MHB Fish Pond Challenge: Show Equilibrium Variation with $R_f$

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on a differential equation modeling fish population dynamics in a pond, influenced by fishing rates. For removal rates less than a quarter of the equilibrium population, the fish population stabilizes at an equilibrium between half and the full capacity of the pond. Conversely, if the removal rate is equal to or exceeds this threshold, the population may decline significantly, potentially leading to extinction. Participants seek solutions for both scenarios, emphasizing the implications of fishing on ecological balance. The challenge highlights the importance of understanding population dynamics in resource management.
lfdahl
Gold Member
MHB
Messages
747
Reaction score
0
Suppose a pond contains $x(t)$ fish at time $t$, and $x(t)$ changes according to the DE:
\[\frac{\mathrm{d} x}{\mathrm{d} t} = x\left ( 1-\frac{x}{x_0} \right )-R_f\]
where $x_0$ is the equilibrium amount with no fishing and $R_f > 0$ is the constant rate of removal due to fishing. Assume $x(0) = \frac{x_0}{2}$.

(a). If $R_f < \frac{x_0}{4}$, solve for $x(t)$ and show that it tends to an equilibrium amount between $\frac{x_0}{2}$ and $x_0$.
(b). What happens if $R_f \geq \frac{x_0}{4}$?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
There was a https://mathhelpboards.com/calculus-10/help-derivative-22779.html on logistic growth with constant harvesting a few months ago.

In particular, if we start with the system given in post #5 there, and we non-dimensionalize by introducing a new time $\tau := (r K) t$ and a new unknown $x(\tau) := P(t(\tau))$, then in these new terms we have
\[
\frac{dx}{d\tau} = \frac{1}{rK}\frac{dP}{dt} = P\left(1 - \frac{P}{K}\right) - \frac{H}{rK} = x\left(1 - \frac{x}{K}\right) - \frac{H}{r K}.
\]
This is the system given in the challenge if we set $K := x_0$, $R_f := \frac{H}{r K}$ and we abuse notation by denoting non-dimensional time again with $t$ instead of $\tau$.

It is nice to see a problem on population dynamics, by the way.
 
Krylov said:
There was a https://mathhelpboards.com/calculus-10/help-derivative-22779.html on logistic growth with constant harvesting a few months ago.

In particular, if we start with the system given in post #5 there, and we non-dimensionalize by introducing a new time $\tau := (r K) t$ and a new unknown $x(\tau) := P(t(\tau))$, then in these new terms we have
\[
\frac{dx}{d\tau} = \frac{1}{rK}\frac{dP}{dt} = P\left(1 - \frac{P}{K}\right) - \frac{H}{rK} = x\left(1 - \frac{x}{K}\right) - \frac{H}{r K}.
\]
This is the system given in the challenge if we set $K := x_0$, $R_f := \frac{H}{r K}$ and we abuse notation by denoting non-dimensional time again with $t$ instead of $\tau$.

It is nice to see a problem on population dynamics, by the way.

Thankyou very much, Krylov! (Handshake)
May I ask for the answers of (a). and (b). in the challenge, based on the logistic growth model, you refer to?
 
Suggested solution:

\[\frac{\mathrm{d} x}{\mathrm{d} t}=x-\frac{x^2}{x_0} - R_f=-\frac{1}{x_0}\left ( x-\frac{x_0}{2} \right )^2+\left ( \frac{x_0}{4}-R_f \right ).\]

