Who is afraid of modelling time as a continuous variable?

Abstract Most models of ecological and eco‐evolutionary processes involve creating trajectories of something, be it population densities, average trait values, or environmental states, over time. This requires decision‐making regarding how to represent the flow of time in models. Most ecologists are exposed to continuous‐time models (typically in the form of ordinary differential equations) as part of their training, especially since the famous Lotka‐Volterra predator–prey dynamics are formulated this way. However, few appear sufficiently well trained to produce their own work with continuous‐time models and may lack exposure to the true versatility of available methods. Specifically, knowledge that discrete individuals can be modelled in continuous time using the Gillespie algorithm is not as widespread as it should be. I will illustrate the flexibility of continous‐time modelling methods such that researchers can make informed choices, and not resort to discretizing time as a ‘default’ without a clear biological motivation to do so. I provide three example‐based tutorials: (1) a comparison of deterministic and stochastic dynamics of the Lotka‐Volterra predator–prey model, (2) an evaluation of matelessness in a hypothetical insect population (and of selection to mate more often by either searching more efficiently or by shortening the ‘time out’ after each mating) and (3) within‐season density dependence followed by a birth pulse leading to Beverton‐Holt or Ricker dynamics depending on whether the deaths of conspecifics help reduce the mortality of others or not (compensatory mortality). I highlight properties of the exponential distribution that, while counter‐intuitive, are good to know when deriving expected lifetime reproductive success or other similar quantities. I also give guidance on how to proceed if the so‐called memorylessness assumption does not hold in a given situation, and show how continuous and discrete times can be freely mixed if the biological situation dictates this to be the preferred option. Continuous‐time models can also be empirically fitted to data, and I review briefly the insight this gives into the so‐called ‘do hares eat lynx?’ paradox that has been plaguing the interpretation of the Hudson Bay hare and lynx dataset.