Biological control does not imply paradox

Bo Deng, Shannon Jessie, Glenn Ledder, Alex Rand, Sarah Srodulski

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

10 Scopus citations

Abstract

Is the classical predator-prey theory inherently pathological? Defenders of the theory are losing ground in the debate. We will demonstrate that detractors' main argument is based on a faulty model, and that the conceptual and predictive bases of the theory are fundamentally sound.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)26-32
Number of pages7
JournalMathematical Biosciences
Volume208
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Jul 1 2007

Keywords

  • Biological control
  • Holling Type II functional form
  • Intraspecific interference predator-prey model
  • Ratio-dependent predation

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Statistics and Probability
  • Modeling and Simulation
  • Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology(all)
  • Immunology and Microbiology(all)
  • Agricultural and Biological Sciences(all)
  • Applied Mathematics

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Biological control does not imply paradox'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

  • Cite this

    Deng, B., Jessie, S., Ledder, G., Rand, A., & Srodulski, S. (2007). Biological control does not imply paradox. Mathematical Biosciences, 208(1), 26-32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mbs.2005.03.002