Acta Biotheoretica

, Volume 66, Issue 3, pp 177–199 | Cite as

Descriptive Modeling of the Dynamical Systems and Determination of Feedback Homeostasis at Different Levels of Life Organization

  • G. N. Zholtkevych
  • K. V. NosovEmail author
  • Yu. G. Bespalov
  • L. I. Rak
  • M. Abhishek
  • E. V. Vysotskaya
Regular Article


The state-of-art research in the field of life’s organization confronts the need to investigate a number of interacting components, their properties and conditions of sustainable behaviour within a natural system. In biology, ecology and life sciences, the performance of such stable system is usually related to homeostasis, a property of the system to actively regulate its state within a certain allowable limits. In our previous work, we proposed a deterministic model for systems’ homeostasis. The model was based on dynamical system’s theory and pairwise relationships of competition, amensalism and antagonism taken from theoretical biology and ecology. However, the present paper proposes a different dimension to our previous results based on the same model. In this paper, we introduce the influence of inter-component relationships in a system, wherein the impact is characterized by direction (neutral, positive, or negative) as well as its (absolute) value, or strength. This makes the model stochastic which, in our opinion, is more consistent with real-world elements affected by various random factors. The case study includes two examples from areas of hydrobiology and medicine. The models acquired for these cases enabled us to propose a convincing explanation for corresponding phenomena identified by different types of natural systems.


