Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 5 minor 73 references

When very slow is too fast -- collapse of a predator-prey system

T0 review · 2 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-14 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read A smooth, slow decline in habitat quality can still tip a predator-prey system into sudden collapse, and the tipping threshold is a canard trajectory, not a bifurcation.

desk verdict A careful, convincing application of canard theory to R-tipping in a classic predator-prey model; the main gap is that all numerics sit at the lower edge of the cited time-scale separation range. read the letter →

arxiv 1908.05507 v1 pith:SX4WAQIN submitted 2019-08-15 q-bio.PE

Anna Vanselow , Sebastian Wieczorek , Ulrike Feudel This is my paper · ORCID
classification q-bio.PE MSC 34E1537N2592D25
keywords rate-inducedcriticaltransitionR-tippingpopulationcollapseRosenzweig-MacArthurmodelcanardtrajectoryfoldedsaddlesingularitycarryingcapacitydeclinefast-slowdynamicalsystems
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The paper studies a well-known predator-prey model in which the prey's habitat quality declines smoothly while predators reproduce much more slowly than prey. It claims that this system can undergo a rate-induced critical transition—a sudden, temporary collapse of the prey population—even when the environmental change is slower than the slowest intrinsic ecosystem timescale. The collapse is not preceded by a bifurcation or by loss of linear stability; a unique stable coexistence equilibrium exists for every fixed habitat quality, but the system can fail to track it as the equilibrium moves. The threshold separating tracking from collapse is a maximal canard trajectory associated with a folded saddle singularity. The practical stakes: ecosystems may be tipped by how fast conditions change, not only by how bad they become.

What carries the argument

The key object is the folded saddle singularity on the fold curve of the critical manifold, together with the singular canard trajectory through it. Desingularization removes the zero denominator of the reduced slow flow at the fold, turning the folded singularity into a regular equilibrium of a rescaled system; the stable manifold of that equilibrium is the tipping threshold. The speed of the moving equilibrium, $|\dot e_3| = r/(1-\eta)^2$, carries the explanation of why a slow ramp can be too fast: for handling time $\eta$ close to one, even small $r$ makes the equilibrium sweep through phase space faster than the system can follow.

What would settle it

Numerically integrate the ramped system (9)-(11) at $\kappa = 0.08$, the upper end of the ecological range the paper cites, with $\eta=0.8$ and the initial state on the moving equilibrium $e_3(\varphi_0)$, for ramping rates on both sides of the predicted canard threshold. If the predicted collapse does not occur for $r$ above the threshold, or occurs for $r$ below it, the canard prediction does not carry over to weaker timescale separation.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central discovery is that the ramped Rosenzweig-MacArthur system—fast prey, slower predator, and a third equation that linearly increases $\phi$ (proportional to the inverse carrying capacity)—has a critical rate of environmental change below the slowest ecosystem timescale. When the ramping rate exceeds that critical rate, an initial state on the stable part of the folded critical manifold is drawn to the fold and jumps off in the fast direction, sending prey density to extremely low values while predator density remains high; the resulting overconsumption produces a temporary collapse of the prey population. This happens in a parameter range in which the coexistence equilibrium is linearly stable for every fixed $\phi$, so standard stability analysis would see no danger. The paper computes the boundary between tracking and tipping as the singular/maximal canard trajectory through the folded saddle singularity; it is generic because two slow variables (predator density and $\phi$) are present. The same threshold can be converted into a critical ramping rate and into a description of all collapse-prone initial states.

