Table of Contents Author Guidelines Submit a Manuscript
Journal of Applied Mathematics
Volume 2012 (2012), Article ID 969425, 18 pages
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2012/969425
Research Article

Dynamic Analysis of a Predator-Prey (Pest) Model with Disease in Prey and Involving an Impulsive Control Strategy

1School of Life and Environmental Science, Wenzhou University, Zhejiang, Wenzhou 325035, China
2School of Mathematics and Information Science, Wenzhou University, Zhejiang, Wenzhou 325035, China
3Institute of Mathematics, Academia Sinica, Beijing 100080, China

Received 9 March 2012; Revised 1 May 2012; Accepted 1 May 2012

Academic Editor: Zhiwei Gao

Copyright © 2012 Min Zhao 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

The dynamic behaviors of a predator-prey (pest) model with disease in prey and involving an impulsive control strategy to release infected prey at fixed times are investigated for the purpose of integrated pest management. Mathematical theoretical works have been pursuing the investigation of the local asymptotical stability and global attractivity for the semitrivial periodic solution and population persistent, which depicts the threshold expression of some critical parameters for carrying out integrated pest management. Numerical analysis indicates that the impulsive control strategy has a strong effect on the dynamical complexity and population persistent using bifurcation diagrams and power spectra diagrams. These results show that if the release amount of infective prey can satisfy some critical conditions, then all biological populations will coexist. All these results are expected to be of use in the study of the dynamic complexity of ecosystems.

1. Introduction

Predator-prey models with disease are a major concern and are now becoming a new field of study known as ecoepidemiology. The disease factor in predator-prey systems has been firstly considered by Anderson and May [1]. In subsequent years, many authors studied the dynamics of ecological models with infected prey, and their papers mainly focused on this issue [28]. The infection rate and the predation rate are the two primary factors, which can control the chaotic dynamics of an ecoepidemiological system [9]. Das et al. [10] studied the HP model [11] by introducing disease in prey populations, which can be described as follows: 𝑑𝑠𝑠𝑑𝑡=𝑟𝑠1𝑘𝛼𝑖𝑠𝑐1𝑎1𝑝1𝑠𝑏1,+𝑠𝑑𝑖𝑑𝑡=𝛼𝑖𝑠𝑎2𝑖𝑝1𝑑1𝑖,𝑑𝑝1𝑑𝑡=𝑎1𝑝1𝑠𝑏1+𝑠+𝑐2𝑖𝑝1𝑎3𝑝1𝑝2𝑏2+𝑝1𝑑2𝑝1,𝑑𝑝2𝑑𝑡=𝑐3𝑎3𝑝1𝑝2𝑏2+𝑝1𝑑3𝑝2,(1.1) where 𝑠,𝑖,𝑝1, and 𝑝2 are respectively the susceptible prey population, infected prey population, the intermediate predator population, and the top-predator population, 𝑎1 and 𝑎2 are the maximal predation rate of intermediate predator for susceptible and infected prey, respectively, 𝑎3 is the maximal predation rate of top-predator for intermediate predator, 𝑏1 and 𝑏2 are the half saturation constant for functional response of intermediate and the top-predator respectively, 𝑐1 is the conversion rate of susceptible prey to intermediate predator, 𝑐2 is the conversion rate of infected prey to intermediate predator, and 𝑐3 is the conversion rate of intermediate predator to top predator.

Through the dimensionless transformation (seeing [10]), the system can change into the following form: 𝑑𝑥𝑝𝑑𝑡=𝑥(1𝑥)𝑎𝑖𝑠𝑏1𝑠,1+𝑐𝑠𝑑𝑖𝑑𝑡=𝑎𝑖𝑠𝑑𝑖𝑝1𝑒𝑖,𝑑𝑝1𝑝𝑑𝑡=𝑓1𝑠1+𝑐𝑠+𝑔𝑖𝑝1𝑝1𝑝21+𝑚𝑝1𝑗𝑝1,𝑑𝑝2𝑝𝑑𝑡=𝑘1𝑝21+𝑚𝑝1𝑙𝑝2.(1.2)

In recent decades, technological revolutions have recently hit the industrial world; thus, infected population can now be controlled by many methods such as spraying pesticides and vaccination. It is well known that pest management involves using pesticides and releasing natural enemies, which have been focused by many researchers [1214]. Control of an infected population can be achieved by chemical or biological control or both, which is called an impulsive control strategy in biomathematics. Systems with impulsive control strategies to describe time-varying processes are characterized by the fact that at certain moments, their states undergo abrupt change. Recently, impulsive control strategies have been recently introduced into population ecology [1518], chemotherapeutic approaches to treat disease [19], and food webs [2025].

