4.7 Article

Bifurcation analysis in a host-generalist parasitoid model with Holling II functional response

期刊

JOURNAL OF DIFFERENTIAL EQUATIONS
卷 268, 期 8, 页码 4618-4662

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.jde.2019.10.036

关键词

Host-parasitoid model; Bogdanov-Takens bifurcation; Hopf bifurcation; Invasion; Persistence; Extinction

资金

  1. NSFC [11871235]
  2. Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities [CCNU19TS030]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In this paper we study a host-generalist parasitoid model with Holling II functional response where the generalist parasitoids are introduced to control the invasion of the hosts. It is shown that the model can undergo a sequence of bifurcations including cusp, focus and elliptic types degenerate Bogdanov-Takens bifurcations of codimension three, and a degenerate Hopf bifurcation of codimension at most two as the parameters vary, and the model exhibits rich dynamics such as the existence of multiple coexistent steady states, multiple coexistent periodic orbits, homoclinic orbits, etc. Moreover, there exists a critical value for the carrying capacity of generalist parasitoids such that: (i) when the carrying capacity of the generalist parasitoids is smaller than the critical value, the invading hosts can always persist despite of the predation by the generalist parasitoids, i.e., the generalist parasitoids cannot control the invasion of hosts; (ii) when the carrying capacity of the generalist parasitoids is larger than the critical value, the invading hosts either tend to extinction or persist in the form of multiple coexistent steady states or multiple coexistent periodic orbits depending on the initial populations, i.e., whether the invasion can be stopped and reversed by the generalist parasitoids depends on the initial populations; (iii) in both cases, the generalist parasitoids always persist. Numerical simulations are presented to illustrate the theoretical results. (C) 2019 Elsevier Inc. 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

4.7
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