Load-bearing premise

The result rests on a strong timescale separation, $\kappa = 0.01$ in all simulations, because the canard threshold is an asymptotic object whose accuracy at finite $\kappa$ is not tested across the cited ecological range $\kappa \in [0.01,0.08]$.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • An environmental change that never leaves the range where a stable coexistence equilibrium exists can still collapse the prey population, provided the rate of change crosses the canard threshold.
  • The critical rate is not fixed by the ecosystem alone: it is smaller for longer predator handling times (inefficient predators) and larger for shorter handling times, following a highly nonlinear curve.
  • For a fixed ramping rate, the paper gives the full set of initial predator and prey densities that are collapse-prone; increasing the rate expands that set and can turn a tracking initial state into a tipping one.
  • The collapse is temporary in the deterministic model, but it leaves the prey at very low density, so with demographic or environmental noise the likely endpoint is extinction and breakdown of the system.
  • Observed regime shifts may be rate-induced rather than bifurcation-induced, so classifying a transition by stability analysis alone can miss the actual mechanism.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If the folded-saddle/canard mechanism is generic for systems with two slow variables, the same rate-induced collapse should appear in other population and ecosystem models whose critical manifold has a fold and whose environment is ramped; this could be tested in model families before field confirmation exists.
  • The mathematical critical rate (where the trajectory crosses the fold) and the ecological critical rate (where prey density drops below a conservation threshold) can differ substantially, so management targets should state which threshold they are using.
  • Adding noise to the ramped system should make the extinction probability depend on how long the prey spends at low density during the collapse; measuring that duration would quantify the extinction risk.
  • Because tipping here occurs without any loss of linear stability, variance-based early-warning signals would not precede it; monitoring the rate of environmental change itself may be a more practical warning indicator.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

2 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper studies the three-dimensional slow-fast Rosenzweig-MacArthur model (Eqs. 9–11) in which the carrying capacity declines linearly in time (φ increases at rate r). For an initial condition on the coexistence equilibrium e3(φ0) close to the fold, the authors show numerically that there is a critical ramp rate between r = 0.005 and r = 0.006 at which the system switches from tracking the moving equilibrium to a rate-induced critical transition in which the prey density temporarily collapses. They explain the mechanism using geometric singular perturbation theory: the reduced dynamics on the folded critical manifold has a folded saddle singularity, and the singular canard emanating from it separates tracking from tipping. They derive the folded saddle coordinates analytically (Appendix E), compute the singular canard as the tipping threshold (Figs. 5–7), characterize the set of collapse-prone initial conditions, and study the dependence of the critical rate on the predator's handling time η (Appendices D and F). Numerical simulations of the original three-dimensional system confirm the predicted threshold at κ = 0.01.

Significance. The result is significant because it transfers the concept of rate-induced critical transitions to a canonical ecological model with an ecologically motivated forcing (declining resource/carrying capacity), and it produces an analytic, parameter-free tipping threshold (the singular canard) rather than a fitted quantity. The claim that collapse can occur for ramp rates slower than the slowest intrinsic timescale is counterintuitive and is well explained through the fast-moving equilibrium argument. The paper also gives falsifiable predictions: the critical rate as a function of η and the location of collapse-prone initial states. Strengths include the explicit derivation of the desingularized system, the folded-saddle analysis, and the direct numerical verification in the original system. The main weakness is the lack of validation across the ecological timescale-separation range cited in the paper.

major comments (2)
  1. [Section 3 and Figs. 3–7, D.1, F.1] All numerical simulations fix κ = 0.01, which is the lower bound of the ecological range κ ∈ [0.01, 0.08] cited from Edwards and Brindley (1999). The singular canard is a κ → 0 construction, and the distance between the singular and maximal canards is O(κ), with additional effects near the fold; at κ = 0.08 the time-scale separation is only about a factor of 12 and the normal-hyperbolicity assumptions weaken. Since the paper's quantitative predictions (critical rates, collapse-prone initial-state region) are used to draw conclusions for natural plankton systems across this whole range, the authors should simulate the original system (9)–(11) for at least two larger κ values (e.g., κ = 0.04 and κ = 0.08) and report how the tipping threshold and critical rates deviate from the singular-canard prediction. This is a load-bearing missing check for the ecological claim.
  2. [Section 4 and Fig. 6] The paper identifies the maximal canard as the tipping threshold but computes only the singular canard (κ = 0), and the verification in Fig. 6 is visual rather than quantitative. Because the threshold underpins the collapse-prone sets in Figs. 5–7 and the critical rates in Fig. F.1, I ask for a quantitative check at κ = 0.01, for example by bisection in u0 for fixed v0 and φ0 to locate the actual threshold in the original system and comparing it with the singular canard curve. This would also provide a baseline for the κ-robustness test requested above.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Appendix E, text after Eq. (E.16)] The stated time rescaling t = −2φη(u_F − u)s has the wrong sign; with that choice one would obtain du/ds = −Λ, whereas Eqs. (E.17)–(E.18) follow from t = +2φη(u_F − u)s. The desingularized equations appear correct, but the text should be fixed.
  2. [Title and Abstract] The phrase 'collapse of a predator-prey system' is stronger than the demonstrated dynamics, in which the prey density temporarily collapses and then the system recovers to the coexistence equilibrium (Section 3, Fig. 1C). The authors correctly state the temporary nature in the body and discuss the role of noise in converting it to extinction, but the title and abstract should be tempered (e.g., 'temporary collapse') to avoid overstating the deterministic result.
  3. [Section 1] The text near line 102 reads 'whitin a bounded φ-interval'; this should be 'within a bounded φ-interval'. Also, the citation '(S. Sakar and P.S. Dutta, unpublished manuscript)' is not listed in the reference list and should either be removed or given a full reference.
  4. [Appendix F and Fig. F.1] There are two typos: 'the back dashed line' should be 'the black dashed line', and the text uses 'black solid line' for two different curves in the same paragraph; please re-read the caption and surrounding text of Fig. F.1 for consistency.
  5. [Fig. 3B caption] The caption states u0 = (1−η)^−1 and v0 = (1−φ0u0)(1 + ηu0); it may help the reader to note explicitly that this initial condition is exactly the coexistence equilibrium e3(φ0) on the critical manifold.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the tipping threshold is derived from the model equations and confirmed by simulation, not fitted.

