Abstract
We present two finite-difference algorithms for studying the dynamics of spatially extended predator–prey interactions with the Holling type II functional response and logistic growth of the prey. The algorithms are stable and convergent provided the time step is below a (non-restrictive) critical value. This is advantageous as it is well-known that the dynamics of approximations of differential equations (DEs) can differ significantly from that of the underlying DEs themselves. This is particularly important for the spatially extended systems that are studied in this paper as they display a wide spectrum of ecologically relevant behavior, including chaos. Furthermore, there are implementational advantages of the methods. For example, due to the structure of the resulting linear systems, standard direct, and iterative solvers are guaranteed to converge. We also present the results of numerical experiments in one and two space dimensions and illustrate the simplicity of the numerical methods with short programs MATLAB. Users can download, edit, and run the codes from http://www.uoguelph.ca/~mgarvie/, to investigate the key dynamical properties of spatially extended predator–prey interactions.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Alonso, D., Bartumeus, F., Catalan, J., 2002. Mutual interference between predators can give rise to Turing spatial patterns. Ecology 83(1), 28–34.
Ascher, U., Ruuth, S., Wetton, B., 1995. Implicit–explicit methods for time-dependent partial differential equations. SIAM J. Numer. Anal. 32(3), 797–823.
Beckett, G., Mackenzie, J., 2001. On a uniformly accurate finite difference approximation of a singularly perturbed reaction–diffusion problem using grid equidistribution. J. Comput. Appl. Math. 131, 381–405.
Brenner, S., Scott, L., 1994. The Mathematical Theory of Finite Element Methods. Vol. 15: Texts in Applied Mathematics. Springer, New York.
Ciarlet, P., 1979. The Finite Element Method for Elliptic Problems. Vol. 4: Studies in Mathematics and its Applications. North-Holland, Amsterdam.
Elliott, C., Stuart, A., 1993. The global dynamics of discrete semilinear parabolic equations. SIAM J. Numer. Anal. 30(6), 1622–1663.
Freedman, H., 1980. Deterministic Mathematical Models in Population Ecology. Vol. 57: Monographs and Textbooks in Pure and Applied Mathematics. Marcel Dekker, New York.
Garvie, M., Trenchea, C., 2005a. Analysis of two generic spatially extended predator–prey models. Nonlinear Anal. Real World Appl., submitted for publication.
Garvie, M., Trenchea, C., 2005b. Finite element approximation of spatially extended predator–prey interactions with the Holling type II functional response. Numer. Math., submitted for publication.
Gentleman, W., Leising, A., Frost, B., Strom, S., Murray, J., 2003. Functional responses for zooplankton feeding on multiple resources: A review of assumptions and biological dynamics. Deep Sea Res. II 50, 2847–2875.
Gurney, W., Veitch, A., Cruickshank, I., McGeachin, G., 1998. Circles and spirals: Population persistence in a spatially explicit predator–prey model. Ecology 79(7), 2516–2530.
Hildebrand, F., 1968. Finite-Difference Equations and Simulations. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
Hoff, D., 1978. Stability and convergence of finite difference methods for systems of nonlinear reaction–diffusion equations. SIAM J. Numer. Anal. 15(6), 1161–1177.
Holling, C., 1959. Some characteristics of simple types of predation and parasitism. Can. Entomol. 91, 385–398.
Holling, C., 1965. The functional response of predators to prey density and its role in mimicry and population regulation. Mem. Entomol. Soc. Can. 45, 1–60.
Holmes, E., Lewis, M., Banks, J., Veit, R., 1994. Partial differential equations in ecology: Spatial interactions and population dynamics. Ecology 75(1), 17–29.
Isaacson, E., Keller, H., 1966. Analysis of Numerical Methods. Wiley, New York.
Ivlev, V., 1961. Experimental Ecology of the Feeding Fishes. Yale University Press, New Haven.
Jerome, J., 1984. Fully discrete stability and invariant rectangular regions for reaction–diffusion systems. SIAM J. Numer. Anal. 21(6), 1054–1065.
Jeschke, J., Kopp, M., Tollrian, R., 2002. Predator functional responses: Discriminating between handling and digesting prey. Ecol. Monogr. 72(1), 95–112.
Li, N., Steiner, J., Tang, S.-M., 1994. Convergence and stability analysis of an explicit finite difference method for 2-dimensional reaction–diffusion equations. J. Aust. Math. Soc. Ser. B 36(2), 234–241.
Malchow, H., Petrovskii, S., 2002. Dynamical stabilization of an unstable equilibrium in chemical and biological systems. Math. Comput. Model. 36, 307–319.
May, R., 1974. Stability and Complexity in Model Ecosystems. Princeton University Press, New Jersey.
Medvinsky, A., Petrovskii, S., Tikhonova, I., Malchow, H., Li, B.-L., 2002. Spatiotemporal complexity of plankton and fish dynamics. SIAM Rev. 44(3), 311–370.
