Cellular automata based simulation of random versus selective harvesting strategies in predator-prey systems

Abstract The stability and productivity properties of different harvesting strategies have been analyzed through various approaches. The previous studies mostly applied the spatially lumped models and focused on different harvested species. In this research, the stochastic cellular automata based predator–prey model (EcoCA) was upgraded to investigate the difference between random harvest and the selective harvest strategies of the predator–prey complex. Three groups of numerical experiments have been conducted: (1) joint harvest with a constant effort and a density limitation, (2) joint harvest with constant quota, (3) joint harvest with a constant effort and without density limitation. In each group, both random harvest and selective harvest have been adopted to examine their differences. The statistical results of the simulations showed that the selective harvest is more stable than random harvest. Moreover, the selective harvest resulted in a longer cyclic period. For both random and selective harvest, the system is more stable if a density limitation is imposed. When the constant quota was adopted, the system is unstable. However, it collapsed more slowly for selective harvest than for random harvest. In conclusion, the selective harvest is a more sustainable strategy to a predation and harvesting system. The results are important to sustainable management of ecosystems, in particular to many situations of conservation biology and natural resources' exploitation. The research also demonstrated the advantages of cellular automata to simulate more realistic predation–harvesting system.

[1]  Yasuhiro Ohta,et al.  From integrability to chaos in a Lotka-Volterra cellular automaton , 1997 .

[2]  Robert M. May,et al.  Maximum sustainable yields in systems subject to harvesting at more than one trophic level , 1980 .

[3]  Honghua Shi,et al.  Impact of predator pursuit and prey evasion on synchrony and spatial patterns in metapopulation , 2005 .

[4]  V. Jansen,et al.  The dynamics of two diffusively coupled predator-prey populations. , 2001, Theoretical population biology.

[5]  Dimitrios V. Vayenas,et al.  Prey–predator dynamics with predator switching regulated by a catabolic repression control mode , 2005 .

[6]  I. Prigogine,et al.  Formative Processes. (Book Reviews: Self-Organization in Nonequilibrium Systems. From Dissipative Structures to Order through Fluctuations) , 1977 .

[7]  Philip H. Crowley,et al.  Functional Responses and Interference within and between Year Classes of a Dragonfly Population , 1989, Journal of the North American Benthological Society.

[8]  Ulf Dieckmann,et al.  The Geometry of Ecological Interactions: Simplifying Spatial Complexity , 2000 .

[9]  J. F. Gilliam,et al.  FUNCTIONAL RESPONSES WITH PREDATOR INTERFERENCE: VIABLE ALTERNATIVES TO THE HOLLING TYPE II MODEL , 2001 .

[10]  D. Fudenberg,et al.  Emergence of cooperation and evolutionary stability in finite populations , 2004, Nature.

[11]  John Holmberg,et al.  Constant quota versus constant effort harvesting , 1996 .

[12]  M. Hoopes,et al.  Stabilizing effects in spatial parasitoid-host and predator-prey models: a review. , 2004, Theoretical population biology.

[13]  Qiuwen Chen,et al.  Effects of cell size and configuration in cellular automata based prey-predator modelling , 2003, Simul. Model. Pract. Theory.

[14]  J. Mcglade,et al.  Advanced ecological theory : principles and applications , 1999 .

[15]  C. Duarte,et al.  Renewable resource market obeying difference equations: Stable points, stable cycles, and Chaos (1991) , 1994 .

[16]  Weifeng Li,et al.  Stability Analysis of Harvesting Strategies in a Cellular Automata Based Predator-Prey Model , 2006, ACRI.

[17]  M. J. Hall,et al.  Screening of Hydrological Data: Tests for Stationarity and Relative Consistency , 1991 .

[18]  Donald L. DeAngelis,et al.  A MODEL FOR TROPHIC INTERACTION , 1975 .

[19]  A. C. Soudack,et al.  Stability regions in predator-prey systems with constant-rate prey harvesting , 1979 .

[20]  J. Beddington,et al.  Harvesting from a prey-predator complex , 1982 .

[21]  Chris Chatfield,et al.  The Analysis of Time Series: An Introduction , 1990 .

[22]  John Holmberg,et al.  Stability analysis of harvesting in a predator-prey model , 1995 .

[23]  James J. Anderson,et al.  Mean free-path length theory of predator-prey interactions: Application to juvenile salmon migration , 2005 .

[24]  J. Beddington,et al.  Mutual Interference Between Parasites or Predators and its Effect on Searching Efficiency , 1975 .

[25]  D. A. Dickey The Analysis of Time Series: An Introduction (4th ed.) , 1991 .

[26]  Donald L. DeAngelis,et al.  A Model for Tropic Interaction , 1975 .

[27]  J. Schnakenberg,et al.  G. Nicolis und I. Prigogine: Self‐Organization in Nonequilibrium Systems. From Dissipative Structures to Order through Fluctuations. J. Wiley & Sons, New York, London, Sydney, Toronto 1977. 491 Seiten, Preis: £ 20.–, $ 34.– , 1978 .

[28]  Colin W. Clark,et al.  Management of Multispecies Fisheries , 1979, Science.