| Literature DB >> 32288086 |
Sourav Rana1, Sabyasachi Bhattacharya1, Joydeep Pal1, Gaston M N'Guérékata2, Joydev Chattopadhyay1.
Abstract
The paradox of enrichment (PoE) proposed by Rosenzweig [M. Rosenzweig, The paradox of enrichment, Science 171 (1971) 385-387] is still a fundamental problem in ecology. Most of the solutions have been proposed at an individual species level of organization and solutions at community level are lacking. Knowledge of how learning and memory modify behavioral responses to species is a key factor in making a crucial link between species and community levels. PoE resolution via these two organizational levels can be interpreted as a microscopic- and macroscopic-level solution. Fractional derivatives provide an excellent tool for describing this memory and the hereditary properties of various materials and processes. The derivatives can be physically interpreted via two time scales that are considered simultaneously: the ideal, equably flowing homogeneous local time, and the cosmic (inhomogeneous) non-local time. Several mechanisms and theories have been proposed to resolve the PoE problem, but a universally accepted theory is still lacking because most studies have focused on local effects and ignored non-local effects, which capture memory. Here we formulate the fractional counterpart of the Rosenzweig model and analyze the stability behavior of a system. We conclude that there is a threshold for the memory effect parameter beyond which the Rosenzweig model is stable and may be used as a potential agent to resolve PoE from a new perspective via fractional differential equations.Entities:
Keywords: Microscopic–macroscopic dynamics; Non-local effects; Predictor–corrector method; Refuge; Rosenzweig’s model; Stability analysis
Year: 2013 PMID: 32288086 PMCID: PMC7127129 DOI: 10.1016/j.physa.2013.03.061
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Physica A ISSN: 0378-4371 Impact factor: 3.263
Parameter values used to solve (3.2) (taken from [3]).
| Parameter | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Value | 0.05 | 0.025 | 0.1 | 1 | 20 |
Fig. 1Phase-plane diagram depicting the trajectory of predator–prey density for interior equilibrium of the classical Rosenzweig model with no memory and gradual enrichment of the system through the carrying capacity . (a) exhibits a stable trajectory with low enrichment () whereas (b) shows a limit-cycle oscillation under moderate enrichment () and (c) exhibits a limit-cycle oscillation with greater amplitude for high enrichment ().
Fig. 2Phase-plane diagram depicting the trajectory of predator–prey density for interior equilibrium of the classical Rosenzweig model with memory effect parameter , with gradual enrichment of the system through the carrying capacity . (a) and (b) exhibit a stable trajectory for moderate () and high () carrying capacities but (c) shows limit-cycle oscillation for high enrichment ().
Fig. 3Phase-plane diagram depicting the trajectory of predator–prey density for interior equilibrium of the classical Rosenzweig model incorporating the memory effect parameter , with gradual enrichment of the system through different levels of the carrying capacity . All the subplots exhibit a stable trajectory.
Fig. 4The parameter regions in which the interior equilibrium is stable (blue region) or unstable based on and . (a) A system with no memory allows stable equilibrium for a carrying capacity of . (b) System with a memory threshold below which it is always stable for all further increases in the carrying capacity. (For interpretation of the references to colour in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.)
Fig. 5Domain of the stability region in which the interior equilibrium of the Rosenzweig model with a refuge effect (B.1) is stable or unstable based on the carrying capacity and refuge parameter . (a) Region corresponds to the system with no memory . (b) The expanded region comprising and together corresponds to the system with memory effect parameter . (c) The largest region comprising , and represents the system with memory effect parameter .
Estimated parameter values.
| Error of fit | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0.7893 | 0.1 | 0.1 | 0.0598 | 1.812 | 21.0428 | 17.2995 | 43.2420 |