full rationale

The paper's central derivation is self-contained. The tipping threshold is obtained analytically from the ramped Rosenzweig-MacArthur system by forming the reduced system on the critical manifold, desingularizing it (Appendix E, Eqs. E.17-E.18), and identifying the folded saddle singularity and its stable manifold as the singular canard. No parameter is fitted to the observed collapse; the numerical simulations of the original system (Figs. 3, 4, 6, D.1, F.1) are used to confirm the analytically computed threshold, and the eigenvector approximation of the critical rate in Appendix F is explicitly checked against direct numerical simulation of the desingularized system and against the full-system collapse criterion. Citations to Wieczorek et al. (2011) and Perryman and Wieczorek (2014) supply the general fast-slow/canard framework, but the specific threshold for this model is computed from the model's own equations rather than imported as an unverified conclusion. The restriction of numerical verification to kappa = 0.01 and the possible sign typo in the desingularization rescaling are robustness or correctness concerns, not evidence that any prediction reduces by construction to an input. Accordingly, no circular step meeting the required standard is present.

Assumptions & free parameters 6 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No new entities are postulated; the folded saddle and canard are standard mathematical objects derived from the model. The central claim rests on standard fast-slow system theory plus the domain assumption that a linear ramp of carrying capacity captures habitat-quality decline.

free parameters (6)
  • kappa (timescale separation) = 0.01
    Ratio of predator to prey timescales; chosen as small (slow-fast regime) and central to the singular perturbation analysis; robustness across kappa is not tested.
  • eta (handling time) = 0.8 (main figures), scanned 0.1-0.9
    The main demonstration uses eta=0.8; critical-rate curves are computed by varying eta.
  • phi_0 (initial resource level) = 0.1
    Initial value of the inverse carrying capacity; the tipping threshold depends on the initial state, and the paper chooses a point near the fold.
  • r (rate of environmental change) = 0.006 (demonstration), critical values computed
    Ramp rate; the paper computes critical rates rather than fitting them, but r is a chosen control parameter.
  • u_e (conservation threshold) = 0.2
    Population density below which collapse is scored in the ecological critical rate; choice affects rcrit-hat quantitatively.
  • epsilon (ramp buffer) = 1e-6
    Small offset from the bifurcation endpoints to keep e3 stable throughout the ramp.
assumptions (5)
  • standard math Fenichel normal hyperbolicity and the existence of slow manifolds for 0<kappa<<1
    Used throughout Section 2 and Appendix B to justify the critical manifold and slow-fast decomposition.
  • standard math One-to-one correspondence between the singular canard and the maximal canard for a folded saddle singularity
    Invoked in Section 4 (following Wechselberger et al. 2013) to translate the singular threshold to the finite-kappa system.
  • domain assumption The linear rate ramp dphi/dt = r is an adequate model of habitat-quality decline
    The model restricts phi to a bounded interval and ramps linearly; results may differ for other temporal forcing shapes.
  • ad hoc to paper kappa = 0.01 is small enough for the asymptotic canard theory to apply quantitatively
    The paper verifies this numerically only for kappa=0.01 and does not explore the ecological range up to kappa~0.08.
  • domain assumption Temporary collapse to near-zero prey density is an ecologically meaningful proxy for extinction risk
    The deterministic model alone does not produce extinction; the ecological interpretation relies on added noise.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of When very slow is too fast -- collapse of a predator-prey system." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/SX4WAQIN

