Finite element approximation of a population spatial adaptation model
-
Received:
01 May 2012
Accepted:
29 June 2018
Published:
01 April 2013
-
-
MSC :
35K55, 65M60, 92D25.
-
-
In [18], Sighesada, Kawasaki and Teramoto presented a system of partial differential equations for modeling spatial segregation of interacting species. Apart from competitive Lotka-Volterra (reaction) and population pressure (cross-diffusion) terms, a convective term modeling the populations attraction to more favorable environmental regions was included. In this article, we study numerically a modification of their convective term to take account for the notion of spatial adaptation of populations. After describing the model, in which a time non-local drift term is considered, we propose a numerical discretization in terms of a mass-preserving time semi-implicit finite element method. Finally, we provied the results of some biologically inspired numerical experiments showing qualitative differences between the original model of [18] and the model proposed in this article.
Citation: Gonzalo Galiano, Julián Velasco. Finite element approximation of a population spatial adaptation model[J]. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2013, 10(3): 637-647. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2013.10.637
-
Abstract
In [18], Sighesada, Kawasaki and Teramoto presented a system of partial differential equations for modeling spatial segregation of interacting species. Apart from competitive Lotka-Volterra (reaction) and population pressure (cross-diffusion) terms, a convective term modeling the populations attraction to more favorable environmental regions was included. In this article, we study numerically a modification of their convective term to take account for the notion of spatial adaptation of populations. After describing the model, in which a time non-local drift term is considered, we propose a numerical discretization in terms of a mass-preserving time semi-implicit finite element method. Finally, we provied the results of some biologically inspired numerical experiments showing qualitative differences between the original model of [18] and the model proposed in this article.
References
[1]
|
Numer. Math., 98 (2004), 195-221.
|
[2]
|
SIAM J. Math. Anal., 36 (2004), 301-322.
|
[3]
|
Commun. Part. Diff. Eqs., 32 (2007), 127-148.
|
[4]
|
Math. Z., 194 (1987), 375-396.
|
[5]
|
Math. Nachr., 195 (1998), 77-114.
|
[6]
|
Appl. Math. Comput., 218 (2011), 4587-4594.
|
[7]
|
Comput. Math. Appl., 64 (2012), 1927-1936.
|
[8]
|
RACSAM Rev. R. Acad. Cienc. Exactas Fs. Nat. Ser. A. Mat., 95 (2001), 281-295.
|
[9]
|
Numer. Math., 93 (2003), 655-673.
|
[10]
|
Banach Center Publ., 63 (2004), 209-216.
|
[11]
|
SIAM J. Math. Anal., 35 (2003), 561-578.
|
[12]
|
Nonlinear Anal., 12 (2011), 2826-2838.
|
[13]
|
Appl. Numer. Math., 59 (2009), 1059-1074.
|
[14]
|
Nonlinear Analysis TMA, 8 (1984), 1121-1144.
|
[15]
|
J. Diff. Eqs., 131 (1996), 79-131.
|
[16]
|
Adv. Math., Beijing, 25 (1996), 283-284.
|
[17]
|
J. Math. Biol., 9 (1980), 49-64.
|
[18]
|
J. Theor. Biol., 79 (1979), 83-99.
|
[19]
|
Nonlinear Analysis TMA, 21 (1993), 603-630.
|
-
-
-
-