Based on the two aspects discussed, the authors constructed a predator-prey model with disease in prey (a pest) and involving an impulsive control strategy for the purpose of integrated pest management. The impulsive control strategy was used to introduce infected prey (a pest) at a fixed time on the basis of system (1.2). The predator-prey model with disease in prey and involving an impulsive control strategy can be described by the following differential equations: 𝑑𝑥(𝑡)𝑑𝑡=𝑥(𝑡)(1𝑥(𝑡))𝑎𝑥(𝑡)𝑦(𝑡)𝑏𝑥(𝑡)𝑧(𝑡),1+𝑐𝑥(𝑡)𝑑𝑦(𝑡)𝑑𝑡=𝑎𝑥(𝑡)𝑦(𝑡)𝑑𝑦(𝑡)𝑧(𝑡)𝑒𝑦(𝑡),𝑑𝑧(𝑡)𝑑𝑡=𝑓𝑥(𝑡)𝑧(𝑡)1+𝑐𝑥(𝑡)+𝑔𝑦(𝑡)𝑧(𝑡)𝑞(𝑡)𝑧(𝑡)1+𝑚𝑧(𝑡)𝑗𝑧(𝑡),𝑑𝑞(𝑡)𝑞𝑑𝑡=𝐾(𝑡)𝑧(𝑡)1+𝑚𝑧(𝑡)𝑙𝑞(𝑡),𝑡𝑛𝑇,Δ𝑥(𝑡)=0,Δ𝑦(𝑡)=𝑝,Δ𝑧(𝑡)=0,Δ𝑞(𝑡)=0,𝑡=𝑛𝑇,(1.3) where 𝑥(𝑡),𝑦(𝑡),𝑧(𝑡), and 𝑞(𝑡) are respectively the densities of susceptible prey (a pest), infected prey (a pest), the intermediate predator (natural enemy), and the top predator at time 𝑡. Then, Δ𝑥(𝑡)=𝑥(𝑡+)𝑥(𝑡), Δ𝑦(𝑡)=𝑦(𝑡+)𝑦(𝑡), Δ𝑧(𝑡)=𝑧(𝑡+)𝑧(𝑡), and Δ𝑞(𝑡)=𝑞(𝑡+)𝑞(𝑡). We have 𝑎=𝛼𝑘𝑟𝑐,𝑏=1𝑎1𝑘𝑟𝑏1𝑘,𝑐=𝑏1𝑎,𝑑=2𝑘𝑟𝑑,𝑒=1𝑟𝑎,𝑓=1𝑘𝑏1𝑟,𝑐𝑔=2𝑎2𝑘𝑟𝑎,=3𝑘𝑏2𝑟𝑘,𝑚=𝑏1𝑑,𝑗=2𝑟𝑐,𝐾=3𝑎3𝑘𝑏2𝑟𝑑,𝑙=3𝑟,(1.4) where 𝑎1 and 𝑎2 are the maximal predation rates of the intermediate predator on susceptible and infected prey respectively; 𝑎3 is the maximal predation rate of the top predator on the intermediate predator; 𝑏1 and 𝑏2 are the half-saturation constants for functional response of the intermediate prey and the top predator respectively; 𝑐1 is the conversion rate of susceptible prey to intermediate predators; 𝑐2 and 𝑐3 are, respectively, the conversion rate of infected prey to intermediate predators and the conversion rate of the intermediate predator to the top predator; 𝑑1, 𝑑2, 𝑑3 are the death rates of infected prey, the intermediate predator, and the top predator, respectively; 𝛼 is the incidence rate; 𝑟 is the intrinsic growth rate; 𝑘 is the carrying capacity (see [10]); 𝑝>0 is the introduced amount of infective prey population at 𝑡=𝑛𝑇, 𝑛𝑁, 𝑁={0,1,2}, where 𝑇 is the period of the impulsive control. It is known that pest outbreak will cause some serious ecological and economic problems, and we can directly gather infected prey to increase the amount of infected prey and indirectly carry out integrated pest management.

The paper is organized as follows: in the next section, a mathematical analysis of the model is carried out. Section 3 describes some numerical simulations, and the last section contains a brief discussion.

2. Mathematical Analysis

Some important notations, lemmas, and definitions will be provided, which are frequently used in subsequent proofs.

Let 𝑅+=[0,+),𝑅4+={𝑋=(𝑥(𝑡),𝑦(𝑡),𝑧(𝑡),𝑞(𝑡))𝑅4|𝑋0}. Denote 𝑓=(𝑓1,𝑓2,𝑓3,𝑓4) as the map defined by the right-hand side of the first, second, third, and fourth equations of system (1.3). Let𝑉0={𝑉𝑅+×𝑅4+𝑅+}, then 𝑉 is said to belong to class 𝑉0 if(1)𝑉 is continuous on (𝑛𝑇,(𝑛+1)𝑇]×𝑅4+,𝑛𝑁, and for each 𝑋𝑅4  lim(𝑡,𝜇)(𝑛𝑇+,𝑋)𝑉(𝑡,𝜇)=𝑉(𝑛𝑇+,𝑋) exists;(2)𝑉 is locally Lipschitzian in 𝑋.

Definition 2.1 (see [26]). Let 𝑉𝑉0, and then, for (𝑛𝑇,(𝑛+1)𝑇]×𝑅4+, the upper right derivative of 𝑉(𝑡,𝑋) with respect to the impulsive differential system (1.3) can be defined as 𝐷+𝑉(𝑡,𝑋)=lim0+1sup[].𝑉(𝑡+,𝑋+𝑓(𝑡,𝑋))𝑉(𝑡,𝑋)(2.1)

The solution of system (1.3) is a piecewise continuous function 𝑋𝑅+×𝑅4+, where 𝑋(𝑡) is continuous on(𝑛𝑇,(𝑛+1)𝑇],𝑛𝑁, and 𝑋(𝑛𝑇+)=lim𝑡𝑛𝑇+𝑋(𝑇) exists. Obviously the smoothness properties of 𝑓 can guarantee the global existence and uniqueness of the solution of system (1.3); for details see [2628].

Definition 2.2 (see [21]). system (1.3) is said to be uniformly persistent if there is an 𝜔>0 (independent of the initial conditions) such that every solution (𝑥(𝑡),𝑦(𝑡),𝑧(𝑡),𝑞(𝑡)) of system (1.3) satisfies the following: lim𝑡inf𝑥(𝑡)𝜔,lim𝑡inf𝑦(𝑡)𝜔,lim𝑡inf𝑧(𝑡)𝜔,lim𝑡inf𝑞(𝑡)𝜔.(2.2)

Definition 2.3 (see [24]). System (1.3) is said to be permanent if there exists a compact region Ω0int𝑅4+ such that every solution (𝑥(𝑡),𝑦(𝑡),𝑧(𝑡),𝑞(𝑡)) of system (1.3) will eventually enter and remain in the region Ω0.

Lemma 2.4 (see [24]). Suppose that 𝑋(𝑡) is a solution of system (1.3) with 𝑋(0+)0; then 𝑋(𝑡)0 for all 𝑡0. Furthermore, 𝑋(𝑡)>0, 𝑡>0 if 𝑋(0+)>0.

