4.4 Article

Pattern formation and chaos in spatial ecological public goods games

期刊

JOURNAL OF THEORETICAL BIOLOGY
卷 268, 期 1, 页码 30-38

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS LTD- ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jtbi.2010.09.036

关键词

Spatial game theory; Cooperation; Maximum Lyapunov exponent; Reaction-diffusion system

资金

  1. JST PRESTO
  2. JSPS KAKENHI [20770019]
  3. Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC)
  4. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [20770019] Funding Source: KAKEN

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Cooperators and defectors can coexist in ecological public goods games. When the game is played in two-dimensional continuous space, a reaction diffusion model produces highly irregular dynamics, in which cooperators and defectors survive in ever-changing configurations (Wakano et al., 2009. Spatial dynamics of ecological public goods. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 106, 7910-7914). The dynamics is related to the formation of Turing patterns, but the origin of the irregular dynamics is not well understood. In this paper, we present a classification of the spatio-temporal dynamics based on the dispersion relation, which reveals that the spontaneous pattern formation can be attributed to the dynamical interplay between two linearly unstable modes: temporal instability arising from a Hopf-bifurcation and spatial instability arising from a Turing-bifurcation. Moreover, we provide a detailed analysis of the highly irregular dynamics through Fourier analysis, the break-down of symmetry, the maximum Lyapunov exponent, and the excitability of the reaction-term dynamics. All results clearly support that the observed irregular dynamics qualifies as spatio-temporal chaos. A particularly interesting type of chaotic dynamics, which we call intermittent bursts, clearly demonstrates the effects of the two unstable modes where (local) periods of stasis alternate with rapid changes that may induce local extinction. (C) 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据