Structure and sensitivity analysis of individual-based predator-prey models

Abstract The expensive computational cost of sensitivity analyses has hampered the use of these techniques for analysing individual-based models in ecology. A relatively cheap computational cost, referred to as the Morris method, was chosen to assess the relative effects of all parameters on the model’s outputs and to gain insights into predator–prey systems. Structure and results of the sensitivity analysis of the Sumatran tiger model – the Panthera Population Persistence (PPP) and the Notonecta foraging model (NFM) – were compared. Both models are based on a general predation cycle and designed to understand the mechanisms behind the predator–prey interaction being considered. However, the models differ significantly in their complexity and the details of the processes involved. In the sensitivity analysis, parameters that directly contribute to the number of prey items killed were found to be most influential. These were the growth rate of prey and the hunting radius of tigers in the PPP model as well as attack rate parameters and encounter distance of backswimmers in the NFM model. Analysis of distances in both of the models revealed further similarities in the sensitivity of the two individual-based models. The findings highlight the applicability and importance of sensitivity analyses in general, and screening design methods in particular, during early development of ecological individual-based models. Comparison of model structures and sensitivity analyses provides a first step for the derivation of general rules in the design of predator–prey models for both practical conservation and conceptual understanding.

[1]  Scott Ferson,et al.  Sensitivity analysis for models of population viability , 1995 .

[2]  M. Sabelis,et al.  Is arthropod predation exclusively satiation-driven? , 2005 .

[3]  Sean C. Ahearn,et al.  TIGMOD: an individual-based spatially explicit model for simulating tiger/human interaction in multiple use forests , 2001 .

[4]  Shinji Nakaoka,et al.  Prey-predator system with parental care for predators. , 2006, Journal of theoretical biology.

[5]  A. Saltelli,et al.  The role of sensitivity analysis in ecological modelling , 2007 .

[6]  M. Sunquist,et al.  The Social Organization of Tigers (Panthera Tigris) in Royal Chitawan National Park, Nepal , 1981 .

[7]  Luděk Berec,et al.  Mixed encounters, limited perception and optimal foraging , 2000, Bulletin of mathematical biology.

[8]  U. Ramakrishnan,et al.  Tiger decline caused by the reduction of large ungulate prey: evidence from a study of leopard diets in southern India , 1999 .

[9]  G. Semiadi,et al.  Grazing patterns of sambar deer (Cervus unicolor) and red deer (Cervus elaphus) in captivity , 1993 .

[10]  D. DeAngelis,et al.  Individual-based modeling of ecological and evolutionary processes , 2005 .

[11]  Stefano Tarantola,et al.  Sensitivity Analysis in Practice: A Guide to Assessing Scientific Models , 2004 .

[12]  D. Haydon,et al.  Multiple movement modes by large herbivores at multiple spatiotemporal scales , 2008, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[13]  J. Nichols,et al.  Tigers and their prey: Predicting carnivore densities from prey abundance. , 2004, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[14]  Richard A. Hinrichsen,et al.  Population viability analysis for several populations using multivariate state-space models , 2009 .

[15]  M. Sunquist Chapter 2 – What Is a Tiger? Ecology and Behavior , 2010 .

[16]  J. Gerritsen,et al.  Encounter Probabilities and Community Structure in Zooplankton: a Mathematical Model , 1977 .

[17]  John D. Stark,et al.  Development and Test of a Whole-Lifetime Foraging and Bioenergetics Growth Model for Drift-Feeding Brown Trout , 2000 .

[18]  Max D. Morris,et al.  Factorial sampling plans for preliminary computational experiments , 1991 .

[19]  Allan S. Lessem,et al.  Improving ecological simulation through sensitivity analysis , 1979 .

[20]  J. Lawton,et al.  Effects of prey‐size and predator‐instar on the predation of Daphnia by Notonecta , 1979 .

[21]  Walter Jetz,et al.  The Scaling of Animal Space Use , 2004, Science.

