al. (2005) Oral tolerance in the absence of naturally occurring Tregs. J Clini Invest 115: 1923-1933. doi: 10.1172/JCI24487
![]() |
[7] | Sakaguchi S, Sakaguchi N, Asano M, et al. (1995) Immunologic self-tolerance maintained by activated T cells expressing IL-2 receptor alpha-chains (CD25). Breakdown of a single mechanism of self-tolerance causes various autoimmune diseases. J Immunol 155: 1151-1164. |
[8] |
Roncarolo MG, Gregori S, Battaglia M, et al. (2006) Interleukin-10-secreting type 1 regulatory T cells in rodents and humans. Immunol Rev 212: 28-50. doi: 10.1111/j.0105-2896.2006.00420.x
![]() |
[9] |
Setoguchi R, Hori S, Takahashi T, et al. (2005) Homeostatic maintenance of natural Foxp3(+) CD25(+) CD4(+) regulatory T cells by interleukin (IL)-2 and induction of autoimmune disease by IL-2 neutralization. J Exp Med 201: 723-735. doi: 10.1084/jem.20041982
![]() |
[10] |
Barron L, Dooms H, Hoyer KK, et al. (2010) Cutting edge: mechanisms of IL-2-dependent maintenance of functional regulatory T cells. J Immunol 185: 6426-6430. doi: 10.4049/jimmunol.0903940
![]() |
[11] |
Read S, Mauze S, Asseman C, et al. (1998) CD38+ CD45RB(low) CD4+ T cells: a population of T cells with immune regulatory activities in vitro. Eur J Immunol 28: 3435-3447. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1521-4141(199811)28:11<3435::AID-IMMU3435>3.0.CO;2-P
![]() |
[12] |
Fu S, Yopp AC, Mao X, et al. (2004) CD4+ CD25+ CD62+ T-regulatory cell subset has optimal suppressive and proliferative potential. Am J Transplant 4: 65-78. doi: 10.1046/j.1600-6143.2003.00293.x
![]() |
[13] |
Allakhverdi Z, Fitzpatrick D, Boisvert A, et al. (2006) Expression of CD103 identifies human regulatory T-cell subsets. J Allergy Clin Immunol 118: 1342-1349. doi: 10.1016/j.jaci.2006.07.034
![]() |
[14] | Brunkow ME, Jeffery EW, Hjerrild KA, et al. (2001) Disruption of a new forkhead/winged-helix protein, scurfin, results in the fatal lymphoproliferative disorder of the scurfy mouse. Nat Genet 27: 68-73. |
[15] |
Chatila TA, Blaeser F, Ho N, et al. (2000) JM2, encoding a fork head-related protein, is mutated in X-linked autoimmunity-allergic disregulation syndrome. J Clini Invest 106: R75-81. doi: 10.1172/JCI11679
![]() |
[16] |
Bennett CL, Christie J, Ramsdell F, et al. (2001) The immune dysregulation, polyendocrinopathy, enteropathy, X-linked syndrome (IPEX) is caused by mutations of FOXP3. Nat Genet 27: 20-21. doi: 10.1038/83713
![]() |
[17] |
Allan SE, Passerini L, Bacchetta R, et al. (2005) The role of 2 FOXP3 isoforms in the generation of human CD4+ Tregs. J Clini Invest 115: 3276-3284. doi: 10.1172/JCI24685
![]() |
[18] |
Tang Q, Bluestone JA (2008) The Foxp3+ regulatory T cell: a jack of all trades, master of regulation. Nat Immunol 9: 239-244. doi: 10.1038/ni1572
![]() |
[19] |
LeGuern C (2003) Regulation of T-cell functions by MHC class II self-presentation. Trends Immunol 24: 633-638. doi: 10.1016/j.it.2003.10.010
![]() |
[20] | Coutinho A, Caramalho I, Seixas E, et al. (2005) Thymic commitment of regulatory T cells is a pathway of TCR-dependent selection that isolates repertoires undergoing positive or negative selection. Curr Top Microbiol 293: 43-71. |
[21] |
Burchill MA, Yang J, Vang KB, et al. (2008) Linked T cell receptor and cytokine signaling govern the development of the regulatory T cell repertoire. Immunity 28: 112-121. doi: 10.1016/j.immuni.2007.11.022
![]() |
[22] |
Liston A, Nutsch KM, Farr AG, et al. (2008) Differentiation of regulatory Foxp3+ T cells in the thymic cortex. P Natl Acad Sci USA 105: 11903-11908. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0801506105
![]() |
[23] | Gershon RK, Kondo K (1970) Cell interactions in the induction of tolerance: the role of thymic lymphocytes. Immunology 18: 723-737. |
[24] |
Lopes JE, Torgerson TR, Schubert LA, et al. (2006) Analysis of FOXP3 reveals multiple domains required for its function as a transcriptional repressor. J Immunol 177: 3133-3142. doi: 10.4049/jimmunol.177.5.3133
![]() |
[25] |
Wu Y, Borde M, Heissmeyer V, et al. (2006) FOXP3 controls regulatory T cell function through cooperation with NFAT. Cell 126: 375-387. doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2006.05.042
![]() |
[26] |
Shimizu J, Yamazaki S, Takahashi T, et al. (2002) Stimulation of CD25(+)CD4(+) regulatory T cells through GITR breaks immunological self-tolerance. Nat Immunol 3: 135-142. doi: 10.1038/ni759
![]() |
[27] |
Sakaguchi S (2004) Naturally arising CD4+ regulatory t cells for immunologic self-tolerance and negative control of immune responses. Annu Rev Immunol 22: 531-562. doi: 10.1146/annurev.immunol.21.120601.141122
![]() |
[28] |
Krummel MF, Allison JP (1995) CD28 and CTLA-4 have opposing effects on the response of T cells to stimulation. J Exp Med 182: 459-465. doi: 10.1084/jem.182.2.459
![]() |
[29] |
Walunas TL, Lenschow DJ, Bakker CY, et al. (1994) CTLA-4 can function as a negative regulator of T cell activation. Immunity 1: 405-413. doi: 10.1016/1074-7613(94)90071-X
![]() |
[30] |
Onishi Y, Fehervari Z, Yamaguchi T, et al. (2008) Foxp3+ natural regulatory T cells preferentially form aggregates on dendritic cells in vitro and actively inhibit their maturation. P Natl Acad Sci USA 105: 10113-10118. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0711106105
![]() |
[31] | Belladonna ML, Puccetti P, Orabona C, et al. (2007) Immunosuppression via tryptophan catabolism: the role of kynurenine pathway enzymes. Transplantation 84: S17-20. |
[32] |
Horwitz DA, Zheng SG, Gray JD (2008) Natural and TGF-beta-induced Foxp3(+)CD4(+) CD25(+) regulatory T cells are not mirror images of each other. Trends Immunol 29: 429-435. doi: 10.1016/j.it.2008.06.005
![]() |
[33] |
Apostolou I, von Boehmer H (2004) In vivo instruction of suppressor commitment in naive T cells. J Exp Med 199: 1401-1408. doi: 10.1084/jem.20040249
![]() |
[34] |
Kretschmer K, Apostolou I, Hawiger D, et al. (2005) Inducing and expanding regulatory T cell populations by foreign antigen. Nat Immunol 6: 1219-1227. doi: 10.1038/ni1265
![]() |
[35] |
Coombes JL, Siddiqui KR, Arancibia-Carcamo CV, et al. (2007) A functionally specialized population of mucosal CD103+ DCs induces Foxp3+ regulatory T cells via a TGF-beta and retinoic acid-dependent mechanism. J Exp Med 204: 1757-1764. doi: 10.1084/jem.20070590
![]() |
[36] |
Selvaraj RK, Geiger TL (2007) A kinetic and dynamic analysis of Foxp3 induced in T cells by TGF-beta. J Iimmunol 178: 7667-7677. doi: 10.4049/jimmunol.178.12.7667
![]() |
[37] |
Faria AM, Weiner HL (2006) Oral tolerance and TGF-beta-producing cells. Inflamm Allergy Drug Targets 5: 179-190. doi: 10.2174/187152806778256034
