Homework #4

Due 09/24/08
ABE 6986
Ramin Shamshiri
UFID # 90213353
Population dynamics
Data on population growth of snails in a fish aquarium are given in Table 1 for surface areas of 4500 and
9300 cm2.

t (wk)

0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18

100
533
1594
2299
2467
2499
2500
2500
2500
2500

A
b
c, wk-1
r

Z
4500 cm2

Z
9300 cm2

100
595
2503
4938
5807
5994
5997
5999
5999
5999
2500

6000

Table 1: Data source, Snail population (P) with elapsed time (t) for a fish aquarium.

Assume that population growth follows the logistic model

=
+
Where t is elapsed time since snails were introduced, wk; P is the number of snails at time t; A is
the maximum number for large time; b is the intercept parameter; and c is the response coefficient,
wk-1. Now Eq. (1) can be rearranged to the linear form:

=
=

Calculation of values of Z requires an estimate of parameter A.

Ramin Shamshiri

ABE 6986, HW #4

Due 09/24/08

1. Plot population (P) vs. time (t) on linear-linear graph paper.

Answer:

Figure 1: Plot of P vs. t for surface areas of 4500 cm2.

Figure 2: Plot of P vs. t for surface areas of 9300 cm2.

Ramin Shamshiri

ABE 6986, HW #4

Due 09/24/08

2.

From #1 estimate A=2500 and A=6000 for the two areas, respectively, and use Eq. (2) to estimate Z
for each t.
Answer:
Using the below set of calculations, the answer is given in Table.
t
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18

P
Z
2
A=2500, area=4500 cm
100
-3.17805
533
-1.30574
1594
0.564963
2299
2.436925
2467
4.314251
2499
7.823646
Math Error
2500
Math Error
2500
Math Error
2500
Math Error
2500

P
Z
2
A=6000, area=9300 cm
100
-4.07754
595
-2.20652
2503
-0.33442
4938
1.536806
5807
3.404129
5994
6.906755
5997
7.600402
5999
8.699348
5999
8.699348
5999
8.699348

Table 2: Estimation of Z values for each t.

A=2500 for area of 4500 cm2:

t=0 => P=100

=> = 1 = ln
t=2 => P=533

=> = 1 = ln

.
.
.
t=18 => P=2500

=> = 1 = ln
A=6000 for area of 9300 cm2
t=0 => P=100

=> = 1 = ln

2500
100

2500
533

2500
2500

6000
100

1 = 3.17805

1 = 1.30574

1 = Math Error

1 = 4.07754

t=2 => P=595

=> = 1 = ln
.
.
.
t=18 => P=5999

6000

6000

=> =

1 = ln

Ramin Shamshiri

595

595

1 = 2.20652

1 = 8.699348

ABE 6986, HW #4

Due 09/24/08

3.

Perform linear regression of Z vs. t to obtain estimates of b and c as well as the linear correlation
coefficient (r). Omit values at t>8 wk from regression.
Answer:

Z
A=2500, area=4500 cm2
-3.17805
-1.30574
0.564963
2.436925
4.314251

0
2
4
6
8

Z
A=6000, area=9300 cm2
-4.07754
-2.20652
-0.33442
1.536806
3.404129

Table 3: Values of Z for different t, (Omitting values at t>8 wk)

Performing linear regression for the Z vs. t data corresponding to A=2500 and area=4500 cm2
A

Linear model: Z = ln P 1 = ct b
Coefficients (with 95% confidence bounds):
c = 0.9364 (0.9353, 0.9374)
b = 3.179 (3.174, 3.184)
Z = 0.9364t 3.179
R-square: 0.999999601
r= 0.9999998
Performing linear regression for the Z vs. t data corresponding to A=6000 and area=4500 cm2

Linear model: = =
Coefficients (with 95% confidence bounds):
c = 0.9353 (0.9345, 0.9361)
b = 4.077 (4.073, 4.081)
Z = 0.9353t 4.077
R-square: 0.999999789
r=0.999999894

Ramin Shamshiri

ABE 6986, HW #4

Due 09/24/08

4. Plot values of Z vs. t on linear-linear graph paper. Show the regression lines as well.
Answer:

Plotting all the values of Z vs. t corresponding to A=2500 and area=4500cm2:

Linear model: = =
Coefficients (with 95% confidence bounds):
c=
1.053 (0.8658, 1.241)
b=
3.491 (-2.355,-4.628)
= . .
R-square: 0.9838
r=0.991866

Z
A=2500, area=4500 cm2
0
-3.17805
2
-1.30574
4
0.564963
6
2.436925
8
4.314251
10
7.823646

Figure 3: Plot of Z vs. t with regression line corresponding to data in Table above.