Lemma 2.5. There exists a constant 𝑀 such that 𝑥(𝑡)𝑀, 𝑦(𝑡)𝑀, 𝑧(𝑡)𝑀, and 𝑞(𝑡)𝑀 for each solution 𝑋=(𝑥(𝑡),𝑦(𝑡),𝑧(𝑡),𝑞(𝑡)) of system (1.3) for all sufficiently large 𝑡. Details can be found in Theorem 2.2 of [29].

Lemma 2.6 (see [26]). Let 𝑉𝑉0, and assume that 𝐷+𝑉𝑡𝑉(𝑡,𝑋)𝑔(𝑡,𝑉(𝑡,𝑋)),𝑡𝑛𝑇,𝑡,𝑋+Φ𝑛(𝑉(𝑡,𝑋(𝑡))),𝑡=𝑛𝑇,(2.3) where 𝑔𝑅+×𝑅+𝑅 is continuous in (𝑛𝑇,(𝑛+1)𝑇] for 𝑢𝑅2+,𝑛𝑁, lim(𝑡,𝑦)(𝑛𝑇+)𝑔(𝑡,𝑣)=𝑔(𝑛𝑇+,𝑢) existing, and 𝜙𝑖𝑛(𝑖=1,2)𝑅+𝑅+ nondecreasing. Let 𝑟(𝑡) be a maximal solution of the scalar impulsive differential equation as follows: 𝑑𝑢(𝑡)𝑢𝑡𝑑𝑡=𝑔(𝑡,𝑢(𝑡)),𝑡𝑛𝑇,+=Φ𝑛𝑢0(𝑢(𝑡)),𝑡=𝑛𝑇,+=𝑢0,(2.4) existing on (0,+]. Then 𝑉(0+,𝑋0)𝑢0, implying that 𝑉(𝑡,𝑋(𝑡))𝑟(𝑡),𝑡0, where 𝑋(𝑡) is any solution of system (1.3). Note that if certain smoothness conditions on 𝑔 exist to guarantee the existence and uniqueness of solutions for (2.4), then 𝑟(𝑡) is the unique solution of (2.4).

For convenience, some basic properties of certain subsystems of system (1.3) are now provided as follows: 𝑑𝑦(𝑡)𝑦𝑡𝑑𝑡=𝑒𝑦(𝑡),𝑡𝑛𝑇,+𝑦0=𝑦(𝑡)+𝑝,𝑡=𝑛𝑇,+=𝑦0.(2.5) Therefore, the following lemma holds.

Lemma 2.7 (see [26]). For a positive periodic solution 𝑦(𝑡) of system (2.5) and the solution 𝑦(𝑡) of system (2.5) with initial value 𝑦0=𝑦(0+)0, |𝑦(𝑡)𝑦(𝑡)|0, 𝑡, where 𝑦(𝑡)=𝑝exp(𝑒(𝑡𝑛𝑇))]𝑦1exp(𝑒𝑇),𝑡(𝑛𝑇,(𝑛+1)𝑇,𝑛𝑁,0+=𝑝,𝑦01exp(𝑒𝑇)𝑦(𝑡)=+𝑝1exp(𝑒𝑇)exp(𝑒𝑇)+𝑦(𝑡).(2.6) Next, the stability of susceptible prey and of predator-eradication periodic solutions will be studied.

Theorem 2.8. The solution (0,𝑦(𝑡),0,0) is said to be locally asymptotically stable if 𝑇<(𝑝/𝑒).

Proof. The local stability of periodic solution (0,𝑦(𝑡),0,0) may be determined by considering the behavior of small-amplitude perturbations of the solution. Define 𝑥(𝑡)=𝑢(𝑡),𝑦(𝑡)=𝑣(𝑡)+𝑦(𝑡),𝑧(𝑡)=𝑤(𝑡),𝑞(𝑡)=(𝑡).(2.7) Substituting (2.7) into (1.3), a linearization of the system can be obtained as follows: 𝑑𝑢(𝑡)=𝑑𝑡1𝑎𝑦(𝑡)𝑢(𝑡),𝑑𝑣(𝑡)𝑑𝑡=𝑎𝑦(𝑡)𝑢(𝑡)𝑒𝑣(𝑡)𝑑𝑦(𝑡)𝑤(𝑡),𝑑𝑤(𝑡)=𝑑𝑡𝑔𝑦(𝑡)𝑗𝑤(𝑡),𝑑(𝑡)𝑑𝑡=𝑙(𝑡),𝑡𝑛𝑇,Δ𝑢(𝑡)=0,Δ𝑣(𝑡)=𝑝,Δ𝑤(𝑡)=0,Δ(𝑡)=0,𝑡=𝑛𝑇.(2.8) This can be rewritten as 𝑢(𝑡)𝑣(𝑡)𝑤(𝑡)(𝑡)=𝜙(𝑡)𝑢(0)𝑣(0)𝑤(0)(0),0𝑡𝑇,(2.9) where 𝜙(𝑡) satisfies 𝑑𝜙(𝑡)=𝑑𝑡1𝑎𝑦(𝑡)000𝑎𝑦(𝑡)𝑒𝑑𝑦(𝑡)000𝑔𝑦(𝑡)𝑗0000𝑙,(2.10) with 𝜙(0)=𝐼, where 𝐼 is the identity matrix, and 𝑢𝑛𝑇+𝑣𝑛𝑇+𝑤𝑛𝑇+𝑛𝑇+=1000010000100001𝑢(𝑛𝑇)𝑣(𝑛𝑇)𝑤(𝑛𝑇)(𝑛𝑇).(2.11) Hence, the stability of the periodic solution (0,𝑦(𝑡),0,0) is determined by the eigenvalues of 𝜃=1000010000100001𝜙(𝑡).(2.12) If the absolute values of all eigenvalues are less than one, the periodic solution (0,𝑦(𝑡),0,0) is locally stable. Then all eigenvalues of 𝜙 can be denoted by 𝜆1,𝜆2,𝜆3, and 𝜆4, where 𝜆1=exp𝑇0(1𝑎𝑦(𝑡))𝑑𝑡, 𝜆2=exp(𝑒𝑇)<1, 𝜆3=exp𝑇0(𝑔𝑦(𝑡)𝑗)𝑑𝑡, 𝜆4=exp(𝑙𝑇)<1.
Clearly, |𝜆3|=exp(𝑔𝑝)<1 with |𝜆1|<1 only if 𝑇<(𝑝/𝑒) according to the Floquet theory of impulsive differential equations, and the periodic solution (0,𝑦(𝑡),0,0) is locally stable. This completes the proof.

