zbMATH — the first resource for mathematics

Using process algebra to develop predator-prey models of within-host parasite dynamics. (English) Zbl 1330.92115
Summary: As a first approximation of immune-mediated within-host parasite dynamics we can consider the immune response as a predator, with the parasite as its prey. In the ecological literature of predator-prey interactions there are a number of different functional responses used to describe how a predator reproduces in response to consuming prey. Until recently most of the models of the immune system that have taken a predator-prey approach have used simple mass action dynamics to capture the interaction between the immune response and the parasite. More recently A. Fenton and S. E. Perkins [“Applying predator-prey theory to modelling immune-mediated, within-host interspecific parasite interactions”, Parasitology 137, No. 6, 1027–1038 (2010; doi:10.1017/S0031182009991788)] employed three of the most commonly used prey-dependent functional response terms from the ecological literature.
In this paper we make use of a technique from computing science, process algebra, to develop mathematical models. The novelty of the process algebra approach is to allow stochastic models of the population (parasite and immune cells) to be developed from rules of individual cell behaviour. By using this approach in which individual cellular behaviour is captured we have derived a ratio-dependent response similar to that seen in the previous models of immune-mediated parasite dynamics, confirming that, whilst this type of term is controversial in ecological predator-prey models, it is appropriate for models of the immune system.

MSC:
 92D25 Population dynamics (general) 92-04 Software, source code, etc. for problems pertaining to biology
PEPA
Full Text:
References:
 [1] Abrams, P., The fallacies of ratio-dependent predation, Ecology, 75, 1842-1850, (1994) [2] Abrams, P., Anomalous predictions of ratio-dependent models of predation, Oikos, 80, 163-171, (1997) [3] Abrams, P.; Ginzburg, L., The nature of predation: prey dependent, ratio dependent or neither?, Trends Ecol. Evol., 15, 337-341, (2000) [4] Antia, R.; Lipsitch, M., Mathematical models of parasite responses to host immune defences, Parasitology, 115S, S155-S167, (1997) [5] Arditi, R.; Ginzburg, L., Coupling in predator prey dynamics—ratio-dependence, J. Theor. Biol., 139, 311-326, (1989) [6] Arditi, R.; Ginzburg, L., How species interact. altering the standard view on trophic ecology, (2012), Oxford University Press Oxford, UK [7] Baeten, J. C.M., A brief history of process algebra, Theor. Comput. Sci., 335, 2/3, 131-146, (2005) · Zbl 1080.68072 [8] Beddington, J. R., Mutual interference between parasites or predators and its effect on searching efficiency, J. Anim. Ecol., 51, 331-340, (1975) [9] Benkirane, S., 2011. Process Algebra for Epidemiology: Evaluating and Enhancing the Ability of PEPA to Describe Biological Systems. Thesis, $$\langle$$http://hdl.handle.net/1893/3603$$\rangle$$. [10] Borghans, J. A.M.; De Boer, R. J., A minimal model for T-cell vaccination, Proc. R. Soc. London Ser. B, 259, 173-178, (1995) [11] Borghans, J. A.M.; De Boer, R. J.; Seegel, L. A., Extending the quasi-steady state approximation by changing variables, Bull. Math. Biol., 58, 1, 43-63, (1996) · Zbl 0866.92010 [12] De Boer, R. J.; Perelson, A. S., Towards a general function describing cell proliferation, J. Theor. Biol., 175, 567-576, (1995) [13] Calder, M.; Gilmore, S.; Hillston, J., Modelling the influence of RKIP on the ERK signalling pathway using the stochastic process algebra PEPA, Trans. Comput. Syst. Biol. VII, 4230, 1-23, (2006) [14] Cardelli, L., On process rate semantics, Theor. Comput. Sci., 391, 190-215, (2008) · Zbl 1133.68054 [15] DeAngelis, D. L.; Goldstein, R. A.; O’Neill, R. V., A model for trophic interaction, Ecology, 56, 881-892, (1975) [16] Fenton, A.; Perkins, S. E., Applying predator-prey theory to modelling immune-mediated, within-host interspecific parasite interactions, Parasitology, 137, 1027-1038, (2010) [17] Ganusov, V. V.; Milutinovic, D.; De Boer, R. J., IL-2 regulates