Skip to contentScholarGate
LibraryBookshelfDeskReview StudioAssistant
Sign in
On this page
IntuitionHow it worksWhen to use itStrengths & limitationsCommon pitfallsApplicationsFrequently asked🔒 Read the full methodSourcesRelated methods
Cite this pageSpotted an issue on this page? Report or suggest a fix →
Home›Ecology›Integral Projection Model
Process / pipelineDemographic modeling

Integral Projection Model

Integral Projection Model (IPM) · Also known as: IPM, continuous size structure, kernel model, size-structured population

Integral projection models (IPMs) are a class of structured population models that use continuous traits (size, age, height) to describe population dynamics. Introduced by Easterling and colleagues (2000) and developed extensively by Ellner, Rees, and collaborators, IPMs overcome limitations of age- or stage-structured models by treating individual traits as continuous. They use integration to project populations forward in time, making them particularly suitable for organisms with continuous size distributions or flexible developmental pathways. IPMs enable estimation of population growth rate (λ), sensitivity analysis, and projection under changing environmental conditions.

ScholarGate
  1. Process / pipeline
  2. v1
  3. 3 Sources
  4. PUBLISHED
Cite this page →
Tools & resources
Download slides
Learn & explore

Read the full method

Members only

Sign in with a free account to read this section.

Sign in

Method map

The neighbourhood of related methods — select a node to explore.

Integral Projection Model
Leslie MatrixLife Table Response Expe…Population Viability Ana…Species AccumulationMetabolic Theory of Ecol…

When to use it

Use integral projection models for populations with continuous or near-continuous trait distributions, especially when age is unknown or when size is a better predictor of fitness than age. Ideal for plants, fish, invertebrates, and other organisms without discrete life stages. Requires longitudinal data on survival, growth, and reproduction as functions of size. Not appropriate for populations with strict discrete stages (e.g., insects with clear instars) where stage-structured models may be simpler.

Strengths & limitations

Strengths
  • Naturally accommodates continuous trait distributions without artificial binning into stages, preserving information and reducing binning artifacts
  • More flexible than Leslie matrices: can incorporate variable growth rates, reproductive schedules that depend on size history, and environmental heterogeneity
  • Computationally tractable despite continuous state space: numerical integration and matrix discretization make large-scale projections feasible
  • Kernel structure enables detailed exploration of how different vital rate functions (survival, growth, reproduction) influence population growth
  • Sensitivity analysis identifies critical size classes and life stages, informing conservation or management decisions
Limitations
  • Requires longitudinal data on many individuals to fit accurate vital rate functions; sparse data lead to large uncertainty in kernel estimates
  • Assumes vital rate relationships are smooth and continuous; abrupt transitions or threshold effects are difficult to model
  • Computational cost increases substantially with model complexity (multiple traits, environmental covariates), potentially limiting scope of analysis
  • Model selection and function specification (linear vs. nonlinear, polynomial degree) can influence results; lack of objective criteria for choosing models
  • Projection accuracy depends on valid extrapolation of vital rate functions beyond observed range of sizes

Frequently asked

How do I choose between a Leslie matrix and an integral projection model?

Use Leslie matrices for organisms with discrete, well-defined age classes (e.g., birds or mammals where age can be reliably estimated). Use IPMs for organisms with continuous size variation or where size is a better predictor of fitness than age (e.g., plants, fish, invertebrates). If in doubt, construct both and compare their predictions and biological realism.

What is the best way to discretize an IPM kernel for numerical computation?

Use a bin width small enough to capture variation in vital rates across the size range (typically 0.05 to 0.1 times the total size range). Test sensitivity: recompute λ with finer and coarser bin widths to ensure numerical stability. Finer bins are more accurate but slower; coarser bins are faster but may lose information. Use at least 50-100 bins for most applications.

How do I handle individuals that shrink between time steps?

Growth (transition) kernels typically assume non-negative size change, but shrinkage occurs (e.g., when plants lose mass during stress). Model shrinkage explicitly by allowing a two-part growth kernel: one for individuals that grow, another for shrinkage. Or, transform size to a log scale where shrinkage becomes negative growth and is better captured by normal distributions.

