À©ÅÙ¹½ÃÛ¤ÎÀ¯¼£·ÐºÑ³Ø¡Ý´üÂԼ¸½¼Ò²ñ¤Ë¸þ¤±¤Æ¡Ý
English
GLOPEII¤Ë¤Ä¤¤¤Æ News ¥¤¥Ù¥ó¥È¥¹¥±¥¸¥å¡¼¥ë ¥ï¡¼¥­¥ó¥°¥Ú¡¼¥Ñ¡¼ GLOPE II À¤ÏÀÄ´ºº°ìÍ÷ ¥ê¥ó¥¯

ͽÄêɽ -¾ÜºÙ¾ðÊó-

·ï̾ LS ËÙ¹¾Å¯Ìé»á
³«»ÏÆü»þ 2011ǯ 11·î 29Æü (²ÐÍËÆü)   12»þ15ʬ (GMT+09:00)
½ªÎ»Æü»þ 2011ǯ 11·î 29Æü (²ÐÍËÆü)   12»þ50ʬ (GMT+09:00)
¾ì½ê 1¹æ´Û401¶µ¼¼
¾ÜºÙ GLOPE II ¥é¥ó¥Á¥¿¥¤¥à¥»¥ß¥Ê¡¼

¡ÚÊó¹ð¼Ô¡ÛËÙ¹¾Å¯Ìé»á¡Ê¾åÃÒÂç³Ø¡¦´Ä¶­¤ÈËǰ׸¦µæ¥»¥ó¥¿¡¼¡Ë
¡Ú¥¿¥¤¥È¥ë¡ÛOptimal Detection Strategies for an Established Invasive Pest
¡Ú³µÍסÛ
We model optimal detection of sub-populations of invasive species that
establish ahead of an advancing front. For many invaders, eradication
of the main population is an untenable goal, yet it may be possible to
treat and eradicate emerging sub-populations once these
sub-populations are detected. We embed a dynamically optimal
post-detection management plan of sub-populations into a model of
optimal detection effort determination and find that optimal detection
effort depends, in part, on the distance from the main front:
locations closer to the front with shorter management horizons enjoy
lower reductions in overall cost from intervention. The uninfested
landscape is divided into two zones, characterized by different
dynamically optimal management plans: a suppression zone and an
eradication zone. In the suppression zone, optimal detection effort
increases with distance from the front. At the distance where the
suppression zone yields to the eradication zone, optimal detection
effort plateaus at its maximum level.

*The talk will be given in English.
*Åö½éͽÄê¤Î11·î22Æü¤«¤éÆüÄø¤¬Êѹ¹¤È¤Ê¤ê¤Þ¤·¤¿¡£
¥«¥Æ¥´¥ê¡¼ À¯¼£·ÐºÑ³Ø´ðÁÃ¥»¥ß¥Ê¡¼¡¦¥é¥ó¥Á¥¿¥¤¥à¥»¥ß¥Ê¡¼
¥µ¥¤¥È¥Þ¥Ã¥×
Home¤Ø