How Spatial Heterogeneity Influences Population Dynamics: Simulations in SEALAB

The influence of nest site selection on population dynamics is explored by considering two reproductive strategies. The first one, described as opportunist, is the most common in ecology. It postulates that an individual tries to select and track the optimal environmental conditions that maximize its total reproductive output. The second one, described as obstinate, comes from a generalization of "natal homing" recently proposed by Cury (1994). It assumes that a newborn individual memorizes early environmental cues that later determine its reproductive environment. We use an individual-based model named SEALAB to track artificial fish in a heterogeneous environment displayed as a lattice of hexagonal patches. The effects of two components of the lattice structure—namely the composition (amount of each patch type) and the configuration (spatial arrangement of patches)—on the success of the searching behavior are examined. For the obstinate strategy, whose searching behavior is characterized by a simple random walk, a spatial redundancy index seems sufficient to account for the spatial heterogeneity influence, whereas for the opportunist strategy, more subtle indices are needed. We develop a quantitative measure of spatial local optima that could apply to any searching behavior based on local hill-climbing or local gradient information. Our results indicate how heterogeneity causes opportunist individuals to get stuck in local spatial optima. The use of a spatially explicit individual-based model such as SEALAB is justified by the possibility of carefully estimating simultaneously the value and the sensitivity of global parameters in relation to the spatial heterogeneity of the environment.

[1]  Jens G. Balchen,et al.  Modeling, Prediction, and Control of Fish Behavior , 1979 .

[2]  D Davenport,et al.  Simulation of simple models of animal behavior with a digital computer. , 1969, Journal of theoretical biology.

[3]  A. Łomnicki Population ecology of individuals. , 1988, Monographs in population biology.

[4]  M. Gilpin,et al.  Metapopulation dynamics: a brief his-tory and conceptual domain , 1991 .

[5]  P. Cury,et al.  Population viability and spatial fish reproductive strategies in constant and changing environments: an individual-based modelling approach , 1997 .

[6]  Alan Hastings,et al.  Spatial heterogeneity and ecological models , 1990 .

[7]  J. Wiens Population Responses to Patchy Environments , 1976 .

[8]  D. L. DeAngelis,et al.  An Introduction to Modeling Migratory Behavior of Fishes , 1984 .

[9]  Ilkka Hanski,et al.  Single‐species metapopulation dynamics: concepts, models and observations , 1991 .

[10]  Chris Langton,et al.  Artificial Life , 2017, Encyclopedia of Machine Learning and Data Mining.

[11]  Michel J. Phipps,et al.  From Local to Global: The Lesson of Cellular Automata , 1992 .

[12]  M. Begon,et al.  Ecology: Individuals, Populations and Communities , 1986 .

[13]  W. H. Neill,et al.  Mechanisms of Migration in Fishes , 1984 .

[14]  M. Bowers,et al.  A large-scale metapopulation model of interspecific competition and environmental change , 1994 .

[15]  Michael L. Cain,et al.  Random Search by Herbivorous Insects: A Simulation Model , 1985 .

[16]  O P Judson,et al.  The rise of the individual-based model in ecology. , 1994, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[17]  A. Hastings,et al.  The influence of spatially and temporally varying oceanographic conditions on meroplanktonic metapopulations , 1994 .

[18]  J. Kolasa,et al.  Introduction: The Heterogeneity of Heterogeneity: A Glossary , 1991 .

[19]  T. J. Walker,et al.  The Evolutionary Ecology of Animal Migration , 1978 .

[20]  John A. Wiens,et al.  POPULATION RESPONSES TO *:4102 PATCHY ENVIRONMENTS , 1976 .

[21]  H. Pulliam,et al.  Ecological Processes That Affect Populations in Complex Landscapes , 1992 .

[22]  Craig Loehle,et al.  Applying artificial intelligence techniques to ecological modeling , 1987 .

[23]  P. Kareiva Population dynamics in spatially complex environments: theory and data , 1990 .

[24]  William E. Grant,et al.  AI modelling of animal movements in a heterogeneous habitat , 1989 .

[25]  S. L. Lima,et al.  Towards a behavioral ecology of ecological landscapes. , 1996, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[26]  D. DeAngelis,et al.  Individual-Based Models and Approaches in Ecology , 1992 .

[27]  R. Wootton,et al.  Fish Reproduction: Strategies and Tactics , 1984 .

[28]  W. H. Neill Behavioral Enviroregulation’s Role in Fish Migration , 1984 .

[29]  Nils Chr. Stenseth,et al.  Animal dispersal : small mammals as a model , 1992 .

[30]  Y Toquenaga,et al.  Frpm artificial individuals to global patterns. , 1994, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[31]  Toby Tyrrell,et al.  Computational mechanisms for action selection , 1993 .

[32]  S. Levin Population Dynamic Models in Heterogeneous Environments , 1976 .