@misc{pith2026190805507,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: When very slow is too fast -- collapse of a predator-prey system},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/SX4WAQIN}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:1908.05507}
}
read the original abstract

Critical transitions or regime shifts are sudden and unexpected changes in the state of an ecosystem, that are usually associated with dangerous levels of environmental change. However, recent studies show that critical transitions can also be triggered by dangerous rates of environmental change. In contrast to classical regime shifts, such rate-induced critical transitions do not involve any obvious loss of stability, or a bifurcation, and thus cannot be explained by the linear stability analysis. In this work, we demonstrate that the well-known Rosenzweig-MacArthur predator-prey model can undergo a rate-induced critical transition in response to a continuous decline in the habitat quality, resulting in a collapse of the predator and prey populations. Rather surprisingly, the collapse occurs even if the environmental change is slower than the slowest process in the model. To explain this counterintuitive phenomenon, we combine methods from geometric singular perturbation theory with the concept of a moving equilibrium, and study critical rates of environmental change with dependence on the initial state and the system parameters. Moreover, for a fixed rate of environmental change, we determine the set of initial states that undergo a rate-induced population collapse. Our results suggest that ecosystems may be more sensitive to how fast environmental conditions change than previously assumed. In particular, unexpected critical transitions with dramatic ecological consequences can be triggered by environmental changes that (i) do not exceed any dangerous levels, and (ii) are slower than the natural timescales of the ecosystem. This poses an interesting research question whether regime shifts observed in the natural world are predominantly rate-induced or bifurcation-induced.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 1908.05507 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. (A): Three-dimensional phase portrait of the time-scaled Rosenzweig-MacArthur predator-prey system, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Three phase portraits of the slow-fast Rosenzweig-MacArthur predator-prey model (3)–(4) for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. (A): The parameter φ increases linearly in time t from φ0 = φ(0) > φmin, to φmax, at the rate r. (B): Phase portrait of the ramped system (9)–(11) for linearly decreasing resource concentration φ at the rates r = 0.005 (green) and r = 0.006 (red). Stable (red) and unstable parts (blue) of the critical manifold S0, the fold F(φ) (black solid line) and the pathway of the moving stable equilibrium e3(φ) (gray dashed … view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (4 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Dependence of the rate-induced critical transition on the initial condition of the ramped system (9)–(11), [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: (A): Sketch of the critical manifold S0 of the ramped system (9)–(11) with its stable parts (red) and unstable parts (blue). The red trajectory cease to exist at the fold F(φ) (black solid line) whereas a singular canard (blue trajectory) is able to cross the fold F(φ)…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Location of the tipping threshold (singular canard) and the corresponding folded saddle singularity [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Location of the tipping threshold (singular canard, blue line) and the corresponding folded saddle singularity [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p020_7.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

73 extracted references · 73 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    and Kiessling, W

    Aberhan, M. and Kiessling, W. (2015). Persistent ecological shifts in marine molluscan assemblages across the end-Cretaceous mass extinction . Proceedings of the National Academy of Science of the USA , 112:7207--7212

    work page 2015

  2. [2]

    A., Matsuda, H., and Harada, Y

    Abrams, P. A., Matsuda, H., and Harada, Y. (1993). Evolutionary unstable fitness maxima and stable fitness minima of continuous traits . Evolutionary Ecology , 7:465--487

    work page 1993

  3. [3]