Can I incorporate environmental variation into an IPM?

Yes. Construct separate kernels for each environmental condition (e.g., wet and dry years) and weight them by their probability. Or, include environmental covariates in the vital rate functions (e.g., survival = logit(a + b*size + c*rainfall)). Stochastic IPMs randomly draw environmental conditions each time step; deterministic IPMs average over environments.

How do I interpret sensitivity of λ to changes in the kernel?

Sensitivity answers: how much does λ change if I perturb the kernel at a given size? High sensitivity at small sizes means recruitment and juvenile survival are critical; high sensitivity at large sizes means adult survival or fecundity are critical. Use elasticity (proportional sensitivity) to compare vital rates with different scales. Focus management on the vital rates and size classes with highest elasticity.

Sources

  1. Easterling, M. R., Ellner, S. P., & Dixon, P. M. (2000). Size-specific sensitivity: applying a new structured population model. Ecology, 81(3), 694-708. DOI: 10.1890/0012-9658(2000)081[0694:SSSAAN]2.0.CO;2 ↗
  2. Ellner, S. P., Guckenheimer, J., & Johnson, A. R. (2016). Dynamical Systems in Population Ecology. Oxford University Press. link ↗
  3. Merow, C., Dahlgren, J. P., Metcalf, C. J. E., Childs, D. Z., Evans, M. E., Jongejans, E., Record, S., Rees, M., Salguero-Gomez, R., & McMahon, S. M. (2014). Advancing population ecology with integral projection models: a practical guide. Methods in Ecology and Evolution, 5(2), 99-110. DOI: 10.1111/2041-210X.12146 ↗

How to cite this page

ScholarGate. (2026, June 3). Integral Projection Model (IPM). ScholarGate. https://scholargate.app/en/ecology/integral-projection-model

Related methods

Leslie MatrixLife Table Response ExperimentPopulation Viability AnalysisSpecies Accumulation

Which method?

Set this method beside its closest kin and read them side by side — the library lays the books on the table; the choice is yours.

  • Leslie MatrixEcology↔ compare
  • Life Table Response ExperimentEcology↔ compare
  • Population Viability AnalysisEcology↔ compare
  • Species AccumulationEcology↔ compare
Compare side by side →

Referenced by

Leslie MatrixLife Table Response ExperimentMetabolic Theory of EcologyPopulation Viability Analysis

Similar methods

Leslie MatrixLife Table Response ExperimentPopulation Viability AnalysisStable Population TheoryInverse ProjectionMultiregional Migration ProjectionLee-Carter Mortality ModelCohort-Component Projection

Related reference concepts

Life Tables and DemographyPopulation EcologyPopulation Growth and RegulationMetapopulations and Spatial DynamicsLife History and Reproductive StrategiesLandscape Pattern and Connectivity

Spotted an issue on this page? Report or suggest a fix →

ScholarGate — Integral Projection Model (Integral Projection Model (IPM)). Retrieved 2026-07-21 from https://scholargate.app/en/ecology/integral-projection-model · Dataset: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.20539026
Quick facts
Originator
Stephen Ellner and Mark Rees
Subfamily
Demographic modeling
Year
2000
Type
size-structured population projection
Related methods
Leslie MatrixLife Table Response ExperimentPopulation Viability AnalysisSpecies Accumulation
ScholarGate

A content-first reference library for research methods — what each one is, how it works, and where it comes from.

Open data (CC-BY)

Explore

  • Library
  • Search the library…
  • Browse by field
  • Fields
  • Journey
  • Compare
  • Which method?

Reference

  • Subjects
  • Atlas
  • Glossary
  • Methodology
  • Philosophy

Your tools

  • Bookshelf
  • Desk
  • Chat

Company

  • About
  • Pricing
  • Contact
  • Suggest a method

Entries are compiled from published sources for reference. Verifying the accuracy and suitability of any information for your own use remains your responsibility.

© 2026 ScholarGate · A research-method reference library
  • Privacy
  • Cookies
  • Terms
  • Delete account