Hostname: page-component-7b7567c8c-tnzcf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-14T05:09:08.284Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

STOCHASTIC PREDATION MODEL WITH DEPLETION

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 May 2012

Guy L. Curry and
Richard M. Feldman
Guy L. Curry
Affiliation:
Biosystems Research Division, Industrial Engineering Department, Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas 77843
Richard M. Feldman
Affiliation:
Biosystems Research Division, Industrial Engineering Department, Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas 77843
Get accessRights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

A stochastic model is developed for the expected number of prey taken by a single predator when prey depletion is apparent. The so-called “random predator equation” with prey exploitation of Royama and Rogers is compared with the stochastic model. The numerical comparisons illustrate situations where the deterministic model provides adequate and inadequate approximations.

Information

Type
Articles
Information
The Canadian Entomologist , Volume 111 , Issue 4 , April 1979, pp. 465 - 470
Copyright
Copyright © Entomological Society of Canada 1979

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Cook, R. M. and Hubbard, S. F.. 1977. Adaptive searching strategies in insect parasites. J. Anim. Ecol. 46: 115–125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Curry, G. L. and DeMichele, D. W.. 1977. Stochastic analysis for the description and synthesis of predator-prey systems. Can. Ent. 109: 1167–1174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gross, D. and Harris, C. M.. 1974. Fundamentals of Queueing Theory. Wiley, New York.Google Scholar
Hassell, M. P. and May, R. M.. 1974. Aggregation of predators and insect parasites and its effect on stability. J. Anim. Ecol. 43: 567–587.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hassell, M. P., Lawton, J. H., and Beddington, J. R.. 1976. The components of arthropod predation I. The prey death rate. J. Anim. Ecol. 45: 135–164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hassell, M. P., Lawton, J. H., and Beddington, J. R.. 1977. Sigmoid functional responses by invertebrate predators and parasitoids. J. Anim. Ecol. 46: 249–262.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holling, C. S. 1959. Some characteristics of simple types of predation and parasitism. Can. Ent. 91: 385–398.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hassell, M. P., Lawton, J. H., and Beddington, J. R.. 1966. The functional response of invertebrate predators to prey density. Mem. ent. Soc. Can. 48. 86 pp.Google Scholar
Nicholson, A. J. and Bailey, V. A.. 1935. The balance of animal populations. Part 1. Proc. zool. Soc. Lond. 1935, Part 3, 551–598.Google Scholar
Oaten, A. 1977. Optimal foraging in patches: a case for stochasticity. Theor. pop. Biol. 12: 263–285.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rogers, D. 1972. Randon search and insect population models. J. Anim. Ecol. 41: 369–383.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Royama, T. 1971. A comparative study of models for predation and parasitism. Researches Popul. Ecol. Kyoto Univ. Suppl. 1. 86 pp.Google Scholar
Taylor, R. J. 1976. Value of clumping to prey and the evolutionary response of ambush predators. Am. Nat. 110: 13–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar