JOVANA
Library Glossary Getting Started Three Levels Fields How it works Mission
Join the mission
Back to the library
Ecology 1926

Predator and Prey: The Lotka–Volterra Equations

Alfred J. Lotka & Vito Volterra

Two coupled equations make predator and prey rise and fall forever, each peak chasing the last.

Choose your version
In depth · the introduction

A meadow with no foxes fills up with rabbits; a meadow with too many foxes empties of both. Lotka and Volterra found the simple rule behind that endless seesaw.

The idea, unpacked

Picture two numbers that push on each other. When prey are plentiful, predators eat well and multiply. But more predators means more prey eaten, so the prey crash. With little to eat, the predators then starve and dwindle — and with few predators left, the prey rebound, and the whole cycle starts over.

Lotka and Volterra captured exactly this with two short equations: prey grow on their own and shrink when they meet predators; predators grow when they meet prey and shrink on their own. Run the equations and the two populations never settle down — they rise and fall in waves forever, with the predators' wave always trailing a step behind the prey's. It was the first time anyone had turned the give-and-take of a food chain into mathematics that actually predicts.

A fish-market puzzle

The Italian mathematician Vito Volterra was handed the problem by his son-in-law, the biologist Umberto d'Ancona, who studied the fish catches of the Adriatic Sea. d'Ancona had noticed something strange in the market records: during the First World War, when fishing boats stayed in port, the catch came back richer in sharks and rays — the predators — not the food fish you might expect to recover. Why would less fishing favour the hunters? Volterra built his equations to find out, and they gave a clean answer: fishing, applied to predator and prey alike, actually props up the predators; stop fishing and the balance tips back toward them. Unknown to Volterra, the American chemist and actuary Alfred Lotka had written down the very same equations a few years earlier, reasoning by analogy with chemical reactions that oscillate. The two corresponded, sorted out who came first, and the model has carried both their names ever since.

Why it mattered

Before this, ecology was a science of careful observation and words — Darwin's 'struggle for existence' was vivid but not calculable. Lotka and Volterra showed that the tangled give-and-take between species could obey equations precise enough to predict, and even to surprise: the result that fishing helps predators is not something common sense would hand you. That single demonstration opened the door to modelling whole ecosystems, the spread of diseases, and the management of fisheries and pests.

A seesaw that always lags

Think of a seesaw where one side can't react instantly. Push down the 'prey' end and the 'predator' end takes a while to rise; by the time the predators are high, the prey are already sinking; then the predators sink too — but late, always late. That built-in delay is what keeps the two ends oscillating instead of balancing. The predator peak forever chases the prey peak around the loop, a quarter-turn behind, and never catches it.

Two oscillating curves through time, green prey and rust predators, the predator peaks lagging the prey peaks; a harvest slider, when raised, lifts the prey's average level and lowers the predators'.

Before and after

Malthus (1798) had shown that a population left alone grows explosively; Verhulst bent that growth down with a ceiling. Lotka and Volterra added the missing piece — what happens when two such populations feed on each other — and so gave equations to the struggle Darwin (1859) had only narrated. Their cycles became the ancestor of disease models and fishery science, and their fragile, perfectly balanced loops — so easily upset by any added realism — foreshadowed the sensitivity to small changes that Lorenz (1963) would make famous in chaos theory.

The original document
Original source text
Vito Volterra · Nature 118: 558–560 · 1926
The question (paraphrase)
Volterra's son-in-law, the marine biologist Umberto d'Ancona, had compiled fish-market statistics from the upper Adriatic across the years around the First World War. He noticed something odd: during and just after the war, when fishing had nearly stopped, the proportion of predatory fish (selachians — sharks and rays) in the catch rose, while food fish fell back. Less fishing favoured the predators. He asked Volterra whether mathematics could explain it.
The model (paraphrase)
Volterra treated the prey population x and the predator population y as continuous quantities. Left alone, prey would multiply without limit (rate α); predators, with nothing to eat, would die out (rate γ). The two are coupled only through encounters, taken proportional to the product x·y: such meetings remove prey (rate β) and feed predators (rate δ). This gives two coupled rate equations:
dx/dt = α·x − β·x·y and dy/dt = δ·x·y − γ·y. They have no fixed resting state except the balance point (x*, y*) = (γ/δ, α/β); away from it the two numbers circle that point forever, the predators peaking a quarter-cycle behind the prey.
The three laws (paraphrase)
Law of the periodic cycle — the two populations fluctuate periodically, the period set by the coefficients and the starting amounts. Law of conservation of the averages — averaged over a full cycle, each population sits exactly at its balance point, no matter how wild the swings. Law of the disturbance of the averages — if both species are destroyed in proportion to their numbers (uniform fishing), the average of the prey goes up and the average of the predator goes down. That last law answered d'Ancona: cutting the fishing of wartime had pushed the balance the other way, toward the predators.
[ … ]
Vito Volterra · Rome · 1926