4.4 Article

Optimising the success of random destructive searches: Levy walks can outperform ballistic motions

Journal

JOURNAL OF THEORETICAL BIOLOGY
Volume 260, Issue 1, Pages 98-103

Publisher

ACADEMIC PRESS LTD- ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jtbi.2009.05.033

Keywords

Levy walks; First passage time; Foraging

Funding

  1. Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council
  2. Spanish Ministry of Science and Education [MEC-EX2005-1011]
  3. DARPA [HR0011-05-1-0057]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

We re-evaluate the long standing and widely held belief that ballistic movements (i.e. straight-lines movements) outperform Levy walks when searching for targets that once located are not revisited. The belief stems from the results of analyses of one-dimensional searches, analyses which have not accounted for the fact that target numbers can be continually depleted during the search process. this is a crucial oversight because continual depletion promotes the searching efficiencies of some Levy walks above that of ballistic motion. the continual depletion effect is not so important for two- and three-dimensional searches. Nevertheless, we show that Levy walks and ballistic movements can be equally or almost equally effective when searching within two- and three-dimensional environments for randomly and sparsely distributed targets or when searching for targets that are occasionally concealed. We also show that Levy walks are advantageous when searching for targets that can occasionally evade capture. These situations represent common predator-prey interactions in which predators are involved in 'imperfect destructive' searches. Our model suggests that accounting for coevolutionary arms races at the predator-prey detection/reaction scales can explain to some extent Levy walk searching patterns of predators at larger scales. This result provides new insights into the Levy walk movement patterns of some destructive for agers. (C) 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available