    C., Schmitt, R

    Adam, T. C., Schmitt, R. J., Holbrook, S. J., Brooks, A. J., Edmunds, P. J., Carpenter, R. C., and Bernardi, G. (2011). Herbivory, connectivity, and ecosystem resilience: Response of a coral teef to a large-scale perturbation . PLoS ONE , 6(8):e23717

    work page 2011

  4. [4]

    A., Kendell, S

    Agler, B. A., Kendell, S. J., Irons, D. B., and Klosiewski, S. (1999). Decline in marine bird populations in Prince William Sound, Alaska coincident with a climatic regime shift . Waterbirds: The International Journal of Waterbird Biology , 22(1):98--103

    work page 1999

  5. [5]

    Ashwin, P., Wieczorek, S., Vitolo, R., and Cox, P. (2012). Tipping points in open systems: bifurcation, noise-induced and rate-dependet examples in the climate system . Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A , 370:1166--1184

    work page 2012

  6. [6]

    H., M.S., W., and Lenton, T

    Bathiany, S., Scheffer, M., van Nes, E. H., M.S., W., and Lenton, T. M. (2018). Abrupt climate change in an oscillating world . Scientific Reports , 8(1):5040

    work page 2018

  7. [7]

    Bazykin, A. D. (1998). Nonlinear dynamics of interacting populations , volume 11. World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., Singapore

    work page 1998

  8. [8]

    Berryman, A. A. (1992). The Orgins and Evolution of Predator-Prey Theory . Ecology , 73(5):1530--1535

    work page 1992

Show all 73 references
  1. [9]

    Claussen, M., Bathiany, S., Brovkin, V., and Kleinen, T. (2013). Simulated climate–vegetation interaction in semi-arid regions affected by plant diversity . Nature Geoscience , 6:954

    2013

  2. [10]

    Cortez, M. H. and Ellner, S. P. (2010). Understanding rapid evolution in predator-prey interactions using the theory of fast-slow dynamical systems . The American Naturalist , 176(5):109--127

    2010

  3. [11]

    R., Aronson, R

    Dudgeon, S. R., Aronson, R. B., Bruno, J. F., and Precht, W. F. (2010). Phase shifts and stable states on coral reefs . Marine Ecology Progress Series , 413:201--216

    2010

  4. [12]

    and Roussarie, R

    Dumortier, F. and Roussarie, R. (1996). Canard cycles and center manifolds (with an appendix by Chengzhi Li) . Memoirs of the American Mathematical Society, Providence, 577 edition

    1996

  5. [13]

    Edwards, A. M. and Brindley, J. (1999). Zooplankton Mortality and the Dynamical Behaviour of Plankton Population Models . Bulletin of Mathematical Biology , 61:303--339

    1999

  6. [14]

    J., Veraart, A

    Faassen, E. J., Veraart, A. J., Nes, E. H. V., Dakos, V., L \" u rling, M., and Scheffer, M. (2015). Hysteresis in an experimental phytoplankton population . Oikos , (124):1617--1623

    2015

  7. [15]

    Fenichel, N. (1979). Geometric singular perturbation theory for ordinary differential equations . Journal of Differential Equations , 31:53--98

    1979

  8. [16]

    and Lindenmayer, D

    Fischer, J. and Lindenmayer, D. B. (2007). Landscape modification and habitat fragmentation: a synthesis . Global Ecology and Biogeography , 16:265--280

    2007

  9. [17]

    A., Coe, M

    Foley, J. A., Coe, M. T., Scheffer, M., and Wang, G. (2003). Regime shifts in the Sahara and Sahel: interactions between ecological and climatic systems in Northern Africa . Ecosystems , 6(6):524--532

    2003

  10. [18]

    Folke, C., Carpenter, S., Walker, B., Scheffer, M., Elmqvist, Thomas Gunderson , L., and Holling, C. S. (2004). Regime shifts, resilience, and biodiversity in ecosystem management . Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics , 35(1):557--581

    2004

  11. [19]

    Ginzburg, L. R. (1998). Assuming reproduction to be a function of consumption raises doubts about some popular predator-prey models . Journal of Animal Ecology , 67(2):325--327

    1998

  12. [20]

    K., Beusen, A., and Drecht, G

    Goldewijk, K. K., Beusen, A., and Drecht, G. V. (2011). The HYDE 3.1 spatially explicit database of human-induced global land-use change over the past 12,000 years . Global Ecology and Biogeography , 20:73--86