Theorem 2.9. The solution (0,𝑦(𝑡),0,0) is said to be globally attractive if 𝑔𝑀<𝑗 and 1𝑎<𝑝exp((𝑑𝑀+𝑒)𝑇).1exp((𝑑𝑀+𝑒)𝑇)(2.13)

Proof. Let 𝑉(𝑡)=𝑓𝐾𝑥(𝑡)+𝑏𝐾𝑧(𝑡)+𝑏𝑞(𝑡); then 𝑉||(1.1)=𝑓𝐾(1𝑎𝑦(𝑡))𝑥(𝑡)+𝑏𝐾(𝑔𝑦(𝑡)𝑗)𝑧(𝑡)𝑓𝐾𝑥2(𝑡)𝑏𝑙𝑞(𝑡).(2.14) By Lemma 2.5, there exists a constant 𝑀>0 such that 𝑥(𝑡)𝑀, 𝑦(𝑡)𝑀, 𝑧(𝑡)𝑀, 𝑞(𝑡)𝑀 for each solution 𝑋=(𝑥(𝑡),𝑦(𝑡),𝑧(𝑡),𝑞(𝑡)) of system (1.3) with sufficiently large 𝑡.
Then, 𝑑𝑦(𝑡)𝑉||𝑑𝑡=𝑎𝑦(𝑡)𝑥(𝑡)𝑑𝑦(𝑡)𝑧(𝑡)𝑒𝑦(𝑡)(𝑑𝑀+𝑒)𝑦(𝑡),𝑡𝑛𝑇Δ𝑦=𝑝,𝑡=𝑛𝑇(2.15)(1.1)=𝑓𝐾(1𝑎𝑦(𝑡))𝑥(𝑡)+𝑏𝐾(𝑔𝑦(𝑡)𝑗)𝑧(𝑡)𝑓𝐾𝑥2(𝑡)𝑏𝑙𝑞(𝑡)𝑓𝐾(1𝑎𝑦(𝑡))𝑥(𝑡)+𝑏𝐾(𝑔𝑀𝑗)𝑧(𝑡)𝑓𝐾𝑥(𝑡)𝑏𝑙𝑞(𝑡).(2.16) By Lemmas 2.6 and 2.7, there exists a 𝑡1>0, and an 𝜀>0 can be selected to be small enough so that 𝑦(𝑡)𝑦1(𝑡)𝜀 for all 𝑡𝑡1. By (2.15), 𝑦(𝑡)𝑦1(𝑡)𝜀=𝑝exp((𝑑𝑀+𝑒)𝑇)𝜆1exp((𝑑𝑀+𝑒)𝑇)𝜀,Δ=𝑝exp((𝑑𝑀+𝑒)𝑇)1exp((𝑑𝑀+𝑒)𝑇)𝜀.(2.17) Let 1𝑎𝜆<0 and 𝑔𝑀𝑗<0. Therefore, when 𝑡𝑡1, by (2.16), 𝑉|(1.1)<0. So 𝑉(𝑡)0 and 𝑥(𝑡)0, 𝑧(𝑡)0, 𝑞(𝑡)0 as 𝑡. It is known from the fact that the limiting state of system (1.3) is exactly system (2.5) and from Lemma 2.7 that (0,𝑦(𝑡),0,0) is globally attractive. This completes the proof.

Theorem 2.10. System (1.3) is permanent if 𝑇>𝑝/𝑒, 𝑔𝑀>𝑗, 1𝑎>𝑝exp((𝑑𝑀+𝑒)𝑇)1exp((𝑑𝑀+𝑒)𝑇),𝑏𝑙𝑀>𝑝exp((𝑎𝑀𝑒)𝑇).1exp((𝑎𝑀𝑒)𝑇)(2.18)