Ramin Shamshiri

ABE 6986, HW #4

Due 09/24/08

Plotting the values of Z vs. t (Omitting values at t>8 wk from regression) corresponding to A=2500 and
area=4500cm2:
t

Linear model: Z = ln P 1 = ct b
Coefficients (with 95% confidence bounds):
c = 0.9364 (0.9353, 0.9374)
b = 3.179 (3.174, 3.184)
Z = 0.9364t 3.179
R-square: 0.999999601
r= 0.9999998

0
2
4
6
8

Z
A=2500, area=4500 cm2
-3.17805
-1.30574
0.564963
2.436925
4.314251

Figure 4: Plot of Z vs. t (omitting values at t>8). Data: Table above.

Ramin Shamshiri

ABE 6986, HW #4

Due 09/24/08

Plotting all the values of Z vs. t corresponding to A=6000 and area=9300cm2:

A
Linear model: Z = ln 1 = ct b
P
t
Coefficients (with 95% confidence bounds):
c=
0.7824 (0.6114, 0.9534)
0
b=
3.149 (1.324,4.974)
2
Z = 0.7824t 3.149
4
R-square: 0.933
6
r=0.96591
8
10
12
14
16
18

Z
A=6000, area=9300 cm2
-4.07754
-2.20652
-0.33442
1.536806
3.404129
6.906755
7.600402
8.699348
8.699348
8.699348

Figure 5: Plot of Z vs. t with regression line corresponding to data in Table above.

Ramin Shamshiri

ABE 6986, HW #4

Due 09/24/08

Plotting the values of Z vs. t (Omitting values at t>8 wk from regression) corresponding to A=6000 and
area=9300cm2:

t
Z
Linear model: = =
A=6000, area=9300 cm2
Coefficients (with 95% confidence bounds):
c = 0.9353 (0.9345, 0.9361)
0
-4.07754
b = 4.077 (4.073, 4.081)
2
-2.20652
Z = 0.9353t 4.077
4
-0.33442
R-square: 0.999999789
6
1.536806
r=0.999999894
8
3.404129

Figure 6: Plot of Z vs. t (omitting values at t>8). Data: Table above.

Ramin Shamshiri

ABE 6986, HW #4

Due 09/24/08

5. Estimates values of for each t from Eq. (1) with your parameters.
Answer:

= +

Eq. (1)

For the data corresponding to A=2500 and area=4500 cm2, the coefficients b and c are 3.179 and 0.9364
respectively. Therefore Eq. (1) can be written as:
2500
=
1 + 3.179 0.9364
t=0 => =

2500
1+ 3.1790.9364 (0)

.
.
t=18 => = 1+

= 99.9092

2500
3.1790.9364 (18)

= 2499.997

For the data corresponding to A=6000 and area=930000 cm2, the coefficients b and c are 4.077 and
0.9353 respectively. Therefore Eq. (1) can be written as:
6000
=
1 + 4.077 0.9353
2500
t=0 => = 1+ 4.077 0.9353 (0) = 100.0529
.
.
t=18 => = 1+

2500
4.077 0.9353 (18)

t (wk)

0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18

100
533
1594
2299
2467
2499
2500
2500
2500
2500

A
b
c, wk-1
r

Ramin Shamshiri

= 5999.983

Z
4500 cm2
-3.17805
-1.30574
0.564963
2.436925
4.314251
7.823646
Math Error
Math Error
Math Error
Math Error

Z
9300 cm2

99.90921
532.8085
1594.946
2299.457
2466.933
2494.86
2499.209
2499.878
2499.981
2499.997

100
595
2503
4938
5807
5994
5997
5999
5999
5999

-4.07754

100.0529
595.0634
2500.98
4936.245
5807.237
5969.479
5995.278
5999.272
5999.888
5999.983

2500
3.179
0.9364
0.9999998

-2.20652
-0.33442
1.536806
3.404129
6.906755
7.600402
8.699348
8.699348
8.699348

6000
4.077
0.9353
0.999999894

ABE 6986, HW #4

Due 09/24/08

6. Plot the prediction curves on #1.

Answer:

Figure 7: Plot of the prediction curve for P values corresponding to A=2500 and area=4500cm

Figure 8: Plot of the prediction curve for P values corresponding to A=6000 and area=9300cm2

Ramin Shamshiri

ABE 6986, HW #4

Due 09/24/08

Figure 9: Plot of = /( + (. . ) ) alone.

Figure 10: Plot of P=2500/(1+exp(3.179-0.9364t) ) alone.

Ramin Shamshiri

ABE 6986, HW #4

Due 09/24/08

7. Discuss your results. How well does the model describe the data? Is the linearization
procedure justified? How could estimates of the parameters be improved? Explain the
effect of surface area on the parameters.
Answer:
The model is a very strong one in predicting the response variable and describing data. Yes, the
linearization procedure is justified because it helped to accurately estimate the b and c coefficients
through a simple procedure. This estimation is very accurate as it leaded to a very high correlation
coefficient, very close to 1, however the estimation of the parameters could be improved through nonlinear procedure or with fitting more data.
As the area has increased from 4500 cm2 to 6000 cm2, the values of P have increased too. In the other
word, the surface area has a positive effect on the values of P but a negative effect on the values of Z for
t<10.

Ramin Shamshiri

ABE 6986, HW #4

Due 09/24/08