TY - JOUR A1 - Mooij, Wolf M. A1 - Brederveld, Robert J. A1 - de Klein, Jeroen J. M. A1 - DeAngelis, Don L. A1 - Downing, Andrea S. A1 - Faber, Michiel A1 - Gerla, Daan J. A1 - Hipsey, Matthew R. A1 - Janse, Jan H. A1 - Janssen, Annette B. G. A1 - Jeuken, Michel A1 - Kooi, Bob W. A1 - Lischke, Betty A1 - Petzoldt, Thomas A1 - Postma, Leo A1 - Schep, Sebastiaan A. A1 - Scholten, Huub A1 - Teurlincx, Sven A1 - Thiange, Christophe A1 - Trolle, Dennis A1 - van Dam, Anne A. A1 - van Gerven, Luuk P. A. A1 - van Nes, Egbert H. A1 - Kuiper, Jan J. T1 - Serving many at once: How a database approach can create unity in dynamical ecosystem modelling JF - Environmental modelling & software with environment data news N2 - Simulation modelling in ecology is a field that is becoming increasingly compartmentalized. Here we propose a Database Approach To Modelling (DATM) to create unity in dynamical ecosystem modelling with differential equations. In this approach the storage of ecological knowledge is independent of the language and platform in which the model will be run. To create an instance of the model, the information in the database is translated and augmented with the language and platform specifics. This process is automated so that a new instance can be created each time the database is updated. We describe the approach using the simple Lotka-Volterra model and the complex ecosystem model for shallow lakes PCLake, which we automatically implement in the frameworks OSIRIS, GRIND for MATLAB, ACSL, R, DUFLOW and DELWAQ. A clear advantage of working in a database is the overview it provides. The simplicity of the approach only adds to its elegance. (C) 2014 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-SA license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/). KW - Modelling framework KW - Programming language KW - Differential equation KW - Community-based modelling KW - Database approach to modelling KW - DATM Y1 - 2014 U6 - https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsoft.2014.04.004 SN - 1364-8152 SN - 1873-6726 VL - 61 SP - 266 EP - 273 PB - Elsevier CY - Oxford ER - TY - JOUR A1 - Mooij, Wolf M. A1 - Trolle, Dennis A1 - Jeppesen, Erik A1 - Arhonditsis, George B. A1 - Belolipetsky, Pavel V. A1 - Chitamwebwa, Deonatus B. R. A1 - Degermendzhy, Andrey G. A1 - DeAngelis, Donald L. A1 - Domis, Lisette Nicole de Senerpont A1 - Downing, Andrea S. A1 - Elliott, J. Alex A1 - Fragoso Jr, Carlos Ruberto A1 - Gaedke, Ursula A1 - Genova, Svetlana N. A1 - Gulati, Ramesh D. A1 - Håkanson, Lars A1 - Hamilton, David P. A1 - Hipsey, Matthew R. A1 - ‘t Hoen, Jochem A1 - Hülsmann, Stephan A1 - Los, F. Hans A1 - Makler-Pick, Vardit A1 - Petzoldt, Thomas A1 - Prokopkin, Igor G. A1 - Rinke, Karsten A1 - Schep, Sebastiaan A. A1 - Tominaga, Koji A1 - Van Dam, Anne A. A1 - Van Nes, Egbert H. A1 - Wells, Scott A. A1 - Janse, Jan H. T1 - Challenges and opportunities for integrating lake ecosystem modelling approaches JF - Aquatic ecology N2 - A large number and wide variety of lake ecosystem models have been developed and published during the past four decades. We identify two challenges for making further progress in this field. One such challenge is to avoid developing more models largely following the concept of others ('reinventing the wheel'). The other challenge is to avoid focusing on only one type of model, while ignoring new and diverse approaches that have become available ('having tunnel vision'). In this paper, we aim at improving the awareness of existing models and knowledge of concurrent approaches in lake ecosystem modelling, without covering all possible model tools and avenues. First, we present a broad variety of modelling approaches. To illustrate these approaches, we give brief descriptions of rather arbitrarily selected sets of specific models. We deal with static models (steady state and regression models), complex dynamic models (CAEDYM, CE-QUAL-W2, Delft 3D-ECO, LakeMab, LakeWeb, MyLake, PCLake, PROTECH, SALMO), structurally dynamic models and