    2011

  13. [21]

    Gunderson, L. H. (2001). Managing surprising ecosystems in southern Florida . Ecological Economics , 37:371--378

    2001

  14. [22]

    Hastings, A. (1997). Population biology . Springer, New York

    1997

  15. [23]

    Hek, G. (2010). Geometric singular perturbation theory in biological practice . Journal of Mathematical Biology , 60:347--386

    2010

  16. [24]

    N., Graham, N

    Hempson, T. N., Graham, N. A. J., MacNeil, A. M., Hoey, A. S., and Wilson, S. K. (2018). Ecosystem regime shifts disrupt trophic structure . Ecological Applications , 28(1):191--200

    2018

  17. [25]

    Holling, C. (1973). Resilience and stability of ecological systems . Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics , 4:1--23

    1973

  18. [26]

    and Spahni, R

    Joos, F. and Spahni, R. (2008). Rates of change in natural and anthropogenic radiative forcing over the past 20,000 years . Proceedings of the National Academy of Science of the USA , 105:1425--1430

    2008

  19. [27]

    Jump, A. S. and Penuelas, J. (2005). Running to stand still: adaptation and the response of plants to rapid climate change . Ecological Letters , 8:1010--1020

    2005

  20. [28]

    and Poggiale, J.-C

    Kooi, B. and Poggiale, J.-C. (2018). Modelling, singular perturbation and bifurcation analyses of bitrophic food chains. Mathematical Biosciences , 301:93--110

    2018

  21. [29]

    H., de los A.G

    Kosten, S., Vernooij, M., van Nes, E. H., de los A.G. Sagrario , M., Clevers, J. G. P. W., and Scheffer, M. (2012). Bimodal transparency as an indicator for alternative states in South American lakes . Freshwater Biology , 57:1191--1201

    2012

  22. [30]

    and Szmolyan, P

    Krupa, M. and Szmolyan, P. (2001). Relaxation oscillation and canard explosion . Journal of Differential Equations , 174:312--368

    2001

  23. [31]

    Lande, R. (1982). A quantitative genetic theory of life history evolution . Ecology , 63(3):607--615

    1982

  24. [32]

    Lenton, T. M. (2013). Environmental Tipping Points . Annual Review of Environment and Resources , 38:1--29

    2013

  25. [33]

    M., Held, H., Kriegler, E., Hall, J

    Lenton, T. M., Held, H., Kriegler, E., Hall, J. W., Lucht, W., Rahmstorf, S., and Schellmhuber, H. J. (2008). Tipping elements in the Earth's climate system . Proceedings of the National Academy of Science of the USA , 105(6):1786--1793

    2008

  26. [34]

    and Bascompte, J

    Liephold, A. and Bascompte, J. (2003). The Allee effect, stochastic dynamics and the eradication of alien species . Ecology Letters , 6:133--140

    2003

  27. [35]

    and Cox, P

    Luke, C. and Cox, P. (2010). Soil carbon and climate change: From the Jenkinson effect to the compost-bomb instability . European Journal of Soil Science , 62:5--12

    2010

  28. [36]

    May, R. (1977). Thresholds and breakpoints in ecosystems with a multiplicity of stable states . Nature , 269:471--477

    1977

  29. [37]

    McCook, L. (1999). Macroalgae, nutrients and phase shifts on coral reefs: Scientific issues and management consequences for the Great Barrier Reef . Coral Reefs , 18:357--367

    1999

  30. [38]

    Morris, J., Sundareshwar, P., Nietch, C., Kjerfve, B., and Cahoon, D. (2002). Response of coastal wetlands to rising sea level . Ecology , 83:2869--2877

    2002

  31. [39]

    and Boitani, L

    Mortelliti, A. and Boitani, L. (2008). Interaction of food resources and landscape structure in determining the probability of patch use by carnivores in fragmented landscapes . Landscape Ecology , 23:285--298

    2008

  32. [40]

    Nes, E. H. V., Amaro, T., Scheffer, M., and Duineveld, G. C. A. (2007). Possible mechanisms for a marine benthic regime shift in the North Sea . Marine Ecology Progress Series , 330:39--47

