Abstract
Many populations live and disperse in advective media. A fundamental question, known as the “drift paradox” in stream ecology, is how a closed population can survive when it is constantly being transported downstream by the flow. Recent population-level models have focused on the role of diffusive movement in balancing the effects of advection, predicting critical conditions for persistence. Here, we formulate an individual-based stochastic analog of the model described in (Lutscher et al., SIAM Rev. 47(4):749–772, 2005) to quantify the effects of demographic stochasticity on persistence. Population dynamics are modeled as a logistic growth process and dispersal as a position-jump process on a finite domain divided into patches. When there is no correlation in the interpatch movement of residents, stochasticity simply smooths the persistence-extinction boundary. However, when individuals disperse in “packets” from one patch to another and the flow field is memoryless on the timescale of packet transport, the probability of persistence is greatly enhanced. The latter transport mechanism may be characteristic of larval dispersal in the coastal ocean or wind-dispersed seed pods.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Alexander, S.E., Roughgarden, J., 1996. Larval transport and population dynamics of intertidal barnacles: a coupled benthic/oceanic model. Ecol. Monogr. 66, 259–275.
Allen, L.J.S., 2003. An Introduction to Stochastic Models with Applications to Biology. Prentice Hall, New York.
Anderson, K.E., Paul, A.J., McCauley, E., Jackson, L.J., Post, J.R., Nisbet, R.M., 2006. Instream flow needs in streams and rivers: the importance of understanding ecological dynamics. Front. Ecol. Environ. 4(6), 309–318.
Bailey, N.T.J., 1964. The elements of Stochastic Processes. Wiley, New York.
Ballyk, M., Smith, H., 1999. A model of microbial growth in a plug flow reactor with wall attachment. Math. Biosci. 158(2), 95–126.
Berkley, H.A., Kendall, B.E., Mitarai, S., Siegel, D.A., 2010. Turbulent dispersal promotes species coexistence. Ecol. Lett., submitted.
Byers, J.E., Pringle, J.M., 2006. Going against the flow:retention, range limits and invasions in advective environments. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 313, 27–41.
Cowen, R.K., Sponaugle, S., 2009. Larval dispersal and marine population connectivity. Ann. Rev. Mar. Sci. 1(1), 443–466.
Elliott, J.M., 2002. Time spent in the drift by downstream-dispersing invertebrates in a lake district stream. Freshwater Biol. 47(1), 97–106.
Gaines, S.D., Bertness, M.D., 1992. Dispersal of juveniles and variable recruitment in sessile marine species. Nature 360, 579–580.
Gillespie, D.T., 1976. A general method for numerically simulating the stochastic time evolution of coupled chemical reactions. J. Comput. Phys. 22(4), 403–434.
Gillespie, D.T., 2007. Stochastic simulation of chemical kinetics. Ann. Rev. Phys. Chem. 58, 35–55.
Gurney, W.S.C., Nisbet, R.M., 1998. Ecological Dynamics. Oxford University Press, New York.
Hershey, A.E., Pastor, J., Peterson, B., Kling, G.W., 1993. Stable isotopes resolve the drift paradox for baetis mayflies in an arctic river. Ecology 74, 2315–2325.
Hinrichsen, H., 2000. Nonequilibrium critical phenomena and phase transitions into absorbing states. Adv. Phys. 49(7), 815–958.
Humphries, S., Ruxton, G.D., 2002. Is there really a drift paradox? J. Animal Ecol. 71, 151–154.
Kawasaki, K., Takasu, F., Caswell, H., Shigesada, N., 2006. How does stochasticity in colonization accelerate the speed of invasion in a cellular automaton model? Ecol. Res. 21, 334–345.
Kot, M., Medlock, J., Reluga, T., Walton, D.B., 2004. Stochasticity, invasions, and branching random walks. Theor. Popul. Biol. 66, 175–184.
Lewis, M.A., 2000. Spread rate for a nonlinear stochastic invasion. J. Math. Biol. 41, 430–454.
Lutscher, F., Pachepsky, E., Lewis, M.A., 2005. The effect of dispersal patterns on stream populations. SIAM Rev. 47(4), 749–772.
Lutscher, F., Lewis, M.A., McCauley, E., 2006. Effects of heterogeneity on spread and persistence in rivers. Bull. Math. Biol. 68(8), 2129–2160.
Mollison, D., 1977. Spatial contact models for ecological and epidemic spread. J. R. Stat. Soc. B 39, 238–326.
Müller, K., 1974. Stream drift as a chronobiological phenomenon in running water ecosystems. Ann. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 5, 309–323.
Müller, K., 1982. The colonisation cycle of freshwater insects. Oecologia 52, 202–207.
Nisbet, R.M., Gurney, W.C.S., 2003. Modelling Fluctuating Populations. Blackburn Press.
Okubo, A., 1980. Diffusion and Ecological Problems: Mathematical Models. Springer, Berlin.
Pachepsky, E., Lutscher, F., Nisbet, R.M., Lewis, M.A., 2005. Persistence, spread and the drift paradox. Theor. Popul. Biol. 67(1), 61–73.
Siegel, D.A., Mitarai, S., Costello, C.J., Gaines, S.D., Kendall, B.E., Warner, R.R., Winters, K.B., 2008. The stochastic nature of larval connectivity among nearshore marine populations. PNAS 105(26), 8974–8979.
Skellam, J.G., 1951. Random dispersal in theoretical populations. Biometrika 38, 196–218.
Snyder, R.E., 2003. How demographic stochasticity can slow biological invasions. Ecology 84(5), 1333–1339.
Speirs, D.C., Gurney, W.S.C., 2001. Population persistence in rivers and estuaries. Ecology 82(5), 1219–1237.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
Open Access This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Noncommercial License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.0), which permits any noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author(s) and source are credited.
About this article
Cite this article
Kolpas, A., Nisbet, R.M. Effects of Demographic Stochasticity on Population Persistence in Advective Media. Bull. Math. Biol. 72, 1254–1270 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11538-009-9489-4
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11538-009-9489-4