Skip to main content
Log in

Sensitivity of the dynamics of the general Rosenzweig–MacArthur model to the mathematical form of the functional response: a bifurcation theory approach

  • Published:
Journal of Mathematical Biology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The equations in the Rosenzweig–MacArthur predator–prey model have been shown to be sensitive to the mathematical form used to model the predator response function even if the forms used have the same basic shape: zero at zero, monotone increasing, concave down, and saturating. Here, we revisit this model to help explain this sensitivity in the case of three response functions of Holling type II form: Monod, Ivlev, and Hyperbolic tangent. We consider both the local and global dynamics and determine the possible bifurcations with respect to variation of the carrying capacity of the prey, a measure of the enrichment of the environment. We give an analytic expression that determines the criticality of the Hopf bifurcation, and prove that although all three forms can give rise to supercritical Hopf bifurcations, only the Trigonometric form can also give rise to subcritical Hopf bifurcation and has a saddle node bifurcation of periodic orbits giving rise to two coexisting limit cycles, providing a counterexample to a conjecture of Kooji and Zegeling. We also revisit the ranking of the functional responses, according to their potential to destabilize the dynamics of the model and show that given data, not only the choice of the functional form, but the choice of the number and/or position of the data points can influence the dynamics predicted.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Cheng KS (1981) Uniqueness of a limit cycle for a predator–prey system. SIAM J Math Anal 12:541–548

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Ermentrout B (2002) Simulating, analyzing, and animating dynamical systems: a guide to XPPAUT for researchers and students. SIAM, Philadelphia

    Book  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Freedman HI, Wolkowicz GSK (1986) Predator–prey systems with group defence: the paradox of enrichment revisited. Bull Math Biol 48:493–508

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Fussmann GF, Blasius B (2005) Community response to enrichment is highly sensitive to model structure. Biol Lett 1:9–12

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gantmacher FR (1959) Matrix Theory, vol I. Chelsea Publishing Company, White River Junction, VT

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Harrison GW (1979) Global stability of predator–prey interactions. J Math Biol 8:159–171

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Hofbauer J, So WHJ (1990) Multiple limit cycles for predator–prey models. Math Biosci 99:71–75

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Holling CS (1959) The components of predation as revealed by a study of small-mammal predation of the European pine sawfly. Can Entomol 91:293–320

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hsu SB (1978) On global stability of a predator–prey system. Math Biosci 39:1–10

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Hsu SB, Hubbell SP, Waltman P (1978) Competing predators. SIAM J Appl Math 35(4):617–625

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Ivlev V (1961) Experimental ecology of the feeding of fishes. Yale University Press, New Haven, CT

    Google Scholar 

  • Jassby AD, Platt T (1976) Mathematical formulation of the relationship between photosynthesis and light for phytoplankton. Limnol Oceanogr 21:540–547

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kooij RE, Zegeling A (1996) A predator–prey model with Ivlev’s functional response. J Math Anal Appl 198:473–489

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Kot M (2001) Elements of mathematical ecology. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Book  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Kuang Y, Freedman HI (1988) Uniqueness of limit cycles in Gause-type models of predator–prey systems. Math Biosci 88(1):67–84

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Kuznetsov Y (1995) Elements of applied bifurcation theory. Springer, New York

    Book  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • LaSalle JP (1960) The extent of asymptotic stability. PNAS 46(3):363–365

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Liou LP, Cheng KS (1988) On the uniqueness of a limit cycle for a predator–prey system. SIAM J Math Anal 19(4):867–878

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • MATLAB (2015) Version 8.5.0 (R2015a). The MathWorks Inc., Natick, Massachusetts

  • Monod J (1949) The growth of bacterial cultures. Annu Rev Microbiol 3:371–394

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Murray JD (2002) Mathematical biology: I. An introduction, 3rd edn. Springer, New York

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Myerscough MR, Darwen M, Hogarth W (1996) Stability, persistence and structural stability in a classical predator–prey model. Ecol Model 89:31–42

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenzweig ML, MacArthur R (1963) Graphical representation and stability conditions of predator–prey interactions. Am Nat 97:209–223

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seo G, Kot M (2008) A comparison of two predator–prey models with Holling’s type I functional response. Math Biosci 212(2):161–179

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Seo G, Wolkowicz GSK (2015) Existence of multiple limit cycles in a predator–prey model with \(arctan(ax)\) as functional response. Commun Math Anal 18:64–68

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Sugie J (1991) Hara: non-existence of periodic solutions of the Liénard system. J Math Anal Appl 159:224–236

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Wolkowicz GSK (1988) Bifurcation analysis of a predator–prey system involving group defence. SIAM J Appl Math 48:592–606

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The research of Gail S. K. Wolkowicz was supported by a Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council (NSERC) of Canada Discovery Grant and Accelerator supplement.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Gunog Seo.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Seo, G., Wolkowicz, G.S.K. Sensitivity of the dynamics of the general Rosenzweig–MacArthur model to the mathematical form of the functional response: a bifurcation theory approach. J. Math. Biol. 76, 1873–1906 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00285-017-1201-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00285-017-1201-y

Keywords

Mathematics Subject Classification

Navigation