![]() |
[38] |
Weiner HL (2001) Induction and mechanism of action of transforming growth factor-beta-secreting Th3 regulatory cells. Immunol Rev 182: 207-214. doi: 10.1034/j.1600-065X.2001.1820117.x
![]() |
[39] | Carrier Y, Yuan J, Kuchroo VK, et al. (2007) Th3 cells in peripheral tolerance. II. TGF-beta-transgenic Th3 cells rescue IL-2-deficient mice from autoimmunity. J Immunol 178: 172-178. |
[40] |
Walker MR, Carson BD, Nepom GT, et al. (2005) De novo generation of antigen-specific CD4+CD25+ regulatory T cells from human CD4+CD25- cells. P Natl Acad Sci USA 102: 4103-4108. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0407691102
![]() |
[41] |
Wilczynski JR, Radwan M, Kalinka J (2008) The characterization and role of regulatory T cells in immune reactions. Front Biosci 13: 2266-2274. doi: 10.2741/2840
![]() |
[42] |
Mazza G, Sabatos-Peyton CA, Protheroe RE, et al. (2010) Isolation and characterization of human interleukin-10-secreting T cells from peripheral blood. Hum Immunol 71: 225-234. doi: 10.1016/j.humimm.2009.12.003
![]() |
[43] |
Pinchuk IV, Beswick EJ, Saada JI, et al. (2011) Human colonic myofibroblasts promote expansion of CD4+ CD25high Foxp3+ regulatory T cells. Gastroenterology 140: 2019-2030. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2011.02.059
![]() |
[44] | Wingo PA, Ries LA, Parker SL, et al. (1998) Long-term cancer patient survival in the United States. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 7: 271-282. |
[45] |
Cannon-Albright LA, Skolnick MH, Bishop DT, et al. (1988) Common inheritance of susceptibility to colonic adenomatous polyps and associated colorectal cancers. N Engl J Med 319: 533-537. doi: 10.1056/NEJM198809013190902
![]() |
[46] |
Peltomaki P, de la Chapelle A (1997) Mutations predisposing to hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer. Adv Cancer Res 71: 93-119. doi: 10.1016/S0065-230X(08)60097-4
![]() |
[47] |
Hawkins NJ, Ward RL (2001) Sporadic colorectal cancers with microsatellite instability and their possible origin in hyperplastic polyps and serrated adenomas. J Natl Cancer I 93: 1307-1313. doi: 10.1093/jnci/93.17.1307
![]() |
[48] |
Fishel R, Lescoe MK, Rao MR, et al. (1993) The human mutator gene homolog MSH2 and its association with hereditary nonpolyposis colon cancer. Cell 75: 1027-1038. doi: 10.1016/0092-8674(93)90546-3
![]() |
[49] |
Al-Tassan N, Chmiel NH, Maynard J, et al. (2002) Inherited variants of MYH associated with somatic G:C-->T:A mutations in colorectal tumors. Nat Genet 30: 227-232. doi: 10.1038/ng828
![]() |
[50] |
Grady WM, Carethers JM (2008) Genomic and epigenetic instability in colorectal cancer pathogenesis. Gastroenterology 135: 1079-1099. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2008.07.076
![]() |
[51] |
Kinzler KW, Vogelstein B (1996) Lessons from hereditary colorectal cancer. Cell 87: 159-170. doi: 10.1016/S0092-8674(00)81333-1
![]() |
[52] |
MacPhee M, Chepenik KP, Liddell RA, et al. (1995) The secretory phospholipase A2 gene is a candidate for the Mom1 locus, a major modifier of ApcMin-induced intestinal neoplasia. Cell 81: 957-966. doi: 10.1016/0092-8674(95)90015-2
![]() |
[53] | Shoemaker AR, Gould KA, Luongo C, et al. (1997) Studies of neoplasia in the Min mouse. Biochimica et biophysica acta 1332: F25-48. |
[54] |