    2007

  33. [41]

    O'Keeffe, P. E. and Wieczorek, S. (2019). Tipping phenomena and points of no return in ecosystems: Beyond classical bifurcations. arXiv preprint arXiv:1902.01796

    2019 arXiv

  34. [42]

    Parmesan, C., Ryrholm, N., Stefanescu, C., Hill, J., Thomas, C., Descimon, H., and Huntley, B. (1999). Polewards shifts in geographical ranges of butterfly species associated with regional warming . Nature , 399:579--583

    1999

  35. [43]

    and Wieczorek, S

    Perryman, C. and Wieczorek, S. (2014). Adapting to a changing environment: non-obvious thresholds in multi-scale systems . Proceedings of the Royal Society A , 470:20140226

    2014

  36. [44]

    L., Jensen, O

    Pinsky, M. L., Jensen, O. P., Ricard, D., and Palumbi, S. R. (2011). Unexpected patterns of fisheries collapse in the world’s oceans . Proceedings of the National Academy of Science of the USA , 108(20):8317--8322

    2011

  37. [45]

    Poggiale, J.-C., Aldebert, C., Girardot, B., and Kooi, B. (2019). Analysis of a predator–prey model with specific time scales: a geometrical approach proving the occurrence of canard solutions. Journal of Mathematical Biology

    2019

  38. [46]

    and Coomes, O

    Ramankutty, N. and Coomes, O. T. (2016). Land-use regime shifts: an analytical framework and agenda for future land-use research . Ecology and Society , 21(2)

    2016

  39. [47]

    and Muratori, S

    Rinaldi, S. and Muratori, S. (1992). Slow-fast limit cycles in predator-prey models. Ecological Modelling , 61:287--308

    1992

  40. [48]

    Rocha, J., Yletyinen, J., Biggs, R., Blenckner, T., and G., P. (2015). Marine regime shifts: drivers and impacts on ecosystems services . Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B , 370:20130273

    2015

  41. [49]

    and MacArthur, R

    Rosenzweig, M. and MacArthur, R. H. (1963). Graphical Representation and Stability Conditions of Predator-Prey Interactions . The American Naturalist , 97(895):209--223

    1963

  42. [50]

    Rosenzweig, M. L. (1971). Paradox of enrichment: Destabilization of exploitation ecosystems in ecological time. Science , 171(3969):385--387

    1971

  43. [51]

    A., Brovkin, V., Carpenter, S., Dakos, V., Held, H., van Nes, E

    Scheffer, M., Bascompte, J., Brock, W. A., Brovkin, V., Carpenter, S., Dakos, V., Held, H., van Nes, E. H., Rietkerk, M., and Sugihara, G. (2009). Early-warning signals for critical transitions . Nature , 461:53--59

    2009

  44. [52]

    and Carpenter, S

    Scheffer, M. and Carpenter, S. (2003). Catastrophic regime shifts in ecosystems: linking theory to observation . Trend in Ecology and Evolution , 18(12):648--656

    2003

  45. [53]

    A., Folke, C., and Walker, B

    Scheffer, M., Carpenter, S., Foley, J. A., Folke, C., and Walker, B. (2001). Catastrophic shifts in ecosystems . Nature , 413:591--596

    2001

  46. [54]

    R., Lenton, T

    Scheffer, M., Carpenter, S. R., Lenton, T. M., Bascompte, J., Brock, W. A., Dakos, V., Koppel van de, J., van de Leemput, I. A., Levin, S. A., van Nes, E. H., Pascual, M., and Vandermeer, J. (2012). Anticipating critical transitions . Science , 338(6105):344--348

    2012

  47. [55]

    Scheffer, M., Rinaldi, S., Gragnani, A., Mur, L., and van Nes, E. H. (1997). On the dominance of filamentous cyanobacteria in shallow, turbid lakes . Ecology , 78:272--282

    1997

  48. [56]

    H., Holmgren, E., and Hughes, T

    Scheffer, M., van Nes, E. H., Holmgren, E., and Hughes, T. (2008). Pulse-driven loss of top-down control: The critical rate hypthesis . Ecosystems , 11:226--237

    2008

  49. [57]

