A predator-prey model with a holling type I functional response including a predator mutual interference

Gunog Seo, Donald L. Deangelis

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

51 Scopus citations


The most widely used functional response in describing predator-prey relationships is the Holling type II functional response, where per capita predation is a smooth, increasing, and saturating function of prey density. Beddington and DeAngelis modified the Holling type II response to include interference of predators that increases with predator density. Here we introduce a predator-interference term into a Holling type I functional response. We explain the ecological rationale for the response and note that the phase plane configuration of the predator and prey isoclines differs greatly from that of the Beddington-DeAngelis response; for example, in having three possible interior equilibria rather than one. In fact, this new functional response seems to be quite unique. We used analytical and numerical methods to show that the resulting system shows a much richer dynamical behavior than the Beddington-DeAngelis response, or other typically used functional responses. For example, cyclic-fold, saddle-fold, homoclinic saddle connection, and multiple crossing bifurcations can all occur. We then use a smooth approximation to the Holling type I functional response with predator mutual interference to show that these dynamical properties do not result from the lack of smoothness, but rather from subtle differences in the functional responses.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)811-833
Number of pages23
JournalJournal of Nonlinear Science
Issue number6
StatePublished - Dec 2011


  • Global bifurcation
  • Homoclinic saddle connection bifurcation
  • Multiple crossing bifurcation
  • Non-smooth system
  • Predator-prey model

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Applied Mathematics
  • Modeling and Simulation
  • Engineering(all)


Dive into the research topics of 'A predator-prey model with a holling type I functional response including a predator mutual interference'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this