Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-75dct Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-03T21:49:06.470Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

The Analysis of Complex Population Processes1

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 May 2012

C. S. Holling
Affiliation:
Forest Insect Laboratory, Sault Ste. Marie, Ontario

Abstract

Population ecology requires realistic and precise analyses of whole systems, or processes, and not just fragments of them. This poses some difficult problems because of the distinctive complexity of these processes. Recent studies of predation have shown, however, that it is possible to achieve great analytical depth and to simulate whole systems in the form of realistic and precise mathematical models. This is accomplished by ignoring the degree of simplicity traditionally required of population models and by emphasizing the need for reality. Extensive experimentation is required to suggest and test possible explanations for the action of each component of the process so that the explanation evolves in gradual steps to include one component after another. The form of the explanation and the resulting equations is hence dictated by the process itself and not by the need for mathematical neatness. The considerable complexity of the predation model arose from features common to many biological processes i.e. the prevalence of limits and thresholds, the presence of important discontinuities and the historical character of biological events. These features can be analyzed effectively only by establishing an intimate feed-back between experiment and theory. Mathematical models incorporating these features are admirably solved using digital computers. Computers, and the languages used to program them, seem to be ideally suited to handle the distinctive type of complexity shown by population processes.

Type
Articles
Copyright
Copyright © Entomological Society of Canada 1964

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Goldberg, S. 1961. Introduction to difference equations. John Wiley and Sons, Science Editions, Inc., New York.Google Scholar
Haldane, J. B. S. 1954. The statics of evolution. In Huxley, J.Hardy, A. C. and Ford, E. B. (eds.) Evolution as a process, Allen and Unwin, London.Google Scholar
Holling, C. S. 1959. Some characteristics of simple types of predation and parasitism. Canad. Ent. 91: 385398.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holling, C. S. 1963. An experimental component analysis of population processes. Mem. ent. Soc. Can. 32: 2232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Labeyrie, V. 1960. Contribution à l'étude de la dynamique des populations d'insectes: I Influence stimulatrice de l'hôte Acrolepia assectella Z. sur la multiplication d'un hymenoptère Ichneumonidae (Diadromus sp.). Entomophaga Mem. 1: 1193.Google Scholar
Lack, D. 1954. The natural regulation of animal numbers. Clarendon Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
Lotka, A. J. 1923. Contribution to quantitative parasitology. J. Wash. Acad. Sci. 13: 152158.Google Scholar
Volterra, V. 1926. Variazioni e fluttuazioni del numero d'individui in specie animali conviventi. Mem. Acad. Lincei (6) 2: 31113.Google Scholar
Watt, K. E. F. 1959. A mathematical model for the effect of densities of attacked and attacking species on the number attacked. Canad. Ent. 91: 129144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wigglesworth, V. B. 1947. The principles of insect physiology. 3rd ed. Methuen and Co. Ltd., London.Google Scholar