minimal dynamic models. We also discuss a group of approaches that could all be classified as individual based: super-individual models (Piscator, Charisma), physiologically structured models, stage-structured models and traitbased models. We briefly mention genetic algorithms, neural networks, Kalman filters and fuzzy logic. Thereafter, we zoom in, as an in-depth example, on the multi-decadal development and application of the lake ecosystem model PCLake and related models (PCLake Metamodel, Lake Shira Model, IPH-TRIM3D-PCLake). In the discussion, we argue that while the historical development of each approach and model is understandable given its 'leading principle', there are many opportunities for combining approaches. We take the point of view that a single 'right' approach does not exist and should not be strived for. Instead, multiple modelling approaches, applied concurrently to a given problem, can help develop an integrative view on the functioning of lake ecosystems. We end with a set of specific recommendations that may be of help in the further development of lake ecosystem models. KW - aquatic KW - food web dynamics KW - plankton KW - nutrients KW - spatial KW - lake KW - freshwater KW - marine KW - community KW - population KW - hydrology KW - eutrophication KW - global change KW - climate warming KW - fisheries KW - biodiversity KW - management KW - mitigation KW - adaptive processes KW - non-linear dynamics KW - analysis KW - bifurcation KW - understanding KW - prediction KW - model limitations KW - model integration Y1 - 2010 U6 - https://doi.org/10.1007/s10452-010-9339-3 SN - 1573-5125 SN - 1386-2588 VL - 44 SP - 633 EP - 667 PB - Springer Science + Business Media B.V. CY - Dordrecht ER - TY - GEN A1 - Mooij, Wolf M. A1 - Trolle, Dennis A1 - Jeppesen, Erik A1 - Arhonditsis, George B. A1 - Belolipetsky, Pavel V. A1 - Chitamwebwa, Deonatus B. R. A1 - Degermendzhy, Andrey G. A1 - DeAngelis, Donald L. A1 - Domis, Lisette Nicole de Senerpont A1 - Downing, Andrea S. A1 - Elliott, J. Alex A1 - Fragoso Jr., Carlos Ruberto A1 - Gaedke, Ursula A1 - Genova, Svetlana N. A1 - Gulati, Ramesh D. A1 - Håkanson, Lars A1 - Hamilton, David P. A1 - Hipsey, Matthew R. A1 - ‘t Hoen, Jochem A1 - Hülsmann, Stephan A1 - Los, F. Hans A1 - Makler-Pick, Vardit A1 - Petzoldt, Thomas A1 - Prokopkin, Igor G. A1 - Rinke, Karsten A1 - Schep, Sebastiaan A. A1 - Tominaga, Koji A1 - Van Dam, Anne A. A1 - Van Nes, Egbert H. A1 - Wells, Scott A. A1 - Janse, Jan H. T1 - Challenges and opportunities for integrating lake ecosystem modelling approaches T2 - Zweitveröffentlichungen der Universität Potsdam : Mathematisch-Naturwissenschaftliche Reihe N2 - A large number and wide variety of lake ecosystem models have been developed and published during the past four decades. We identify two challenges for making further progress in this field. One such challenge is to avoid developing more models largely following the concept of others ('reinventing the wheel'). The other challenge is to avoid focusing on only one type of model, while ignoring new and diverse approaches that have become available ('having tunnel vision'). In this paper, we aim at improving the awareness of existing models and knowledge of concurrent approaches in lake ecosystem modelling, without covering all possible model tools and avenues. First, we present a broad variety of modelling approaches. To illustrate these approaches, we give brief descriptions of rather arbitrarily selected sets of specific models. We deal with static models (steady state and regression models), complex dynamic models (CAEDYM, CE-QUAL-W2, Delft 3D-ECO, LakeMab, LakeWeb, MyLake, PCLake, PROTECH, SALMO), structurally dynamic models and minimal dynamic models. We also discuss a group of approaches that could all be classified as individual based: super-individual models (Piscator, Charisma), physiologically structured models, stage-structured models and traitbased models. We briefly mention genetic algorithms, neural networks, Kalman filters and fuzzy