de Miranda NF, Hes FJ, van Wezel T, et al. (2012) Role of the microenvironment in the tumourigenesis of microsatellite unstable and MUTYH-associated polyposis colorectal cancers. Mutagenesis 27: 247-253. doi: 10.1093/mutage/ger077
![]() |
[55] |
Salama P, Phillips M, Grieu F, et al. (2009) Tumor-infiltrating FOXP3+ T regulatory cells show strong prognostic significance in colorectal cancer. J Clin Oncol 27: 186-192. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2008.18.7229
![]() |
[56] |
Ladoire S, Martin F, Ghiringhelli F (2011) Prognostic role of FOXP3+ regulatory T cells infiltrating human carcinomas: the paradox of colorectal cancer. Cancer Immunol Immunother 60: 909-918. doi: 10.1007/s00262-011-1046-y
![]() |
[57] |
Boland CR (2010) Chronic inflammation, colorectal cancer and gene polymorphisms. Digestive diseases 28: 590-595. doi: 10.1159/000320053
![]() |
[58] | Danese S, Mantovani A Inflammatory bowel disease and intestinal cancer: a paradigm of the Yin-Yang interplay between inflammation and cancer. Oncogene 29: 3313-3323. |
[59] |
Chaput N, Louafi S, Bardier A, et al. (2009) Identification of CD8+CD25+Foxp3+ suppressive T cells in colorectal cancer tissue. Gut 58: 520-529. doi: 10.1136/gut.2008.158824
![]() |
[60] |
Brudvik KW, Henjum K, Aandahl EM, et al. (2012) Regulatory T-cell-mediated inhibition of antitumor immune responses is associated with clinical outcome in patients with liver metastasis from colorectal cancer. Cancer Immunol Immunother 61: 1045-1053. doi: 10.1007/s00262-011-1174-4
![]() |
[61] | Zeng JC, Zhang Z, Li TY, et al. (2013) Assessing the role of IL-35 in colorectal cancer progression and prognosis. Int J Clin Exp Pathol 6: 1806-1816. |
[62] |
Bates GJ, Fox SB, Han C, et al. (2006) Quantification of regulatory T cells enables the identification of high-risk breast cancer patients and those at risk of late relapse. J Clin Oncol 24: 5373-5380. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2006.05.9584
![]() |
[63] |
Fu J, Xu D, Liu Z, et al. (2007) Increased regulatory T cells correlate with CD8 T-cell impairment and poor survival in hepatocellular carcinoma patients. Gastroenterology 132: 2328-2339. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2007.03.102
![]() |
[64] |
Betts G, Jones E, Junaid S, et al. (2012) Suppression of tumour-specific CD4(+) T cells by regulatory T cells is associated with progression of human colorectal cancer. Gut 61: 1163-1171. doi: 10.1136/gutjnl-2011-300970
![]() |
[65] | Bacic D, Uravic M, Bacic R, et al. (2011) Augmentation of regulatory T cells (CD4+CD25+Foxp3+) correlates with tumor stage in patients with colorectal cancer. Coll Antropol 35 Suppl 2: 65-68. |
[66] |
Mempel TR, Pittet MJ, Khazaie K, et al. (2006) Regulatory T cells reversibly suppress cytotoxic T cell function independent of effector differentiation. Immunity 25: 129-141. doi: 10.1016/j.immuni.2006.04.015
![]() |
[67] |
Slaney CY, Rautela J, Parker BS (2013) The emerging role of immunosurveillance in dictating metastatic spread in breast cancer. Cancer Res 73: 5852-5857. doi: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-13-1642
![]() |
[68] |
Koebel CM, Vermi W, Swann JB, et al. (2007) Adaptive immunity maintains occult cancer in an equilibrium state. Nature 450: 903-907. doi: 10.1038/nature06309
![]() |