Proof. From Lemma 2.5, there exists a constant 𝑀>0 such that 𝑥(𝑡)𝑀, 𝑦(𝑡)𝑀, 𝑧(𝑡)𝑀, 𝑞(𝑡)𝑀 for each solution 𝑋=(𝑥(𝑡),𝑦(𝑡),𝑧(𝑡),𝑞(𝑡)) of system (1.3) with 𝑡 sufficiently large. From (2.15), it is known that 𝑦(𝑡)𝑦1(𝑡)𝜀=(𝑝exp((𝑑𝑀+𝑒)𝑇))/(1exp((𝑑𝑀+𝑒)𝑇))𝜀Δ=𝛿1 for large enough 𝑡.
Therefore, it is only necessary to find a 𝛿2 that satisfies 𝑥(𝑡)>𝛿2, 𝑧(𝑡)>𝛿2, 𝑞(𝑡)>𝛿2. This will be achieved in the following two steps.
Let 𝛿3>0,𝛿4>0,𝛾=𝑒𝑎𝛿3, and 𝑉(𝑡)=𝑓𝐾𝑥(𝑡)+𝑏𝐾𝑧(𝑡)+𝑏𝑞(𝑡).
Then 𝑉||(1.1)=𝑓𝐾(1𝑎𝑦(𝑡))𝑥(𝑡)+𝑏𝐾(𝑔𝑦(𝑡)𝑗)𝑧(𝑡)𝑓𝐾𝑥2(𝑡)𝑏𝑙𝑞(𝑡)𝑓𝐾(1𝑎𝑦(𝑡)𝑀)𝑥(𝑡)+𝑏𝐾(𝑔𝑦(𝑡)𝑗)𝑧(𝑡)𝑓𝐾𝑥(𝑡)𝑏𝑙𝑞(𝑡).(2.19) First, it will be proved that there exists a 𝑡2(0,+) such that 𝑥(𝑡2)>𝛿4, 𝑧(𝑡2)>𝛿4, and 𝑞(𝑡2)>𝛿4 because 𝑉(𝑡) is ultimately bounded.
Next, it will be proved that 𝑥(𝑡)<𝛿3, 𝑧(𝑡)<𝛿3, 𝑞(𝑡)<𝛿3 cannot hold for all 𝑡(0,+).
Otherwise, 𝑑𝑦(𝑡)𝑑𝑡=𝑎𝑦(𝑡)𝑥(𝑡)𝑑𝑦(𝑡)𝑧(𝑡)𝑒𝑦(𝑡)𝑎𝛿3𝑒𝑦(𝑡),𝑡𝑛𝑇Δ𝑦=𝑝,𝑡=𝑛𝑇.(2.20) Then let 𝑣1(𝑡) be the solution of 𝑑𝑣1(𝑡)=𝑑𝑡𝑎𝛿3𝑣𝑒1(𝑡),𝑡𝑛𝑇Δ𝑣1(𝑡)=𝑝,𝑡=𝑛𝑇.(2.21) It follows that 𝑦(𝑡)<𝑣1(𝑡) and 𝑣1(𝑡)𝑣1(𝑡)(𝑡) where 𝑣1(𝑡)=(𝑝exp(𝛾(𝑡𝑛)𝑇))/(1exp(𝛾𝑇)).
So there exists a 𝑡3>0 such that 𝑦(𝑡)<𝑣1(𝑡)<𝑣1(𝑡)+𝜀1=𝑝exp(𝛾(𝑡𝑛)𝑇)1exp(𝛾𝑇)+𝜀1<𝑝1exp(𝛾𝑇)+𝜀1.(2.22) Then 𝑉||(1.1)=𝑓𝐾(1𝑎𝑦(𝑡))𝑥(𝑡)+𝑏𝐾(𝑔𝑦(𝑡)𝑗)𝑧(𝑡)𝑓𝐾𝑥2𝑝(𝑡)𝑏𝑙𝑞(𝑡)𝑓𝐾(1𝑎𝑦(𝑡)𝑀)𝑥(𝑡)+𝑏𝐾(𝑔𝑦(𝑡)𝑗)𝑧(𝑡)𝑓𝐾𝑥(𝑡)𝑏𝑙𝑞(𝑡)𝑓𝐾1𝑎1exp(𝛾𝑇)+𝜀1𝑔𝑝𝑀𝑥(𝑡)+𝑏𝐾1exp(𝛾𝑇)+𝜀1𝑗𝑧(𝑡).(2.23) According to the above conditions, 𝑉|(1.1)>0; then 𝑉(𝑡) and 𝑥(𝑡), 𝑧(𝑡), 𝑞(𝑡) as 𝑡; however, this is a contradiction. Therefore, 𝑉(𝑡) is ultimately bounded.
Second, if 𝑥(𝑡)>𝛿3, 𝑧(𝑡)>𝛿3, 𝑞(𝑡)>𝛿3 for all 𝑡𝑡2, then the objective has been attained. To show this, let 𝑡=inf𝑡𝑡2{𝑉(𝑡)<𝛿5}, and it follows that 𝑉(𝑡)𝛿5 for 𝑡[𝑡2,𝑡) and that 𝑉(𝑡)=𝛿5. Suppose that 𝑡(𝑛1𝑇,(𝑛1+1)𝑇],𝑛1𝑁. Select 𝑛2,𝑛3𝑁 such that 𝑛2𝑇 > (ln(𝜀1/(𝑀+𝑝))/𝛾), exp(𝑛3𝛼1𝑇)exp(𝛼2(𝑛2+1)𝑇)>1, where 𝛼1𝑝=𝑓𝐾1𝑎1exp(𝛾𝑇)+𝜀1𝑝𝑀𝑥(𝑡)+𝑏𝐾𝑔1exp(𝛾𝑇)+𝜀1𝛼𝑗𝑧(𝑡)>0,2=𝑎𝑝exp((𝑎𝑀𝑒)𝑇)1exp((𝑎𝑀𝑒)𝑇)𝑥(𝑡)𝑗𝑧(𝑡)<0.(2.24) Let 𝑇2=𝑛2𝑇+𝑛3𝑇. It is claimed that there must be a 𝑡3((𝑛1+1)𝑇,(𝑛1+1)𝑇+𝑇2] such that 𝑉(𝑡)𝛿5. Otherwise, consider (2.21) with 𝑣1(𝑡+)=𝑦(𝑡+). Then 𝑣1𝑣(𝑡)=1𝑛1𝑇+1+𝑝𝑛1exp(𝛾𝑇)exp𝛾𝑡1𝑇+1+𝑣1(𝑡).(2.25) For 𝑡((𝑛+1)𝑇,(𝑛+1)𝑇], 𝑛1+1<𝑛<𝑛1+𝑛2+𝑛3+1, it can be shown that |𝑣1(𝑡)𝑣1(𝑡)|<(𝑀+𝑝)exp(𝛾𝑛1𝑇)<𝜀1, 𝑦(𝑡)𝑣1(𝑡)𝑣1(𝑡)+𝜀1 for 𝑡((𝑛1+𝑛2+1)𝑇,(𝑛1+1)𝑇+𝑇2], 𝑉||(1.1)𝑝𝑓𝐾1𝑎1exp(𝛾𝑇)+𝜀1𝑔𝑝𝑀𝑥(𝑡)+𝑏𝐾1exp(𝛾𝑇)+𝜀1𝑗𝑧(𝑡)=𝛼1>0,(2.26) and 𝑉((𝑛1+1)𝑇+𝑇2)𝑉((𝑛1+𝑛2+1)𝑇)exp(𝛼1𝑛3𝑇). For 𝑡[𝑡,(𝑛1+𝑛2+1)𝑇], it can be shown that 𝑉|(1.1)𝛼2𝑉(𝑡)>0; then, 𝑉((𝑛1+𝑛2+1)𝑇)𝑉(𝑡)exp(𝛼2(𝑛2+1)𝑇), so 𝑉((𝑛1+1)𝑇+𝑇2)𝑉(𝑡)exp(𝛼2(𝑛2+1)𝑇+𝛼1𝑛3𝑇) > 𝛿5, which is a contradiction. Therefore, there exists a 𝑡3((𝑛1+1)𝑇,(𝑛1+1)𝑇+𝑇2] such that 𝑉(𝑡)𝛿5, resulting in 𝑉(𝑡)𝑉(𝑡)exp(𝛼2(𝑛1 + 𝑛2 + 𝑛3 + 1)𝑇)Δ=𝛿6.
When 𝑡𝑡3, the same procedure can be performed. According to the above discussion, if Ω0={(𝑥(𝑡),𝑦(𝑡),𝑧(𝑡),𝑞(𝑡))𝑉(𝑡)=𝑓𝐾𝑥(𝑡)+𝑏𝐾𝑧(𝑡)+𝑏𝑙𝑞(𝑡),𝛿𝑉(𝑡)𝑀1}int𝑅3+, every solution of system (1.3) will eventually enter and remain in the region Ω0. This completes the proof.

