Abstract
In any reaction–diffusion system of predator–prey models, the population densities of species are determined by the interactions between them, together with the influences from the spatial environments surrounding them. Generally, the prey species would die out when their birth rate is too low, the habitat size is too small, the predator grows too fast, or the predation pressure is too high. To save the endangered prey species, some human interference is useful, such as creating a protection zone where the prey could cross the boundary freely but the predator is prohibited from entering. This paper studies the existence of positive steady states to a predator–prey model with reaction–diffusion terms, Beddington–DeAngelis type functional response and non-flux boundary conditions. It is shown that there is a threshold value \(\theta _0\) which characterizes the refuge ability of prey such that the positivity of prey population can be ensured if either the prey’s birth rate satisfies \(\theta \ge \theta _0\) (no matter how large the predator’s growth rate is) or the predator’s growth rate satisfies \(\mu \le 0\), while a protection zone \(\Omega _0\) is necessary for such positive solutions if \(\theta <\theta _0\) with \(\mu >0\) properly large. The more interesting finding is that there is another threshold value \(\theta ^*=\theta ^*(\mu ,\Omega _0)<\theta _0\), such that the positive solutions do exist for all \(\theta \in (\theta ^*,\theta _0)\). Letting \(\mu \rightarrow \infty \), we get the third threshold value \(\theta _1=\theta _1(\Omega _0)\) such that if \(\theta >\theta _1(\Omega _0)\), prey species could survive no matter how large the predator’s growth rate is. In addition, we get the fourth threshold value \(\theta _*\) for negative \(\mu \) such that the system admits positive steady states if and only if \(\theta >\theta _*\). All these results match well with the mechanistic derivation for the B-D type functional response recently given by Geritz and Gyllenberg (J Theoret Biol 314:106–108, 2012). Finally, we obtain the uniqueness of positive steady states for \(\mu \) properly large, as well as the asymptotic behavior of the unique positive steady state as \(\mu \rightarrow \infty \).
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Beddington JR (1975) Mutual interference between parasites or predators and its effect on searching efficiency. J Animal Ecol 44:331–340
Chen WY, Wang MX (2005) Qualitative analysis of predator–prey model with Beddington–DeAngelis functional response and diffusion. Math Comput Model 42:31–44
Crandall MG, Rabinowitz PH (1971) Bifurcation from simple eigenvalues. J Funct Anal 8:321–340
Cui RH, Shi JP, Wu BY (2014) Strong Allee effect in a diffusive predator–prey system with a protection zone. J Differ Equ 256:108–129
DeAngelis DL, Goldstein RA, O’Neill RV (1975) A model for tropic interaction. Ecology 56:881–892
Dimitrov DT, Kojouharov HV (2005) Complete mathematical analysis of predator–prey models with linear prey growth and Beddington–DeAngelis functional response. Appl Math Comput 162:523–538
Du YH, Liang X (2008) A diffusive competition model with a protection zone. J Differ Equ 244:61–86
Du YH, Shi JP (2006) A diffusive predator–prey model with a protection zone. J Differ Equ 229:63–91
Du YH, Shi JP (2007) Allee effect and bistability in a spatially hererogeneous predator–prey model. J Differ Equ 359:4557–4593
Du YH, Peng R, Wang MX (2009) Effect of a protection zone in the diffusive Leslie predator-prey model. J Differ Equ 246:3932–3956
González-Olivares E, Ramos-jiliberto R (2003) Dynamic consequences of prey refuges in a simple model system: more prey, fewer predators and enhanced stability. Ecol Model 166:135–146
Geritz S, Gyllenberg M (2012) A mechanistic derivation of the DeAngelis–Beddington functional response. J Theoret Biol 314:106–108
Guo GH, Wu JH (2010) Multiplicity and uniqueness of positive solutions for a predator–prey model with B-D functional response. Nonlinear Anal 72:1632–1646
Guo GH, Wu JH (2012) The effect of mutual interference between predators on a predator–prey model with diffusion. J Math Anal Appl 389:179–194
Haque M, Rahman MS, Venturino E, Li BL (2014) Effect of a functional response-dependent prey refuge in a predator–prey model. Ecol Complex 20:248–256
Ko W, Ryu K (2006) Qualitative analysis of a predator–prey model with Holling type II functional response incorporating a prey refuge. J Differ Equ 231:534–550
Lin CS, Ni WM, Takagi I (1988) Large amplitude stationary solutions to a chemotaxis system. J Differ Equ 72:1–27
López-Gómez J (2001) Spectral theory and nonlinear functional analysis. Res Notes Math, vol 426. Chapman and Hall/CRC, Boca Raton
Lou Y, Ni WM (1996) Diffusion, self-diffusion and cross-diffusion. J Differ Equ 131:79–131
Lou Y, Ni WM (1999) Diffusion vs cross-diffusion: an elliptic approach. J Differ Equ 154:157–190
Mukherjee D (2016) The effect of refuge and immigration in a predator–prey system in the presence of a competitor for the prey. Nonlinear Anal RWA 31:277–287
Oeda K (2011) Effect of cross-diffusion on the stationary problem of a prey–predator model with a protection zone. J Differ Equ 250:3988–4009
Pang PYH, Wang MX (2003) Qualitative analysis of a ratio-dependt predator-prey system with diffusion. Proc R Soc Edinburgh 133A:919–942
Rabinowitz PH (1971) Some global results for nonlinear eigenvalue problems. J Funct Anal 7:487–513
Sarwardi S, Mandal PK, Ray S (2012) Analysis of a competitive prey–predator system with a prey refuge. Biosystems 110:133–148
Sih A (1987) Prey refuges and predator–prey stability. Theoret Popul Biol 31:1–12
Wang YX, Li WT (2013) Effect of cross-diffusion on the stationary problem of a diffusive competition model with a protection zone. Nonlinear Anal RWA 14:224–245
Wang Y, Wang J (2012) Influence of prey refuge on predator–prey dynamics. Nonlinear Dyn 67:191–201
Wei FY, Fu QY (2016) Hopf bifurcation and stability for predator–prey systems with Beddington–DeAngelis type functional response and stage structure for prey incorporating refuge. Appl Math Model 40:126–134
Yang RZ, Zhang CR (2016) Dynamics in a diffusive predator–prey system with a constant prey refuge and delay. Nonlinear Anal RWA 31:1–22
Zou XL, Wang K (2011) The protection zone of biological population. Nonlinear Anal RWA 12:956–964
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (11171048).
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
He, X., Zheng, S. Protection zone in a diffusive predator–prey model with Beddington–DeAngelis functional response. J. Math. Biol. 75, 239–257 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00285-016-1082-5
Received:
Revised:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00285-016-1082-5
Keywords
- Reaction–diffusion
- Predator–prey
- Beddington–DeAngelis type functional response
- Protection zone
- Bifurcation