[69] | Bonertz A, Weitz J, Pietsch DH, et al. (2009) Antigen-specific Tregs control T cell responses against a limited repertoire of tumor antigens in patients with colorectal carcinoma. J Clini Invest 119: 3311-3321. |
[70] |
Duchmann R, May E, Heike M, et al. (1999) T cell specificity and cross reactivity towards enterobacteria, bacteroides, bifidobacterium, and antigens from resident intestinal flora in humans. Gut 44: 812-818. doi: 10.1136/gut.44.6.812
![]() |
[71] | Naito Y, Saito K, Shiiba K, et al. (1998) CD8+ T cells infiltrated within cancer cell nests as a prognostic factor in human colorectal cancer. Cancer Res 58: 3491-3494. |
[72] |
Golby SJ, Chinyama C, Spencer J (2002) Proliferation of T-cell subsets that contact tumour cells in colorectal cancer. Clin Exp Immunol 127: 85-91. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2249.2002.01730.x
![]() |
[73] |
Le Gouvello S, Bastuji-Garin S, Aloulou N, et al. (2008) High prevalence of Foxp3 and IL17 in MMR-proficient colorectal carcinomas. Gut 57: 772-779. doi: 10.1136/gut.2007.123794
![]() |
[74] |
Nosho K, Baba Y, Tanaka N, et al. (2010) Tumour-infiltrating T-cell subsets, molecular changes in colorectal cancer, and prognosis: cohort study and literature review. J Pathol 222: 350-366. doi: 10.1002/path.2774
![]() |
[75] |
Gooden MJ, de Bock GH, Leffers N, et al. (2011) The prognostic influence of tumour-infiltrating lymphocytes in cancer: a systematic review with meta-analysis. Brit J Cancer 105: 93-103. doi: 10.1038/bjc.2011.189
![]() |
[76] |
Sinicrope FA, Rego RL, Ansell SM, et al. (2009) Intraepithelial effector (CD3+)/regulatory (FoxP3+) T-cell ratio predicts a clinical outcome of human colon carcinoma. Gastroenterology 137: 1270-1279. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2009.06.053
![]() |
[77] |
Katz SC, Bamboat ZM, Maker AV, et al. (2013) Regulatory T cell infiltration predicts outcome following resection of colorectal cancer liver metastases. Ann Surg Oncol 20: 946-955. doi: 10.1245/s10434-012-2668-9
![]() |
[78] | Blatner NR, Mulcahy MF, Dennis KL, et al. (2012) Expression of RORgammat marks a pathogenic regulatory T cell subset in human colon cancer. Sci Transl Med 4: 164ra159. |
[79] |
Awasthi A, Kuchroo VK (2009) Th17 cells: from precursors to players in inflammation and infection. Int Immunol 21: 489-498. doi: 10.1093/intimm/dxp021
![]() |
[80] | Liu Z, Huang Q, Liu G, et al. (2014) Presence of FOXP3(+)Treg cells is correlated with colorectal cancer progression. Int J Clin Exp Med 7: 1781-1785. |
[81] |
Sojka DK, Huang YH, Fowell DJ (2008) Mechanisms of regulatory T-cell suppression - a diverse arsenal for a moving target. Immunology 124: 13-22. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2567.2008.02813.x
![]() |
[82] |
Ishimaru N, Nitta T, Arakaki R, et al. (2010) In situ patrolling of regulatory T cells is essential for protecting autoimmune exocrinopathy. PloS One 5: e8588. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0008588
![]() |
[83] |
Akeus P, Langenes V, von Mentzer A, et al. (2014) Altered chemokine production and accumulation of regulatory T cells in intestinal adenomas of APC(Min/+) mice. Cancer Immunol Immunother 63: 807-819. doi: 10.1007/s00262-014-1555-6
![]() |
[84] |