Mickens, R., 2003. A nonstandard finite difference scheme for a Fisher PDE having nonlinear diffusion. Comput. Math. Appl. 45, 429–436.
Morton, K., Mayers, D., 1996. Numerical Solution of Partial Differential Equations. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Murray, J., 1993. Mathematical Biology. Vol. 19: Biomathematics Texts. Springer, Berlin.
Neubert, M., Caswell, H., Murray, J., 2002. Transient dynamics and pattern formation: Reactivity is necessary for Turing instabilities. Math. Biosci. 175, 1–11.
Pao, C., 1998. Accelerated monotone iterative methods for finite difference equations of reaction–diffusion. Numer. Math. 79, 261–281.
Pao, C., 1999. Numerical analysis of coupled systems of nonlinear parabolic equations. SIAM J. Numer. Anal. 36(2), 393–416.
Pao, C., 2002. Finite difference reaction–diffusion systems with coupled boundary conditions and time delays. J. Math. Anal. 272, 407–434.
Pascual, M., 1993. Diffusion-induced chaos in a spatial predator–prey system. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. Ser. B 251, 1–7.
Petrovskii, S., Malchow, H., 1999. A minimal model of pattern formation in a prey–predator system. Math. Comput. Model. 29, 49–63.
Petrovskii, S., Malchow, H., 2001. Wave of chaos: New mechanism of pattern formation in spatio-temporal population dynamics. Theor. Populat. Biol. 59, 157–174.
Petrovskii, S., Malchow, H., 2002. Critical phenomena in plankton communities: KISS model revisited. Nonlinear Anal. Real 1, 37–51.
Pujol, M., Grimalt, P., 2002. A non-linear model for cerebral diffusion: Stability of finite differences method and resolution using the Adomian method. Int. J. Numer. Method H 13(4), 473–485.
Rai, V., Jayaraman, G., 2003. Is diffusion-induced chaos robust? Curr. Sci. India 84(7), 925–929.
Richtmyer, R., Morton, K., 1967. Difference Methods for Initial Value Problems. Vol. 4: Interscience Tracts in Pure and Applied Mathematics. Wiley-Interscience, New York.
Rosenzweig, M., MacArthur, R., 1963. Graphical representation and stability conditions for predator–prey interaction. Am. Nat. 97, 209–223.
Ruuth, J., 1995. Implicit–explicit methods for reaction–diffusion problems in pattern formation. J. Math. Biol. 34, 148–176.
Saad, Y., 2003. Iterative methods for sparse linear systems. SIAM.
Saad, Y., Schultz, M., 1986. GMRES: A generalized minimal residual algorithm for solving nonsymmetric linear systems. SIAM J. Sci. Stat. Comput. 7(3), 856–869.
Savill, N., Hogeweg, P., 1999. Competition and dispersal in predator–prey waves. Theor. Populat. Biol. 56, 243–263.
Segel, L., Jackson, J., 1972. Dissipative structure: An explanation and an ecological example. J. Theor. Biol. 37, 545–559.
Sherratt, J., 2001. Periodic travelling waves in cyclic predator–prey systems. Ecol. Lett. 4, 30–37.
Sherratt, J., Eagan, B., Lewis, M., 1997. Oscillations and chaos behind predator–prey invasion: Mathematical artifact or ecological reality? Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B 352, 21–38.
Sherratt, J., Lambin, X., Thomas, C., Sherratt, T., 2002. Generation of periodic waves by landscape features in cyclic predator–prey systems. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. Ser. B 269, 327–334.
Sherratt, J., Lewis, M., Fowler, A., 1995. Ecological chaos in the wake of invasion. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 92, 2524–2528.
Skalski, G., Gilliam, J.F., 2001. Functional responses with predator interference: Viable alternatives to the Holling type II model. Ecology 82(11), 3083–3092.
Smoller, J., 1983. Shock Waves and Reaction–Diffusion Equations. Vol. 258: Grundlehren der mathematischen Wissenschaften. Springer-Verlag, New York.
Stuart, A., 1989. Nonlinear instability in dissipative finite difference schemes. SIAM Rev. 31(2), 191–220.
Stuart, A., Humphries, A., 1998. Dynamical Systems and Numerical Analysis. Vol. 2: Cambridge Monographs on Applied and Computational Mathematics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Turing, A., 1952. The chemical basis of morphogenesis. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B 237, 37–72.
Yee, H., Sweby, P., 1994. Global asymptotic behavior of iterative implicit schemes. Int. J. Bifurcat. Chaos 4(6), 1579–1611.
Yee, H., Sweby, P., 1995. Dynamical approach study of spurious steady-state numerical solutions of nonlinear differential equations II. Global asymptotic behaviour of time discretizations. Comp. Fluid Dyn. 4, 219–283.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Garvie, M.R. Finite-Difference Schemes for Reaction–Diffusion Equations Modeling Predator–Prey Interactions in MATLAB . Bull. Math. Biol. 69, 931–956 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11538-006-9062-3
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11538-006-9062-3