Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Both the Lotka–Volterra and Rosenzweig–MacArthur models have been used to explain the dynamics of natural populations of predators and prey. In the late 1980s, an alternative to the Lotka–Volterra predator–prey model (and its common-prey-dependent generalizations) emerged, the ratio dependent or Arditi–Ginzburg model. [22]
The Kolmogorov model addresses a limitation of the Volterra equations by imposing self-limiting growth in prey populations, preventing unrealistic exponential growth scenarios. It also provides a predictive model for the qualitative behavior of predator-prey systems without requiring explicit functional forms for the interaction terms. [5]
a = conversion efficiency: the fraction of prey energy assimilated by the predator and turned into new predators P = predator density V = prey density m = predator mortality c = capture rate Demographic response consists of a change in dP/dt due to a change in V and/or m. For example, if V increases, then predator growth rate (dP/dt) will increase.
If predators learn while foraging, but do not reject prey before they accept one, the functional response becomes a function of the density of all prey types. This describes predators that feed on multiple prey and dynamically switch from one prey type to another. This behaviour can lead to either a type II or a type III functional response.
The species–area relationship or species–area curve describes the relationship between the area of a habitat, or of part of a habitat, and the number of species found within that area. Larger areas tend to contain larger numbers of species, and empirically, the relative numbers seem to follow systematic mathematical relationships. [1]
Using these variables, the optimal diet model can predict how predators choose between two prey types: big prey 1 with energy value E 1 and handling time h 1, and small prey 2 with energy value E 2 and handling time h 2. In order to maximize its overall rate of energy gain, a predator must consider the profitability of the two prey types.
For example, exploitative interactions between a predator and prey can result in the extinction of the victim (the prey, in this case), as the predator, by definition, kills the prey, and thus reduces its population. [2] Another effect of these interactions is in the coevolutionary "hot" and "cold spots" put forth by geographic mosaic theory ...
Spider wasps paralyse and eventually kill their hosts, but are considered parasitoids, not predators.. At the most basic level, predators kill and eat other organisms. However, the concept of predation is broad, defined differently in different contexts, and includes a wide variety of feeding methods; moreover, some relationships that result in the prey's death are not necessarily called pre