Michaud J, Im DS, Hla T (2010) Inhibitory role of sphingosine 1-phosphate receptor 2 in macrophage recruitment during inflammation. J Immunol 184: 1475-1483. doi: 10.4049/jimmunol.0901586
![]() |
[85] |
Ishimaru N, Yamada A, Nitta T, et al. (2012) CCR7 with S1P1 signaling through AP-1 for migration of Foxp3+ regulatory T-cells controls autoimmune exocrinopathy. Am J Pathol 180: 199-208. doi: 10.1016/j.ajpath.2011.09.027
![]() |
[86] |
Goetzl EJ, Liao JJ, Huang MC (2008) Regulation of the roles of sphingosine 1-phosphate and its type 1 G protein-coupled receptor in T cell immunity and autoimmunity. Biochimica et biophysica acta 1781: 503-507. doi: 10.1016/j.bbalip.2008.03.001
![]() |
[87] | Wang W, Graeler MH, Goetzl EJ (2004) Physiological sphingosine 1-phosphate requirement for optimal activity of mouse CD4+ regulatory T Cells. FASEB J 18: 1043-1045. |
[88] |
Rosen H, Goetzl EJ (2005) Sphingosine 1-phosphate and its receptors: an autocrine and paracrine network. Nat Rev Immunol 5: 560-570. doi: 10.1038/nri1650
![]() |
[89] |
Pyne S, Pyne NJ (2011) Translational aspects of sphingosine 1-phosphate biology. Trends Mol Med 17: 463-472. doi: 10.1016/j.molmed.2011.03.002
![]() |
[90] |
Kohama T, Olivera A, Edsall L, et al. (1998) Molecular cloning and functional characterization of murine sphingosine kinase. J Biol Chem 273: 23722-23728. doi: 10.1074/jbc.273.37.23722
![]() |
[91] |
Liu H, Chakravarty D, Maceyka M, et al. (2002) Sphingosine kinases: a novel family of lipid kinases. Prog Nucleic Acid Res Mol Biol 71: 493-511. doi: 10.1016/S0079-6603(02)71049-0
![]() |
[92] |
Wang W, Huang MC, Goetzl EJ (2007) Type 1 sphingosine 1-phosphate G protein-coupled receptor (S1P1) mediation of enhanced IL-4 generation by CD4 T cells from S1P1 transgenic mice. J Immunol 178: 4885-4890. doi: 10.4049/jimmunol.178.8.4885
![]() |
[93] |
Sawicka E, Dubois G, Jarai G, et al. (2005) The sphingosine 1-phosphate receptor agonist FTY720 differentially affects the sequestration of CD4+/CD25+ T-regulatory cells and enhances their functional activity. J Immunol 175: 7973-7980. doi: 10.4049/jimmunol.175.12.7973
![]() |
[94] |
Liu G, Yang K, Burns S, et al. (2010) The S1P(1)-mTOR axis directs the reciprocal differentiation of T(H)1 and T(reg) cells. Nat Immunol 11: 1047-1056. doi: 10.1038/ni.1939
![]() |
[95] |
Snider AJ, Orr Gandy KA, Obeid LM (2010) Sphingosine kinase: Role in regulation of bioactive sphingolipid mediators in inflammation. Biochimie 92: 707-715. doi: 10.1016/j.biochi.2010.02.008
![]() |
[96] |
Spiegel S, Milstien S (2011) The outs and the ins of sphingosine-1-phosphate in immunity. Nat Rev Immunol 11: 403-415. doi: 10.1038/nri2974
![]() |
[97] |
Maceyka M, Harikumar KB, Milstien S, et al. (2012) Sphingosine-1-phosphate signaling and its role in disease. Trends Cell Biol 22: 50-60. doi: 10.1016/j.tcb.2011.09.003
![]() |
[98] |
Schwalm S, Pfeilschifter J, Huwiler A (2013) Sphingosine-1-phosphate: a Janus-faced mediator of fibrotic diseases. Biochim Biophys Acta 1831: 239-250. doi: 10.1016/j.bbalip.2012.07.022
![]() |
[99] |
Nguyen AV, Wu YY, Liu Q, et al. (2013) STAT3 in Epithelial Cells Regulates Inflammation and Tumor Progression to Malignant State in Colon. Neoplasia 15: 998-1008. doi: 10.1593/neo.13952
![]() |
[100] |
Liang J, Nagahashi M, Kim EY, et al. (2013) Sphingosine-1-phosphate links persistent STAT3 activation, chronic intestinal inflammation, and development of colitis-associated cancer. Cancer Cell 23: 107-120. doi: 10.1016/j.ccr.2012.11.013