[22]  H. Ratte,et al.  Diurnal and nocturnal functional response of juvenile Notonecta maculata considered as a consequence of shifting predation behaviour , 2010, Behavioural Processes.

[23]  Peter Jackson,et al.  Riding the tiger : tiger conservation in human-dominated landscapes , 1999 .

[24]  Kenneth M. Portier,et al.  Modeling Florida panther movements in response to human attributes of the landscape and ecological settings , 2001 .

[25]  Andrea Saltelli,et al.  An effective screening design for sensitivity analysis of large models , 2007, Environ. Model. Softw..

[26]  K. Hohberg,et al.  Foraging theory and partial consumption in a tardigrade–nematode system , 2009 .

[27]  N. Chapman,et al.  Reproductive strategies and the influence of date of birth on growth and sexual development of an aseasonally‐breeding ungulate: Reeves' muntjac (Muntiacus reevesi) , 1997 .

[28]  Stefano Tarantola,et al.  Sensitivity analysis practices: Strategies for model-based inference , 2006, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf..

[29]  E. J. Collins,et al.  The hidden cost of information in collective foraging , 2005, Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

[30]  Sebastiaan A.L.M. Kooijman,et al.  Dynamic Energy and Mass Budgets in Biological Systems , 2000 .

[31]  André Gergs,et al.  Predicting functional response and size selectivity of juvenile Notonecta maculata foraging on Daphnia magna , 2009 .

[32]  W. Murdoch,et al.  Selective predation by the backswimmer, Notonecta1 , 1983 .

[33]  M. Sunquist,et al.  Ecology behaviour and resilience of the tiger and its conservation needs , 1999 .

[34]  C. Srinivasulu,et al.  Prey selection by the Indian tiger (Panthera tigris tigris) in Nagarjunasagar Srisailam Tiger Reserve, India , 2004 .

[35]  C. S. Holling,et al.  Principles of Insect Predation , 1961 .

[36]  Margaret F. Kinnaird,et al.  Crouching tigers, hidden prey: Sumatran tiger and prey populations in a tropical forest landscape , 2003 .

[37]  Leslie A. Real,et al.  The Kinetics of Functional Response , 1977, The American Naturalist.

[38]  Nilsson P. Anders Predator behaviour and prey density: evaluating density‐dependent intraspecific interactions on predator functional responses , 2001 .

[39]  Individual base model of predator-prey system shows predator dominant dynamics. , 2000, Bio Systems.

[40]  P. Giller,et al.  Predation Strategies, Resource Partitioning and Habitat Selection in Notonecta (Hemiptera/Heteroptera) , 1981 .

[41]  D. DeAngelis,et al.  Effects of spatial grouping on the functional response of predators. , 1999, Theoretical population biology.

[42]  Jonathan M. Jeschke,et al.  PREDATOR FUNCTIONAL RESPONSES: DISCRIMINATING BETWEEN HANDLING AND DIGESTING PREY , 2002 .

[43]  Volker Grimm,et al.  Home range dynamics and population regulation: An individual-based model of the common shrew Sorex araneus , 2007 .

[44]  Guy Pe'er,et al.  Incorporating the perceptual range of animals into connectivity models , 2008 .

[45]  U. Hommen,et al.  Development and validation of an individual based Daphnia magna population model: The influence of crowding on population dynamics , 2009 .

[46]  V. Grimm Ten years of individual-based modelling in ecology: what have we learned and what could we learn in the future? , 1999 .

[47]  B. J. Cockrell,et al.  Predator ingestion rate and its bearing on feeding time and the theory of oprimal diets , 1978 .

[48]  Birgit Müller,et al.  A standard protocol for describing individual-based and agent-based models , 2006 .

[49]  M. Imron An Individual-based Model Approach for the Conservation of the Sumatran Tiger Panthera tigris sumatrae Population in Central Sumatra , 2010 .

[50]  Thorsten Wiegand,et al.  Fragmented landscapes, road mortality and patch connectivity: modelling influences on the dispersal of Eurasian lynx , 2004 .