expansion of CD4(+) T cell populations by affecting cell death: insights from modeling CFSE data, J. Immunol., 179, 2, 950-957, (2007) [18] Hatcher, M.J., Tofts, C., 1995. The Evolution of Polygenic Sex Determination with Potential for Environmental Manipulation. Technical Report UMCS-95-4-2, Department of Computer Science, University of Manchester. [19] Hillston, J., September 2005. Fluid flow approximation of PEPA models. In: QEST’05, Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Quantitative Evaluation of Systems. IEEE Computer Society Press, Torino, pp. 33-42. [20] Holling, C. S., The components of predation as revealed by a study of small mammal predation of the European pine sawfly, Can. Entomol., 91, 293-320, (1959) [21] Holling, C. S., Some characteristics of simple types of predation and parasitism, Can. Entomol., 91, 358-398, (1959) [22] Kurtz, T. G., Solutions of ordinary differential equations as limits of pure jump Markov processes, J. Appl. Prob., 7, 49-58, (1970) · Zbl 0191.47301 [23] McCaig, C., 2007. From Individuals to Populations: Changing Scale in Process Algebra Models of Biological Systems. PhD Thesis. University of Stirling, 2008. Available from $$\langle$$http://hdl.handle.net/1893/398$$\rangle$$. [24] McCaig, C., Norman, R., Shankland, C., 2008. Process algebra models of population dynamics. In: Algebraic Biology, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 5147. Springer-Verlag, pp. 139-155. · Zbl 1171.92336 [25] McCaig, C.; Norman, R.; Shankland, C., From individuals to populations: a mean field semantics for process algebra, Theor. Comput. Sci., 412, 17, 1557-1580, (2011) · Zbl 1209.68307 [26] McCaig, C.; Begon, M.; Norman, R.; Shankland, C., A symbolic investigation of superspreaders, Bull. Math. Biol., 73, 4, 777-794, (2011) · Zbl 1214.92064 [27] McCaig, C.; Norman, R.; Shankland, C., From individuals to populations: a symbolic process algebra approach to epidemiology, Math. Comput. Sci., 2, 3, 535-556, (2009) · Zbl 1205.68247 [28] Norman, R., Shankland, C., 2003. Developing the use of process algebra in the derivation and analysis of mathematical models of infectious disease. In: Computer Aided Systems Theory—EUROCAST 2003, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 2809. Springer-Verlag, pp. 404-414. [29] Nowak, M. A.; May, R. M., Virus dynamics: mathematical principles of immunology and virology, (2000), Oxford University Press Oxford, UK · Zbl 1101.92028 [30] Pilyugin, S. S.; Antia, R., Modelling immune responses with handling time, Bull. Math. Biol., 62, 869-890, (2000) · Zbl 1323.92116 [31] Precharattana, M.; Nokkeaw, A.; Triampo, W.; Triampo, D.; Lenbury, Y., Stochastic cellular automata model and Monte Carlo simulations of CD4(+) T cell dynamics with a proposed alternative leukapheresis treatment for HIV/AIDS, Comput. Biol. Med., 41, 7, 546-558, (2011) [32] Regev, A.; Panina, E. M.; Silverman, W.; Cardelli, L.; Shapiro, E., Bioambients: an abstraction for biological compartments, Theor. Comput. Sci., 325, 141-167, (2004) · Zbl 1069.68569 [33] Sallusto, F.; Lenig, D.; Forster, R.; Lipp, M.; Lanzavecchia, A., Two subsets of memory T lymphocytes with distinct homing potentials and effector functions, Nature, 401, 708-712, (1999) [34] Slobodkin, L. B., A summary of the special feature and comments on its theoretical context and importance, Ecology, 73, 1564-1566, (1992) [35] Sumpter, D. J.T.; Broomhead, D. S., Relating individual behaviour to population dynamics, Proc. R. Soc. London Ser. B, 268, 925-932, (2001) [36] Tofts, C., Using process algebra to describe social insect behaviour, Trans. Soc. Comput. Simulation, 9, 227-283, (1993) [37] Tofts, C., Processes with probabilities, priority and time, Formal Aspects Comput., 6, 536-564, (1994) · Zbl 0820.68072
This reference list is based on information provided by the publisher or from digital mathematics libraries. Its items are heuristically matched to zbMATH identifiers and may contain data conversion errors. It attempts to reflect the references listed in the original paper as accurately as possible without claiming the completeness or perfect precision of the matching.