![]() |
[101] |
Lee H, Herrmann A, Deng JH, et al. (2009) Persistently activated Stat3 maintains constitutive NF-kappaB activity in tumors. Cancer Cell 15: 283-293. doi: 10.1016/j.ccr.2009.02.015
![]() |
[102] |
Nagahashi M, Hait NC, Maceyka M, et al. (2014) Sphingosine-1-phosphate in chronic intestinal inflammation and cancer. Adv Biol Regul 54: 112-120. doi: 10.1016/j.jbior.2013.10.001
![]() |
[103] |
Daniel C, Sartory N, Zahn N, et al. (2007) FTY720 ameliorates Th1-mediated colitis in mice by directly affecting the functional activity of CD4+CD25+ regulatory T cells. J Immunol 178: 2458-2468. doi: 10.4049/jimmunol.178.4.2458
![]() |
[104] | Bos PD, Rudensky AY (2012) Treg cells in cancer: a case of multiple personality disorder. Sci Transl Med 4: 164fs144. |
[105] | Liao X, Lochhead P, Nishihara R, et al. Aspirin use, tumor PIK3CA mutation, and colorectal-cancer survival. N Engl J Med 367: 1596-1606. |
[106] |
Nguyen AV, Wu YY, Lin EY (2014) STAT3 and sphingosine-1-phosphate in inflammation-associated colorectal cancer. World J Gastroenterol 20: 10279-10287. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v20.i30.10279
![]() |
[107] |
Khan S, Burt DJ, Ralph C, et al. (2011) Tremelimumab (anti-CTLA4) mediates immune responses mainly by direct activation of T effector cells rather than by affecting T regulatory cells. Clin Immunol 138: 85-96. doi: 10.1016/j.clim.2010.09.011
![]() |
[108] |
Saha A, Chatterjee SK (2010) Combination of CTL-associated antigen-4 blockade and depletion of CD25 regulatory T cells enhance tumour immunity of dendritic cell-based vaccine in a mouse model of colon cancer. Scand J Immunol 71: 70-82. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-3083.2009.02355.x
![]() |
[109] |
Yano H, Thakur A, Tomaszewski EN, et al. (2014) Ipilimumab augments antitumor activity of bispecific antibody-armed T cells. J Transl Med 12: 191. doi: 10.1186/1479-5876-12-191
![]() |
[110] |
Liu H, Hu B, Xu D, et al. (2003) CD4+CD25+ regulatory T cells cure murine colitis: the role of IL-10, TGF-beta, and CTLA4. J Immunol 171: 5012-5017. doi: 10.4049/jimmunol.171.10.5012
![]() |
[111] | von Boehmer H, Daniel C (2013) Therapeutic opportunities for manipulating T(Reg) cells in autoimmunity and cancer. Nat Rev Drug Discov 12: 51-63. |
[112] | Rech AJ, Mick R, Martin S, et al. (2012) CD25 blockade depletes and selectively reprograms regulatory T cells in concert with immunotherapy in cancer patients. Sci Transl Med 4: 134ra162. |
1. | Claudio Arancibia-Ibarra, Michael Bode, José Flores, Graeme Pettet, Peter van Heijster, Turing patterns in a diffusive Holling–Tanner predator-prey model with an alternative food source for the predator, 2021, 99, 10075704, 105802, 10.1016/j.cnsns.2021.105802 | |
2. | Altemir Bortuli Junior, Norberto Anibal Maidana, A modified Leslie–Gower predator–prey model with alternative food and selective predation of noninfected prey, 2021, 44, 0170-4214, 3441, 10.1002/mma.6952 | |
3. | Claudio Arancibia-Ibarra, Pablo Aguirre, José Flores, Peter van Heijster, Bifurcation analysis of a predator-prey model with predator intraspecific interactions and ratio-dependent functional response, 2021, 402, 00963003, 126152, 10.1016/j.amc.2021.126152 | |
