Advertisement

Journal of Mathematical Biology

, Volume 63, Issue 5, pp 901–932 | Cite as

Global analysis of a stoichiometric producer–grazer model with Holling type functional responses

  • Xiong Li
  • Hao WangEmail author
  • Yang Kuang
Article

Abstract

Cells, the basic units of organisms, consist of multiple essential elements such as carbon, nitrogen, and phosphorus. The scarcity of any of these elements can strongly restrict cellular and organismal growth. During recent years, ecological models incorporating multiple elements have been rapidly developed in many studies, which form a new research field of mathematical and theoretical biology. Among these models, the one proposed by Loladze et al. (Bull Math Biol 62:1137–1162, 2000) is prominent and has been highly cited. However, the global analysis of this nonsmooth model has never been done. The aim of this paper is to provide the complete global analysis for the model with Holling type I functional response and perform a bifurcation analysis for the model with Holling type II functional response.

Keywords

Stoichiometry Producer Grazer Nutrient Light Holling type functional response Global stability Limit cycle Bifurcation 

Mathematics Subject Classification (2000)

34-XX 92-XX 37-XX 58-XX 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Andersen T (1997) Pelagic nutrient cycles: herbivores as sourced and sinks for nutrients. Springer-Verlag, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  2. Elser JJ, Fagan WF, Denno RF, Dobberfuhl DR, Folarin A, Huberty A et al (2000) Nutritional constraints in terrestrial and freshwater food webs. Nature 408: 578–580CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Grover JP (2002) Stoichiometry, herbivory and competition for nutrients: simple models based on planktonic ecosystems. J Theor Biol 214: 599–618CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Hessen DO, Bjerkeng B (1997) A model approach to planktonic stoichiometry and consumer-resource stability. Freshw Biol 38: 447–471CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Hsu SB, Hubbell SP, Waltman P (1978) Competing predators. SIAM J Appl Math 35: 617–625MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Kuang Y, Huisman J, Elser JJ (2004) Stoichiometric plant-herbivore models and their interpretation. Math Biosci Eng 1: 215–222MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Loladze I, Kuang Y, Elser JJ (2000) Stoichiometry in producer-grazer systems: linking energy flow with element cycling. Bull Math Biol 62: 1137–1162CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Sanchez LA (2005) Convergence to equilibria in the Lorenz system via monotone methods. J Differ Equ 217: 341–362zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Sterner RW, Elser JJ (2002) Ecological stoichiometry. Princeton University, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  10. Urabe J, Elser JJ, Kyle M, Sekino T, Kawabata Z (2002) Herbivorous animals can mitigate unfavorable ratios of energy and material supplies by enhancing nutrient recycling. Ecol Lett 5: 177–185CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Wang H, Smith HL, Kuang Y, Elser JJ (2007) Dynamics of stoichiometric bacteria-algae interactions in the epilimnion. SIAM J Appl Math 68: 503–522MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Wang H, Kuang Y, Loladze I (2008) Dynamics of a mechanistically derived stoichiometric producer-grazer model. J Biol Dyn 2: 286–296MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Laboratory of Mathematics and Complex SystemsSchool of Mathematical Sciences, Beijing Normal University, Ministry of EducationBeijingPeople’s Republic of China
  2. 2.Department of Mathematical and Statistical SciencesUniversity of AlbertaEdmontonCanada
  3. 3.School of Mathematical and Statistical SciencesArizona State UniversityTempeUSA

Personalised recommendations