Sarah A Vollert, Christopher Drovandi, Matthew P Adams
{"title":"Ecosystem Knowledge Should Replace Coexistence and Stability Assumptions in Ecological Network Modelling.","authors":"Sarah A Vollert, Christopher Drovandi, Matthew P Adams","doi":"10.1007/s11538-024-01407-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Quantitative population modelling is an invaluable tool for identifying the cascading effects of conservation on an ecosystem. When population data from monitoring programs is not available, deterministic ecosystem models have often been calibrated using the theoretical assumption that ecosystems have a stable, coexisting equilibrium. However, a growing body of literature suggests these theoretical assumptions are inappropriate for conservation contexts. Here, we develop an alternative for data-free population modelling that relies on expert-elicited knowledge of species populations. Our new Bayesian algorithm systematically removes model parameters that lead to impossible predictions, as defined by experts, without incurring excessive computational costs. We demonstrate our framework on an ordinary differential equation model by limiting predicted population sizes and their ability to change rapidly, utilising readily available knowledge from field observations and experts rather than relying on theoretical ecosystem properties. Our results show that using only coexistence and stability requirements can lead to unrealistic population dynamics, which can be avoided by switching to expert-derived information. We demonstrate how this change can dramatically impact population predictions, expected responses to management, conservation decision-making, and long-term ecosystem behaviour. Without data, we argue that field observations and expert knowledge are more trustworthy for representing ecosystems observed in nature, improving the precision and confidence in predictions.</p>","PeriodicalId":9372,"journal":{"name":"Bulletin of Mathematical Biology","volume":"87 1","pages":"17"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Bulletin of Mathematical Biology","FirstCategoryId":"100","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11538-024-01407-9","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"数学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"BIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Quantitative population modelling is an invaluable tool for identifying the cascading effects of conservation on an ecosystem. When population data from monitoring programs is not available, deterministic ecosystem models have often been calibrated using the theoretical assumption that ecosystems have a stable, coexisting equilibrium. However, a growing body of literature suggests these theoretical assumptions are inappropriate for conservation contexts. Here, we develop an alternative for data-free population modelling that relies on expert-elicited knowledge of species populations. Our new Bayesian algorithm systematically removes model parameters that lead to impossible predictions, as defined by experts, without incurring excessive computational costs. We demonstrate our framework on an ordinary differential equation model by limiting predicted population sizes and their ability to change rapidly, utilising readily available knowledge from field observations and experts rather than relying on theoretical ecosystem properties. Our results show that using only coexistence and stability requirements can lead to unrealistic population dynamics, which can be avoided by switching to expert-derived information. We demonstrate how this change can dramatically impact population predictions, expected responses to management, conservation decision-making, and long-term ecosystem behaviour. Without data, we argue that field observations and expert knowledge are more trustworthy for representing ecosystems observed in nature, improving the precision and confidence in predictions.
期刊介绍:
The Bulletin of Mathematical Biology, the official journal of the Society for Mathematical Biology, disseminates original research findings and other information relevant to the interface of biology and the mathematical sciences. Contributions should have relevance to both fields. In order to accommodate the broad scope of new developments, the journal accepts a variety of contributions, including:
Original research articles focused on new biological insights gained with the help of tools from the mathematical sciences or new mathematical tools and methods with demonstrated applicability to biological investigations
Research in mathematical biology education
Reviews
Commentaries
Perspectives, and contributions that discuss issues important to the profession
All contributions are peer-reviewed.