3. Numerical Analysis

3.1. Bifurcation

To study the dynamics of system (1.3), the period 𝑇 and the impulsive control parameter 𝑝 are used as the bifurcation parameter. The bifurcation diagram provides a summary of the basic dynamic behavior of the system [30, 31].

First, the influence of the period 𝑇 is studied using the time series shown in Figure 1. The bifurcation diagrams are shown in Figures 2 and 3. Next, the influence of the impulsive control parameter 𝑝 is investigated. The bifurcation diagrams for this are shown in Figure 4.

fig1
Figure 1: Dynamics of system (1.3) with 𝑏=8, 𝑑=3, 𝑐=3, 𝑒=0.2, 𝑓=3, 𝑔=2.5, =0.3, 𝑚=1.2, 𝑗=0.2, 𝑘=0.6, 𝑙=0.008, 𝑎=3, 𝑝=1.03, 𝑇=14. Time series of (a) susceptible prey, (b) infected prey, (c) the intermediate predator, and (d) the top predator.
fig2
Figure 2: Bifurcation diagram of system (1.3) with initial conditions 𝑥(0)=0.1,𝑦(0)=0.2,𝑧(0)=0.3,𝑞(0)=0.4, 7𝑇37, 𝑏=6, 𝑑=3, 𝑐=3, 𝑒=0.2, 𝑓=2, 𝑔=2.5, =0.1, 𝑚=2; 𝑗=0.1, 𝑘=0.6, 𝑙=0.01, 𝑎=3, and 𝑝=0.6.
fig3
Figure 3: Bifurcation diagram of system (1.3) with initial conditions 𝑥(0)=0.1,𝑦(0)=0.2,𝑧(0)=0.3,𝑞(0)=0.4, 7𝑇27, 𝑏=10, 𝑑=3, 𝑐=3, 𝑒=0.5, 𝑓=5, 𝑔=2.5, =0.1, 𝑚=2; 𝑗=0.2, 𝑘=0.3, 𝑙=0.01, 𝑎=1.3, and 𝑝=0.6.
fig4
Figure 4: Bifurcation diagram of system (1.3) with initial conditions 𝑥(0)=0.1, 𝑦(0)=0.2, 𝑧(0)=0.3, 𝑞(0)=0.4, 0.1𝑝2.4, 𝑏=8, 𝑑=3, 𝑐=3, 𝑒=0.2, and 𝑓=3 s, 𝑔=2.5, =0.1, 𝑚=0.2, 𝑗=0.1, 𝑘=0.6, 𝑙=0.008, 𝑎=3, 𝑝=0.6.

To clearly see the dynamics of system (1.3), it is necessary to examine the phase diagrams at different value of the period 𝑇 and parameter 𝑝 corresponding to the bifurcation diagrams in Figures 2 and 4; the results of this analysis are shown in Figures 5 and 6.

fig5
Figure 5: Periodic and chaotic behavior corresponding to Figure 2 as shown by phase diagrams: (a) 𝑇=10, (b) 𝑇=17, (c) 𝑇=15, and (d) 𝑇=27.7.
fig6
Figure 6: Periodic and chaotic behavior corresponding to Figure 3, as shown in phase diagrams: (a) 𝑝=0.13, (b) 𝑝=0.25, (c) 𝑝=0.3, (d) 𝑝=0.35, (e) 𝑝=0.45, (f) 𝑝=0.7, (g) 𝑝=0.9, and (h) 𝑝=1.0009.