4. | Claudio Arancibia–Ibarra, José Flores, Dynamics of a Leslie–Gower predator–prey model with Holling type II functional response, Allee effect and a generalist predator, 2021, 03784754, 10.1016/j.matcom.2021.03.035 | |
5. | Yingzi Liu, Zhong Li, Mengxin He, Bifurcation analysis in a Holling-Tanner predator-prey model with strong Allee effect, 2023, 20, 1551-0018, 8632, 10.3934/mbe.2023379 | |
6. | ANURAJ SINGH, DEEPAK TRIPATHI, YUN KANG, A MODIFIED MAY–HOLLING–TANNER MODEL: THE ROLE OF DYNAMIC ALTERNATIVE RESOURCES ON SPECIES’ SURVIVAL, 2024, 32, 0218-3390, 187, 10.1142/S0218339024500074 | |
7. | Liliana Puchuri, Orestes Bueno, Eduardo González-Olivares, Alejandro Rojas-Palma, Simultaneous Hopf and Bogdanov–Takens Bifurcations on a Leslie–Gower Type Model with Generalist Predator and Group Defence, 2024, 23, 1575-5460, 10.1007/s12346-024-01118-5 | |
8. | Zhenliang Zhu, Yuming Chen, Fengde Chen, Zhong Li, Complex dynamics of a predator–prey model with opportunistic predator and weak Allee effect in prey, 2023, 17, 1751-3758, 10.1080/17513758.2023.2225545 | |
9. | Hongliang Li, Min Zhao, Rong Yuan, Traveling waves of modified Leslie–Gower predator–prey systems, 2025, 18, 1793-5245, 10.1142/S1793524523501073 | |
10. | Nicole Martínez-Jeraldo, Elizabeth Rozas-Torres, Eduardo González-Olivares, Paulo C. Tintinago-Ruiz, 2025, 9780443154454, 19, 10.1016/B978-0-44-315445-4.00008-1 | |
11. | Francisco Javier Reyes-Bahamón, Camilo Andrés Rodríguez-Cifuentes, Eduardo González-Olivares, Simeón Casanova-Trujillo, Hunting Cooperation: Its Impact in a modified May–Holling–Tanner model, 2025, 24, 1575-5460, 10.1007/s12346-025-01267-1 |
Parameters | Meanings |
$ r $ | intrinsic prey growth rate or biotic potential |
$ K $ | prey environmental carrying capacity |
$ q $ | maximum number of prey that can be eaten by a predator in each time unit |
$ a $ | amount of prey to achieve one-half of the maximum rate $ q $ |
$ s $ | intrinsic predator growth rate |
$ n $ | measure of the food quality |
$ c $ | amount of alternative food available for predators |
Case | sg$\left(B_{1}\right) $ | sg$\left(B_{0}\right) $ | sg$\left(\Delta \left(\eta \right) \right) $ | Number of Positive equilibrium |
1.1 | $+$ | $+$ | $+$ | $2$ |
1.2 | $+$ | $+$ | $0$ | $1$ |
1.3 | $+$ | $+$ | $-$ | $0$ |
2.1 | $+$ | $-$ | $+$ | $1$ |
2.2 | $-$ | $+$ | $+$ | $1$ |
3 | $+$ | $0$ | $+$ | $1$ |
4 | $0$ | $-$ | $+$ | $1$ |
5.1 | $0$ | $+$ | $-$ | $0$ |
5.2 | $-$ | $+$ | $-$ | $0$ |
Parameters | Meanings |
$ r $ | intrinsic prey growth rate or biotic potential |
$ K $ | prey environmental carrying capacity |
$ q $ | maximum number of prey that can be eaten by a predator in each time unit |
$ a $ | amount of prey to achieve one-half of the maximum rate $ q $ |
$ s $ | intrinsic predator growth rate |
$ n $ | measure of the food quality |
$ c $ | amount of alternative food available for predators |
Case | sg$\left(B_{1}\right) $ | sg$\left(B_{0}\right) $ | sg$\left(\Delta \left(\eta \right) \right) $ | Number of Positive equilibrium |
1.1 | $+$ | $+$ | $+$ | $2$ |
1.2 | $+$ | $+$ | $0$ | $1$ |
1.3 | $+$ | $+$ | $-$ | $0$ |
2.1 | $+$ | $-$ | $+$ | $1$ |
2.2 | $-$ | $+$ | $+$ | $1$ |
3 | $+$ | $0$ | $+$ | $1$ |
4 | $0$ | $-$ | $+$ | $1$ |
5.1 | $0$ | $+$ | $-$ | $0$ |
5.2 | $-$ | $+$ | $-$ | $0$ |