logic. Thereafter, we zoom in, as an in-depth example, on the multi-decadal development and application of the lake ecosystem model PCLake and related models (PCLake Metamodel, Lake Shira Model, IPH-TRIM3D-PCLake). In the discussion, we argue that while the historical development of each approach and model is understandable given its 'leading principle', there are many opportunities for combining approaches. We take the point of view that a single 'right' approach does not exist and should not be strived for. Instead, multiple modelling approaches, applied concurrently to a given problem, can help develop an integrative view on the functioning of lake ecosystems. We end with a set of specific recommendations that may be of help in the further development of lake ecosystem models. T3 - Zweitveröffentlichungen der Universität Potsdam : Mathematisch-Naturwissenschaftliche Reihe - 1326 KW - aquatic KW - food web dynamics KW - plankton KW - nutrients KW - spatial KW - lake KW - freshwater KW - marine KW - community KW - population KW - hydrology KW - eutrophication KW - global change KW - climate warming KW - fisheries KW - biodiversity KW - management KW - mitigation KW - adaptive processes KW - non-linear dynamics KW - analysis KW - bifurcation KW - understanding KW - prediction KW - model limitations KW - model integration Y1 - 2010 U6 - http://nbn-resolving.de/urn/resolver.pl?urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-429839 SN - 1866-8372 IS - 1326 ER - TY - JOUR A1 - van Gerven, Luuk P. A. A1 - Brederveld, Robert J. A1 - de Klein, Jeroen J. M. A1 - DeAngelis, Don L. A1 - Downing, Andrea S. A1 - Faber, Michiel A1 - Gerla, Daan J. A1 - Janse, Jan H. A1 - Janssen, Annette B. G. A1 - Jeuken, Michel A1 - Kooi, Bob W. A1 - Kuiper, Jan J. A1 - Lischke, Betty A1 - Liu, Sien A1 - Petzoldt, Thomas A1 - Schep, Sebastiaan A. A1 - Teurlincx, Sven A1 - Thiange, Christophe A1 - Trolle, Dennis A1 - van Nes, Egbert H. A1 - Mooij, Wolf M. T1 - Advantages of concurrent use of multiple software frameworks in water quality modelling using a database approach JF - Fundamental and applied limnology : official journal of the International Association of Theoretical and Applied Limnology N2 - Water quality modelling deals with multidisciplinary questions ranging from fundamental to applied. Addressing this broad range of questions requires multiple analysis techniques and therefore multiple frameworks. Through the recently developed database approach to modelling (DATM), it has become possible to run a model in multiple software frameworks without much overhead. Here we apply DATM to the ecosystem model for ditches PCDitch and its twin model for shallow lakes PCLake. Using DATM, we run these models in six frameworks (ACSL, DELWAQ, DUFLOW, GRIND for MATLAB, OSIRIS and R), and report on the possible model analyses with tools provided by each framework. We conclude that the dynamic link between frameworks and models resulting from DATM has the following main advantages: it allows one to use the framework one is familiar with for most model analyses and eases switching between frameworks for complementary model analyses, including the switch between a 0-D and 1-D to 3-D setting. Moreover, the strength of each framework - including runtime performance - can now be easily exploited. We envision that a community-based further development of the concept can contribute to the future development of water quality modelling, not only by addressing multidisciplinary questions but also by facilitating the exchange of models and process formulations within the community of water quality modellers. KW - Database Approach To Modelling KW - DATM KW - PCLake KW - PCDitch KW - OSIRIS KW - ACSL KW - R KW - GRIND KW - DUFLOW KW - DELWAQ KW - Modelling Framework KW - Model Implementation KW - Model Analysis KW - Differential Equations KW - Community-based Modelling Y1 - 2015 U6 - https://doi.org/10.1127/fal/2015/0631 SN - 1863-9135 VL - 186 IS - 1-2 SP - 5 EP - 20 PB - Schweizerbart CY - Stuttgart ER -