Figures 2, 3, and 4 reveal the complex dynamics of system (1.3), including period-doubling cascades, symmetry-breaking pitchfork bifurcation, chaos, and nonunique dynamics. Because every bifurcation diagram is similar, only one needs to be explained. Take Figure 4(a) as an example. When 𝑝[0,0.124], the dynamics of the system are not obvious, but with increasing 𝑝, the dynamics become more obvious. The system enters into a chaotic band with periodic windows. When 𝑝 is between 0.124 and 0.153, the chaotic behavior is intense, as can be seen in Figure 6(a). When 𝑝 moves beyond 0.153, the chaotic behavior disappears. When 𝑝[0.203,0.219], the chaotic attractor gains in strength, and the chaotic behavior appears again. When 𝑝 becomes greater than 0.219, periodic windows appear, as can be seen in Figures 6(b) and 6(c). When 𝑝 is in the interval between 0.328 and 0.35, chaotic behavior ensues, as can be seen in Figure 6(d). As the value of 𝑝 increases further, the system enters a stable state, as is shown in Figures 6(e), 6(f), and 6(g). When 𝑝 moves beyond 1.001, an unexpectedly chaotic phase appears, as is shown in Figure 6(h). It is clear that seasonal disturbances have little effect on the maximum density of all species; however, serious periodic oscillations are generated, and weak periodic solutions lose their stability and move into chaos. In summary, the key factor in the long-term dynamic behavior of system (1.3) is impulse perturbations, but seasonal disturbances can aggravate periodic oscillations and promote the emergence of chaos. Based on the above numerical simulation analysis, it is clear that impulsive control strategy has an important effect on the dynamical behaviors of the system, and weak periodic solutions lose their stability and move into chaos. In summary, the key factor in the long-term dynamic behavior of system (1.3) is impulsive control strategy, but disease disturbances can aggravate periodic oscillations and promote the emergence of chaos.

3.2. The Iargest Lyapunov Exponent

To detect whether the system exhibits chaotic behavior, one of the commonest methods is to calculate the largest Lyapunov exponent. The largest Lyapunov exponent takes into account the average exponential rates of divergence or convergence of nearby orbits in phase space [32]. A positive largest Lyapunov exponent indicates that the system is chaotic. If the largest Lyapunov exponent is negative, there must be periodic windows or a stable state. Through the largest Lyapunov exponent, it is possible to judge that at what time the system is chaotic, and at what time the system is stable. The largest Lyapunov exponents corresponding to Figures 2, 3, and 4 can be calculated and are shown in Figures 7, 8, and 9, which shows the accuracy and effectiveness of numerical simulation. Moreover, using the simulation of the largest Lyapunov exponents, the existence of chaotic behavior in system (1.3) can be further confirmed.

969425.fig.007
Figure 7: The largest Lyapunov exponents (LLE) corresponding to Figure 2.
969425.fig.008
Figure 8: The largest Lyapunov exponents (LLE) corresponding to Figure 3.
969425.fig.009
Figure 9: The largest Lyapunov exponents (LLE) corresponding to Figure 4.
3.3. Strange Attractors and Power Spectra

To understand the qualitative nature of strange attractors, power spectra are used [33]. From Section 3.2, it is known that the largest Lyapunov exponent for strange attractor (a) is 0.0413, and for strange attractor (b) is 0.124. Therefore, they are both chaotic attractors, and the exponent of (b) is larger than that of (a), which means that the chaotic dynamics of (b) are more extreme than those of (a). The power spectrum of strange attractor (a) is composed of strong broadband components and sharp peaks, as are shown in Figure 10(c). On the contrary, in the spectrum of strong chaotic attractor (b), it is difficult to distinguish any sharp peaks, as can be seen in Figure 10(d). These power spectra can be interpreted as meaning that (a) comes from a strong limit cycle, but that (b) experiences some weak limit cycles. Hence, it is obvious that the impulsive control strategy has a strong effect on the dynamical behaviors of system (1.3) with 𝑡 the period of the impulsive control 𝑇 varying but that (b) experiences some weak limit cycles.

fig10
Figure 10: Strange attractors and power spectra: (a) strange attractor when 𝑇=32, (b) strange attractor when 𝑇=21, (c) power spectrum of attractor (a), and (d) power spectrum of attractor (b).

4. Conclusions and Remarks

In the paper, the dynamic behaviors of a predator-prey (pest) model with disease in prey and involving an impulsive control strategy are presented analytically and numerically. The critical conditions are obtained to ensure the local asymptotical stability and global attractivity of semitrivial periodic solution as well as population permanence. Numerical analysis indicates that the impulsive control strategy has a strong effect on the dynamical complexity and population persistent using bifurcation diagrams and power spectra diagrams. In addition, the largest Lyapunov exponents are computed. This computation further confirms the existence of chaotic behavior and the accuracy of numerical simulation. These results revealed that the introduction of disease and the use of an impulsive control strategy can change the dynamic behaviors of the system. The same results also have been observed in continuous-time models of predator-prey or three-species food-chain models [3437] and other systems [38]. In a word, it should be stressed that the impulsive control strategy is an effective method to control complex dynamics of predator-prey (pest) model.

Acknowledgment

The authors would like to thank the editor and the anonymous referees for their valuable comments and suggestions on this paper. This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC no. 31170338 and no. 30970305) and also by the Key Program of Zhejiang Provincial Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant no. LZ12C03001).

