Table of Contents Author Guidelines Submit a Manuscript
Abstract and Applied Analysis
Volume 2011 (2011), Article ID 726518, 9 pages
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2011/726518
Research Article

Differential Subordinations for Certain Meromorphically Multivalent Functions Defined by Dziok-Srivastava Operator

1Department of Mathematics, Maanshan Teacher's College, Maanshan 243000, China
2Department of Mathematics, Yangzhou University, Yangzhou 225002, China

Received 21 January 2011; Revised 14 April 2011; Accepted 20 April 2011

Academic Editor: Malisa R. Zizovic

Copyright © 2011 Ying Yang et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Abstract

By making use of the Dziok-Srivastava operator, we introduce a new class of meromorphically multivalent functions. Some inclusion properties of functions belonging to this class are derived.

1. Introduction

Let denote the class of functions of the form which are analytic in the punctured open unit disk with a pole at . Also let the Hadamard product (or convolution) of the following functions: be given by

Given two functions and , which are analytic in , we say that the function is subordinate to and write or (more precisely) , if there exists a Schwarz function , analytic in with and such that . In particular, if is univalent in , we have the following equivalence:

Let be the class of functions of the form which are analytic in . A function is said to be in the class if for some . When , is the class of starlike functions of order in . A function is said to be prestarlike of order in if where the symbol means the familiar Hadamard product (or convolution) of two analytic functions in . We denote this class by (see [1]). Clearly a function is in the class if and only if is convex univalent in and .

For complex parameters we define the generalized hypergeometric function by where is the Pochhammer symbol defined, in terms of the Gamma function ,by Corresponding to a function defined by we now consider a linear operator defined by means of the Hadamard product (or convolution) as follows: For convenience, we write Thus, after some calculations, we have

The operator is popularly known as the generalized Dziok-Srivastava operator. Many interesting subclasses of multivalent functions, associated with the operator and its various special cases, were investigated recently by (e.g.) Dziok and Srivastava [24], Liu [5], Liu and Srivastava [6, 7], Patel et al. [8], Wang et al. [9], and others.

Let be the class of functions with , which are analytic and convex univalent in .

Definition 1.1. A function is said to be in the class if it satisfies the subordination condition where is a complex number and .

The main object of this paper is to present a systematic investigation of the class defined above by means of the generalized Dziok-Srivastava operator .

For our purpose, we shall need the following lemmas to derive our main results for the class .

Lemma 1.2 (see [10]). Let be analytic in and be analytic and convex univalent in with . If where , then and is the best dominant of (1.17).

Lemma 1.3 (see [1]). Let , and . Then, for any analytic function in , where denotes the closed convex hull of .

2. Properties of the Class

Theorem 2.1. Let . Then .

Proof. Let and suppose that for . Then the function is analytic in with . Differentiating both sides of (2.1) with respect to and using (1.16), we have Hence an application of Lemma 1.2 yields Noting that and that is convex univalent in , it follows from (2.1) to (2.3) that Thus and the proof of Theorem 2.1 is completed.

Theorem 2.2. Let . Then .

Proof. Define a function by Then where is defined as in (1.11), and By (2.8), we see that which implies that
Let . It is easy to verify that From (2.11), (2.12), and (2.6), we deduce that where Since the function belongs to the function class and is convex univalent in , it follows from (2.12), (2.13), (2.14), and Lemma 1.3 that Thus and the proof of Theorem 2.2 is completed.

Theorem 2.3. Let and Then

Proof. For and , we have where In view of (2.16), the function has the Herglotz representation where is a probability measure defined on the unit circle and Since is convex univalent in , it follows from (2.18) to (2.20) that This shows that and the theorem is proved.

Theorem 2.4. Let and Then

Proof. For and , from (2.18) we have where is defined as in (2.19).
Since is convex univalent in , it follows from (2.25) and Lemma 1.3 the desired result.

Theorem 2.5. Let and . If , where then . The bound is sharp when .

Proof. Let us define for with and . Then we have Hence an application of Lemma 1.2 yields where
If , where is given by (2.27), then it follows from (2.31) that Now, by using the Herglotz representation for , from (2.28) and (2.30), we arrive at because is convex univalent in . This shows that .
For and defined by it is easy to verify that Thus . Also, for , we have which implies that . Hence the bound cannot be increased when .

Acknowledgment

The authers would like to express sincere thanks to the referees for careful reading and suggestions which helped us to improve the paper.

References

  1. S. Ruscheweyh, Convolutions in Geometric Function Theory, vol. 83 of Séminaire de Mathématiques Supérieures, Les Presses de l'Université de Montréal, Montréal, Canada, 1982.
  2. J. Dziok and H. M. Srivastava, “Classes of analytic functions associated with the generalized hypergeometric function,” Applied Mathematics and Computation, vol. 103, no. 1, pp. 1–13, 1999. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Zentralblatt MATH · View at MathSciNet
  3. J. Dziok and H. M. Srivastava, “Some subclasses of analytic functions with fixed argument of coefficients associated with the generalized hypergeometric function,” Advanced Studies in Contemporary Mathematics, vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 115–125, 2002. View at Google Scholar · View at Zentralblatt MATH
  4. J. Dziok and H. M. Srivastava, “Certain subclasses of analytic functions associated with the generalized hypergeometric function,” Integral Transforms and Special Functions, vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 7–18, 2003. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Zentralblatt MATH · View at MathSciNet
  5. J.-L. Liu, “Strongly starlike functions associated with the Dziok-Srivastava operator,” Tamkang Journal of Mathematics, vol. 35, no. 1, pp. 37–42, 2004. View at Google Scholar · View at Zentralblatt MATH
  6. J.-L. Liu and H. M. Srivastava, “Certain properties of the Dziok-Srivastava operator,” Applied Mathematics and Computation, vol. 159, no. 2, pp. 485–493, 2004. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Zentralblatt MATH · View at MathSciNet
  7. J.-L. Liu and H. M. Srivastava, “A class of multivalently analytic functions associated with the Dziok-Srivastava operator,” Integral Transforms and Special Functions, vol. 20, no. 5, pp. 401–417, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Zentralblatt MATH
  8. J. Patel, A. K. Mishra, and H. M. Srivastava, “Classes of multivalent analytic functions involving the Dziok-Srivastava operator,” Computers & Mathematics with Applications, vol. 54, no. 5, pp. 599–616, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Zentralblatt MATH · View at MathSciNet
  9. Z.-G. Wang, Y.-P. Jiang, and H. M. Srivastava, “Some subclasses of multivalent analytic functions involving the Dziok-Srivastava operator,” Integral Transforms and Special Functions, vol. 19, no. 2, pp. 129–146, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Zentralblatt MATH
  10. S. S. Miller and P. T. Mocanu, “Differential subordinations and univalent functions,” The Michigan Mathematical Journal, vol. 28, no. 2, pp. 157–172, 1981. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Zentralblatt MATH · View at MathSciNet