↓ Skip to main content

Joining or opting out of a Lotka–Volterra game between predators and prey: does the best strategy depend on modelling energy lost and gained?

Overview of attention for article published in Interface Focus, December 2013
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
4 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
17 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Joining or opting out of a Lotka–Volterra game between predators and prey: does the best strategy depend on modelling energy lost and gained?
Published in
Interface Focus, December 2013
DOI 10.1098/rsfs.2013.0034
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kateřina Staňková, Alessandro Abate, Maurice W. Sabelis, Ján Buša, Li You

Abstract

Apart from interacting, prey and predators may also avoid each other by moving into refuges where they lack food, yet survive by switching to an energy-saving physiological state. Lotka-Volterra models of predator-prey interactions ignore this option. Therefore, we have modelled this game of 'joining versus opting out' by extending Lotka-Volterra models to include portions of populations not in interaction and with different energy dynamics. Given this setting, the prey's decisions to join or to opt out influence those of the predator and vice versa, causing the set of possible strategies to be complex and large. However, using game theory, we analysed and published two models showing (i) which strategies are best for the prey population given the predator's strategy, and (ii) which are best for prey and predator populations simultaneously. The predicted best strategies appear to match empirical observations on plant-inhabiting predator and prey mites. Here, we consider a plausible third model that does not take energy dynamics into account, but appears to yield contrasting predictions. This supports our assumption to extend Lotka-Volterra models with 'interaction-dependent' energy dynamics, but more work is required to prove that it is essential and that what is best for the population is also best for the individual.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 17 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 17 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 4 24%
Professor > Associate Professor 3 18%
Student > Bachelor 2 12%
Student > Master 1 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 6%
Other 2 12%
Unknown 4 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 41%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 12%
Physics and Astronomy 2 12%
Environmental Science 1 6%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 6%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 4 24%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 27 October 2013.
All research outputs
#18,351,676
of 22,727,570 outputs
Outputs from Interface Focus
#477
of 581 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#231,527
of 306,466 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Interface Focus
#7
of 7 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,727,570 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 581 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.8. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 306,466 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 7 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.