Let $\frac{1}{\sqrt{x_0}}\left ( x-\frac{x_0}{2} \right )=y(t)$, so that $\sqrt{x_0}dy = dx$ and $y(0) = 0$.
Also, let $a^2 = \left | \frac{x_0}{4}-R_f \right |$. In these terms the D.E. is

\[-dt = \frac{\sqrt{x_0}dy}{y^2\mp a^2}\]
where $a^2 = 0$ if $R_f = \frac{x_0}{4}$, negative if $R_f < \frac{x_0}{4}$, and positive if $R_f > \frac{x_0}{4}$.
(a). When $R_f < \frac{x_0}{4}$, $-t = \frac{\sqrt{x_0}}{2a}\ln \left ( \frac{a-y}{a+y} \right )+c$. Since $y(0) = 0$, we have $c = 0$, and so
\[e^{\frac{-2at}{\sqrt{x_0}}}= \frac{a-y}{a+y} = \frac{2a}{a+y}-1\]
i.e. \[y = \frac{2a}{1+e^{\frac{-2at}{\sqrt{x_0}}}}-a.\]

As $t \rightarrow \infty$, clearly $y \rightarrow a$, i.e.
\[\frac{1}{\sqrt{x_0}}\left ( x-\frac{x_0}{2} \right )\rightarrow \sqrt{\frac{x_0}{4}-R_f}\]

and so \[x \rightarrow \frac{x_0}{2}+\sqrt{\frac{x_0^2}{4}-R_fx_0}.\]

(b). When $R_f = \frac{x_0}{4}$, the original equation is

\[\frac{\mathrm{d} x}{\mathrm{d} t}=x-\frac{x^2}{x_0} - R_f=-\frac{1}{x_0}\left ( x-\frac{x_0}{2} \right )^2,\]
which has the obvious constant solution $x(t) = \frac{x_0}{2} = x(0)$.
When $R_f > \frac{x_0}{4}$, \[-t = \frac{\sqrt{x_0}}{a}\arctan \left ( \frac{y}{a} \right ) + c.\]

Again $c = 0$. Now, $-\tan \left ( \frac{at}{\sqrt{x_0}}\right )=\frac{y}{a}$, or $-\sqrt{R_f-\frac{x_0}{4}}\tan \left ( \frac{\sqrt{R_f-\frac{x_0}{4}}}{\sqrt{x_0}}t\right ) = \frac{1}{\sqrt{x_0}}\left ( x-\frac{x_0}{2} \right )$, and so
\[x = \frac{x_0}{2}-\sqrt{R_fx_0-\frac{x_0^2}{4}}\: \tan \left ( \sqrt{\frac{R_f}{x_0}-\frac{1}{4}}\: \cdot t\right ).\]
This is a decreasing function of $t$, which becomes $0$, when $\tan \left ( \sqrt{\frac{R_f}{x_0}-\frac{1}{4}}\: \cdot t\right ) = \frac{x_0}{2\sqrt{R_fx_0-\frac{x_0^2}{4}}}$.
So, the fish population becomes $0$ in a finite time.
 
Seemingly by some mathematical coincidence, a hexagon of sides 2,2,7,7, 11, and 11 can be inscribed in a circle of radius 7. The other day I saw a math problem on line, which they said came from a Polish Olympiad, where you compute the length x of the 3rd side which is the same as the radius, so that the sides of length 2,x, and 11 are inscribed on the arc of a semi-circle. The law of cosines applied twice gives the answer for x of exactly 7, but the arithmetic is so complex that the...
Thread 'Video on imaginary numbers and some queries'
Hi, I was watching the following video. I found some points confusing. Could you please help me to understand the gaps? Thanks, in advance! Question 1: Around 4:22, the video says the following. So for those mathematicians, negative numbers didn't exist. You could subtract, that is find the difference between two positive quantities, but you couldn't have a negative answer or negative coefficients. Mathematicians were so averse to negative numbers that there was no single quadratic...
Thread 'Unit Circle Double Angle Derivations'
Here I made a terrible mistake of assuming this to be an equilateral triangle and set 2sinx=1 => x=pi/6. Although this did derive the double angle formulas it also led into a terrible mess trying to find all the combinations of sides. I must have been tired and just assumed 6x=180 and 2sinx=1. By that time, I was so mindset that I nearly scolded a person for even saying 90-x. I wonder if this is a case of biased observation that seeks to dis credit me like Jesus of Nazareth since in reality...

Similar threads

Back
Top