    E., McGeoch, M

    Selwood, K. E., McGeoch, M. A., and Mac Nally , R. (2015). The effects of climate change and land-use change on demographic rates and population viability . Biological Reviews , 90:837--853

    2015

  50. [58]

    Sih, A. (2013). Understanding variation in behavioural responses to human-induced rapid environmental change: a conceptual overview . Animal Behaviour , 85:1077--1088

    2013

  51. [59]

    O., and Harris, D

    Sih, A., Ferrari, M. O., and Harris, D. J. (2011). Evolutionary and behavioural responses to human-induced rapid environmental change . Evolutionary Applications , 4:367--387

    2011

  52. [60]

    Siteur, K., Eppinga, M., Doelman, A., Siero, E., and Rietkerk, M. (2016). Ecosystems off track: rate-induced critical transitions in ecological models . Oikos , 125:1689--1699

    2016

  53. [61]

    J., Edmonds, J., Hartin, C

    Smith, S. J., Edmonds, J., Hartin, C. A., Mundra, A., and Calvin, K. (2015). Near-term accelaration in the rate of termperature change . Nature Climate Change , 5:333--336

    2015

  54. [62]

    Steele, J. H. (1996). Regime shifts in fisheries management . Fisheries Research , 25(1):19--23

    1996

  55. [63]

    N., Gross, K

    Suding, K. N., Gross, K. L., and Houseman, G. R. (2004). Alternative states and positive feedbacks in restoration ecology . Trend in Ecology and Evolution , 19(1):46--53

    2004

  56. [64]

    and Wechselberger, M

    Szmolyan, P. and Wechselberger, M. (2001). Canards in R \^ 3 . Journal of Differential Equations , 177:419--453

    2001

  57. [65]

    and Lennon, J

    Thomas, C. and Lennon, J. (1999). Birds extent their ranges northwards . Natrue , 399:213

    1999

  58. [66]

    van Nes, E. H. and Scheffer, M. (2007). Slow recovery from perturbations as a generic indicator of a nearby catastrophic shift . The American Naturalist , 169(6):738--747

    2007

  59. [67]

    Walther, G.-r., Post, E., Convey, P., Menzel, A., Parmesan, C., Beebee, T. J. C., Fromentin, J.-m., I, O. H.-g., and Bairlein, F. (2002). Ecological responses to recent climate change . Nature , 416:389--395

    2002

  60. [68]

    Wechselberger, M., Mitry, J., and Rinzel, J. (2013). Canard Theory and Excitability . In Kloeden, P. and Poetzsche, C., editors, Nonautonomous dynamical systems in the life science , pages 89--132. Springer International Publishing, Berlin

    2013

  61. [69]

    C., de Bettignies, T., Cure, K., Depcynski, M., Dufois, F., Fromont, J., Fulton, C

    Wernberg, T., Bennett, S., Babock, R. C., de Bettignies, T., Cure, K., Depcynski, M., Dufois, F., Fromont, J., Fulton, C. J., Hovey, R. K., Harvey, E. S., Holmes, T. H., Kendrick, G. A., Radford, B., Santana-Garcon, J., Saunders, B. J., Smale, D. A., Thomsen, M. S., Tuckett, C...

    2016

  62. [70]

    West, G. B. and Brown, J. H. (2005). The origin of allometric scaling laws in biology from genomes to ecosystems: towards a quantitative unifying theory of biological structure and organization . The Journal of Experimental Biology , 208:1575--1592

    2005

  63. [71]

    Wieczorek, S., Ashwin, C., Luke, C., and Cox, P. (2011). Excitability in ramped systems: the compost-bomb instability . Proceedings of the Royal Society of London , 467:1243--1269

    2011

  64. [72]

    P., Fussmann, G., and Hairston Jr

    Yoshida, T., Jones, L., Ellner, S. P., Fussmann, G., and Hairston Jr. , N. (2003). Rapid evolution drives ecological dynamics in a predator-prey system . Nature , 424:303--306

    2003

  65. [73]

    Zanette, L., Doyle, P., and Tremont, S. (2000). Food shortage in small fragments: evidence from an area-sensitive passerine . Ecology , 81:1654--1666

    2000

Pith tools

Reviewed August 14, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.