Feedback relations Stochastic models Markov chains Dynamical systems Homeostasis 


  1. Abrams PA (1987) On classifying interactions between populations. Oecologia 73(2):272–281Google Scholar
  2. Abrams PA (2001) Describing and quantifying interspecific interactions: a commentary on recent approaches. Oikos 94(2):209–218Google Scholar
  3. Arató M (2003) Famous nonlinear Stochastic equation (Lotka–Volterra model with diffusion). Math Comput Modell 38:709–726Google Scholar
  4. Banfalvi G (2014) Homeostasis–tumor–metastasis. SpringerGoogle Scholar
  5. Bekey GA, Beneken JE (1978) Identification of biological systems: a survey. Automatica 14(1):41–47Google Scholar
  6. Bernard C (1879) Leçons sur les phénomènes de la vie commune aux animaux et aux végétaux. BailliéreGoogle Scholar
  7. Bieda B (2012) Stochastic analysis in production process and ecology under uncertainty. Springer, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  8. Bynum WF (2011) Nature’s helping hand. Nature 414:21Google Scholar
  9. Cannon WB (1932) The wisdom of the body. W.W. Norton & Company, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  10. Chou IC, Voit EO (2009) Recent developments in parameter estimation and structure identification of biochemical and genomic systems. Math Biosci 219(2):57–83Google Scholar
  11. Christianou M, Kokkoris G (2008) Complexity does not affect stability in feasible model communities. J Theor Biol 253(1):162–169Google Scholar
  12. De Gaetano A, Di Martino D, Germani A, Manes C (2005) Mathematical models and state observation of the glucose–insulin homeostasis. Springer, New York, pp 281–294Google Scholar
  13. Gnedenko BV (2005) The theory of probability. AMS Chelsea Publishing, MadisonGoogle Scholar
  14. Goldberger AL, Amaral LAN, Glass L, Hausdorff JM, Ivanov PC, Mark RG, Mietus JE, Moody GB, Peng CK, Stanley HE (2000) Physiobank, physiotoolkit, and physionet components of a new research resource for complex physiologic signals. Circulation 101(23):e215–e220Google Scholar
  15. Gophen M (2000) Lake Kinneret (Israel) ecosystem: long-term instability or resiliency? Water Air Soil Pollut 123:323–335Google Scholar
  16. Guyton AC, Coleman TG, Granger HJ (1972) Circulation: overall regulation. Annu Rev Physiol 34(1):13–44Google Scholar
  17. Haber R, Unbehauen H (1990) Structure identification of nonlinear dynamic systems: a survey on input/output approaches. Automatica 26(4):651–677Google Scholar
  18. Hambright KD, Eckert W, Leavitt PR, Schelske CL (2004) Effects of historical lake level and land use on sediment and phosphorus accumulation rates in lake Kinneret. Environ Sci Technol 38(24):6460–6467Google Scholar
  19. Hipsey MR, Gal G, Antenucci JP, Zohary T, Makler V, Imberger J (2006) Lake Kinneret water quality management system. In: Proceedings of the seventh international conference on hydroscience and engineeringGoogle Scholar
  20. Hofbauer J, Sigmund K (1988) The theory of evolution and dynamical systems. Mathematical aspects of selection. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  21. Hohm T, Zitzler E, Simon R (2010) A dynamic model for stem cell homeostasis and patterning in Arabidopsis meristems. PLoS ONE 5(2):1–9Google Scholar
  22. Jansen V, Kokkoris G (2003) Complexity and stability revisited. Ecol Lett 6:498–502Google Scholar
  23. Jost L (2006) Entropy and diversity. Oikos 113(2):363–375Google Scholar
  24. Kokkoris G, Jansen VAA, Loreau M, Troumbis AY (2002) Variability in interaction strength and implications for biodiversity. J Anim Ecol 71:362–371Google Scholar
  25. Kurachi K, Kurachi S, Hamada T, Suenaga E, Bolotova T, Solovieva E (2008) Age-related homeostasis and hemostatic system. Springer, Tokyo, pp 427–438Google Scholar
  26. Lidicker WZ Jr (1979) A clarification of interactions in ecological systems. Bioscience 29(8):475–477Google Scholar
  27. Margalef R (1968) Perspectives in ecological theory. Chicago University Press, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  28. Norris JR (1998) Markov chains. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  29. Øksendal B (2003) Stochastic differential equations. An introduction with applications. Springer, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  30. Parparov A, Gal G, Markel D (2013) Water quality assessment and management of Lake Kinneret water resources: results and challenges. In: Becker N (ed) Water policy in Israel: context, issues and options. Springer, DordrechtGoogle Scholar
  31. Paul W, Baschnagel J (2013) Stochastic processes: from physics to finance, 2nd edn. Springer, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  32. Pearl J, Dechter R (1996) Identifying independencies in causal graphs with feedback. In: Proceedings of the twelfth international conference on uncertainty in artificial intelligence. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers Inc., Burlington, pp 420–426Google Scholar
  33. Recknagel F, Ostrovsky I, Cao H, Zohary T, Zhang X (2013) Ecological relationships, thresholds and time-lags determining phytoplankton community dynamics of Lake Kinneret, Israel elucidated by evolutionary computation and wavelets. Ecol Model 255:70–86Google Scholar
  34. Rodriguez-Fernandez M, Mendes P, Banga JR (2006) A hybrid approach for efficient and robust parameter estimation in biochemical pathways. Biosystems 83(2–3):248–265Google Scholar
  35. Rosen R (1967) Homeostasis in biology: general orientation. Springer, Boston, pp 105–115Google Scholar
  36. Shipley B (2004) Cause and correlation in biology. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  37. Smirnov NN (ed) (1973) Many-year zooplankton data for lakes. Publishing house “Nauka”, MoscowGoogle Scholar
  38. Smith AP (2013) Systemic signaling in the maintenance of phosphate homeostasis. In: Baluška F (ed) Long-distance systemic signaling and communication in plants. Springer, Berlin, pp 149–166Google Scholar
  39. Spirtes P (1995) Directed cyclic graphical representations of feedback models. In: Proceedings of the eleventh conference on uncertainty in artificial intelligence. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers Inc., Burlington, pp 491–498Google Scholar
  40. Thompson JN (1988) Variation in interspecific interactions. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 19:65–87Google Scholar
  41. Tuomisto H (2010) A diversity of beta diversities: straightening up a concept gone awry. Part 1. Defining beta diversity as a function of alpha and gamma diversity. Ecography 33(1):2–22Google Scholar
  42. Unbehauen H (1982) Some modern developments in system identification using parameter estimation methods. Springer, Vienna, pp 405–443Google Scholar
  43. Welch JP, Ford PJ, Teplick RS, Rubsamen RM (1991) The Massachusetts General Hospital-Marquette Foundation hemodynamic and electrocardiographic database-comprehensive collection of critical care waveforms. Clin Monit 7(1):96–97Google Scholar
  44. Wootton JT, Emmerson M (2005) Measurement of interaction strength in nature. Annu Rev Ecol Evol Syst 36:419–444Google Scholar
  45. Young P (1981) Parameter estimation for continuous-time models: a survey. Automatica 17(1):23–39Google Scholar
  46. Zholtkevych GN, Bespalov YG, Nosov KV, Abhishek M (2013) Discrete modeling of dynamics of zooplankton community at the different stages of an antropogeneous eutrophication. Acta Biotheor 61(4):449–465Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V., part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.V. N. Karazin Kharkiv National UniversityKharkivUkraine
  2. 2.Robert Gordon UniversityAberdeenUK
  3. 3.Kharkiv National University of Radio ElectronicsKharkivUkraine

Personalised recommendations