Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2008, 5(3): 567-583. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2008.5.567.

Primary: 92D25; Secondary: none.

Export file:

Format

  • RIS(for EndNote,Reference Manager,ProCite)
  • BibTex
  • Text

Content

  • Citation Only
  • Citation and Abstract

Stabilization due to predator interference: comparison of different analysis approaches

1. Dept. Theor. Biology, Vrije Universiteit, de Boelelaan 1087, 1081 HV Amsterdam
2. ICBM, Carl von Ossietzky Universität, PF 2503, 26111 Oldenburg
3. Dept. of Chem. Eng., Princeton University, Engineering Quadrangle, Princeton, NJ 08540
4. Department of Theoretical Biology, Faculty of Earth and Life Sciences, Vrije Universiteit, de Boelelaan 1087, 1081 HV Amsterdam
5. Institute for Chemistry and Biology of the Marine Environment, Carl von Ossietzky Universität Oldenburg, PF 2503, 26111 Oldenburg

We study the influence of the particular form of the functional response in two-dimensional predator-prey models with respect to the stability of the nontrivial equilibrium. This equilibrium is stable between its appearance at a transcritical bifurcation and its destabilization at a Hopf bifurcation, giving rise to periodic behavior. Based on local bifurcation analysis, we introduce a classification of stabilizing effects. The classical Rosenzweig-MacArthur model can be classified as weakly stabilizing, undergoing the paradox of enrichment, while the well known Beddington-DeAngelis model can be classified as strongly stabilizing. Under certain conditions we obtain a complete stabilization, resulting in an avoidance of limit cycles. Both models, in their conventional formulation, are compared to a generalized, steady-state independent two-dimensional version of these models, based on a previously developed normalization method. We show explicitly how conventional and generalized models are related and how to interpret the results from the rather abstract stability analysis of generalized models.
  Figure/Table
  Supplementary
  Article Metrics

Keywords stability.; bifurcation analysis; generalized model; functional response

Citation: G.A.K. van Voorn, D. Stiefs, T. Gross, B. W. Kooi, Ulrike Feudel, S.A.L.M. Kooijman. Stabilization due to predator interference: comparison of different analysis approaches. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2008, 5(3): 567-583. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2008.5.567

 

This article has been cited by

  • 1. C. Kovach-Orr, G. F. Fussmann, Evolutionary and plastic rescue in multitrophic model communities, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 2012, 368, 1610, 20120084, 10.1098/rstb.2012.0084
  • 2. B.S.R.V. Prasad, Malay Banerjee, P.D.N. Srinivasu, Dynamics of additional food provided predator–prey system with mutually interfering predators, Mathematical Biosciences, 2013, 246, 1, 176, 10.1016/j.mbs.2013.08.013
  • 3. Martin Zumsande, Thilo Gross, Bifurcations and chaos in the MAPK signaling cascade, Journal of Theoretical Biology, 2010, 265, 3, 481, 10.1016/j.jtbi.2010.04.025
  • 4. Moitri Sen, P.D.N. Srinivasu, Malay Banerjee, Global dynamics of an additional food provided predator–prey system with constant harvest in predators, Applied Mathematics and Computation, 2015, 250, 193, 10.1016/j.amc.2014.10.085
  • 5. Marianne Alunno-Bruscia, Henk W. van der Veer, Sebastiaan A.L.M. Kooijman, The AquaDEB project: Physiological flexibility of aquatic animals analysed with a generic dynamic energy budget model (phase II), Journal of Sea Research, 2011, 66, 4, 263, 10.1016/j.seares.2011.09.005
  • 6. Subhendu Chakraborty, Bob W. Kooi, Barasha Biswas, J. Chattopadhyay, Revealing the role of predator interference in a predator–prey system with disease in prey population, Ecological Complexity, 2015, 21, 100, 10.1016/j.ecocom.2014.11.005
  • 7. George A. K. van Voorn, Bob W. Kooi, Combining bifurcation and sensitivity analysis for ecological models, The European Physical Journal Special Topics, 2017, 226, 9, 2101, 10.1140/epjst/e2017-70030-2
  • 8. Rajat Karnatak, Ram Ramaswamy, Ulrike Feudel, Conjugate coupling in ecosystems: Cross-predation stabilizes food webs, Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, 2014, 68, 48, 10.1016/j.chaos.2014.07.003
  • 9. Thilo Gross, Ulrike Feudel, Local dynamical equivalence of certain food webs, Ocean Dynamics, 2009, 59, 2, 417, 10.1007/s10236-008-0165-2
  • 10. Jianfeng Feng, Lin Zhu, Hongli Wang, Stability of Ecosystem Induced by Mutual Interference between Predators, Procedia Environmental Sciences, 2010, 2, 42, 10.1016/j.proenv.2010.10.007
  • 11. Jianfeng Feng, Vasilis Dakos, Egbert H. van Nes, Does predator interference cause alternative stable states in multispecies communities?, Theoretical Population Biology, 2012, 82, 3, 170, 10.1016/j.tpb.2012.06.003
  • 12. Christoph K. Schmitt, Stefan Schulz, Jonas Braun, Christian Guill, Barbara Drossel, The effect of predator limitation on the dynamics of simple food chains, Theoretical Ecology, 2014, 7, 2, 115, 10.1007/s12080-013-0204-6
  • 13. Gunog Seo, Donald L. DeAngelis, A Predator–Prey Model with a Holling Type I Functional Response Including a Predator Mutual Interference, Journal of Nonlinear Science, 2011, 21, 6, 811, 10.1007/s00332-011-9101-6
  • 14. Lenka Přibylová, Luděk Berec, Predator interference and stability of predator–prey dynamics, Journal of Mathematical Biology, 2015, 71, 2, 301, 10.1007/s00285-014-0820-9

Reader Comments

your name: *   your email: *  

Copyright Info: 2008, , licensee AIMS Press. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Licese (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)

Download full text in PDF

Export Citation

Copyright © AIMS Press All Rights Reserved