References

  1. R. M. Anderson and R. M. May, “The invasion, persistence and spread of infectious diseases within animal and plant communities,” Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, vol. 314, no. 1167, pp. 533–570, 1986. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  2. K. P. Hadeler and H. I. Freedman, “Predator-prey populations with parasitic infection,” Journal of Mathematical Biology, vol. 27, no. 6, pp. 609–631, 1989. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Zentralblatt MATH
  3. G.-P. Hu and X.-L. Li, “Stability and Hopf bifurcation for a delayed predator-prey model with disease in the prey,” Chaos, Solitons and Fractals, vol. 45, no. 3, pp. 229–237, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  4. W. Bob, A.K. George, V Voornb, and D. Krishna, “Stabilization and complex dynamics in a predator-prey model with predator suffering from an infectious disease,” Ecological Complexity, vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 113–122, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  5. X. Niu, T. Zhang, and Z. Teng, “The asymptotic behavior of a nonautonomous eco-epidemic model with disease in the prey,” Applied Mathematical Modelling, vol. 35, no. 1, pp. 457–470, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Zentralblatt MATH
  6. E. Venturino, “Epidemics in predator-prey models: disease in the predators,” IMA Journal of Mathematics Applied in Medicine and Biology, vol. 19, no. 3, pp. 185–205, 2002. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  7. Y. Xiao and L. Chen, “Modeling and analysis of a predator-prey model with disease in the prey,” Mathematical Biosciences, vol. 171, no. 1, pp. 59–82, 2001. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Zentralblatt MATH
  8. Y. Pei, S. Li, and C. Li, “Effect of delay on a predator-prey model with parasitic infection,” Nonlinear Dynamics, vol. 63, no. 3, pp. 311–321, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  9. S. Chatterjee, M. Bandyopadhyay, and J. Chattopadhyay, “Proper predation makes the system disease free - Conclusion drawn from an eco-epidemiological model,” Journal of Biological Systems, vol. 14, no. 4, pp. 599–616, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  10. K. P. Das, S. Chatterjee, and J. Chattopadhyay, “Disease in prey population and body size of intermediate predator reduce the prevalence of chaos-conclusion drawn from Hastings-Powell model,” Ecological Complexity, vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 363–374, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  11. A. Hastings and T. Powell, “Chaos in a three-species food chain,” Ecology, vol. 72, no. 3, pp. 896–903, 1991. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  12. X. Liu and L. Chen, “Complex dynamics of Holling type II Lotka-Volterra predator-prey system with impulsive perturbations on the predator,” Chaos, Solitons and Fractals, vol. 16, no. 2, pp. 311–320, 2003. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Zentralblatt MATH
  13. R. Shi, X. Jiang, and L. Chen, “A predator-prey model with disease in the prey and two impulses for integrated pest management,” Applied Mathematical Modelling, vol. 33, no. 5, pp. 2248–2256, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Zentralblatt MATH
  14. H. Liu, H. Xu, J. Yu, and G. Zhu, “Stability on coupling SIR epidemic model with vaccination,” Journal of Applied Mathematics, no. 4, pp. 301–319, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  15. G. Ballinger and X. Liu, “Permanence of population growth models with impulsive effects,” Mathematical and Computer Modelling, vol. 26, no. 12, pp. 59–72, 1997. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Zentralblatt MATH
  16. L. Dong, L. Chen, and L. Sun, “Optimal harvesting policies for periodic Gompertz systems,” Nonlinear Analysis, vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 572–578, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Zentralblatt MATH
  17. X. Song and Y. Li, “Dynamic behaviors of the periodic predator-prey model with modified Leslie-Gower Holling-type II schemes and impulsive effect,” Nonlinear Analysis, vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 64–79, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Zentralblatt MATH
  18. X. Liu and L. Chen, “Complex dynamics of Holling type II Lotka-Volterra predator-prey system with impulsive perturbations on the predator,” Chaos, Solitons and Fractals, vol. 16, no. 2, pp. 311–320, 2003. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Zentralblatt MATH
  19. A. Lakmeche and O. Arino, “Bifurcation of non trivial periodic solutions of impulsive differential equations arising chemotherapeutic treatment,” Dynamics of Continuous, Discrete and Impulsive Systems, vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 265–287, 2000. View at Google Scholar · View at Zentralblatt MATH
  20. H. Yu, S. Zhong, R. P. Agarwal, and S. K. Sen, “Three-species food web model with impulsive control strategy and chaos,” Communications in Nonlinear Science and Numerical Simulation, vol. 16, no. 2, pp. 1002–1013, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Zentralblatt MATH
  21. H. Yu and M. Zhao, “Seasonally perturbed prey-predator ecological system with the beddington-deangelis functional response,” Discrete Dynamics in Nature and Society, vol. 2012, Article ID 150359, 12 pages, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  22. M. Zhao, X. Wang, H. Yu, and J. Zhu, “Dynamics of an ecological model with impulsive control strategy and distributed time delay,” Mathematics and Computers in Simulation, vol. 82, no. 8, pp. 1432–1444, 2012. View at Google Scholar
  23. Y. Wang and M. Zhao, “Dynamic analysis of an impulsively controlled predator-prey model with holling type iv functional response,” Discrete Dynamics in Nature and Society, vol. 2012, Article ID 141272, 18 pages, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  24. J. Yang and M. Zhao, “Complex behavior in a fish algae consumption model with impulsive control strategy,” Discrete Dynamics in Nature and Society. An International Multidisciplinary Research and Review Journal, vol. 2011, Article ID 163541, 17 pages, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Zentralblatt MATH
  25. J. Yang and M. Zhao, “A mathematical model for the dynamics of a fish algae consumption model with impulsive control strategy,” Journal of Applied Mathematics, vol. 2012, Article ID 452789, 17 pages, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  26. V. Lakshmikantham, D. D. Baĭnov, and P. S. Simeonov, Theory of Impulsive Differential Equations, vol. 6 of Series in Modern Applied Mathematics, World Scientific Publishing, Singapore, 1989.
  27. V. Lakshmikantham, D.D. Bainov, and P.S. Simeonov, Impulsive Differential Equations: Periodic Solutions and Applications, Pitman Monographs and Surveys in Pure and Applied Mathematics, 1993.
  28. K. E. Brenan, S. L. Campbell, and L. R. Petzold, Numerical Solution of Initial-Value Problems in Differential-Algebraic Equations, vol. 14 of Classics in Applied Mathematics, SIAM, Philadelphia, Pa, USA, 1996.
  29. H. Yu, S. Zhong, and R. P. Agarwal, “Mathematics analysis and chaos in an ecological model with an impulsive control strategy,” Communications in Nonlinear Science and Numerical Simulation, vol. 16, no. 2, pp. 776–786, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Zentralblatt MATH
  30. Z. W. Gao and D. W. C. Ho, “On state-space realization of Bezout factorizations in singular systems,” Dynamics of Continuous, Discrete & Impulsive Systems, vol. 13, no. 3-4, pp. 387–410, 2006. View at Google Scholar · View at Zentralblatt MATH
  31. H. Yu, M. Zhao, S. Lv, and L. Zhu, “Dynamic complexities in a parasitoid-host-parasitoid ecological model,” Chaos, Solitons and Fractals, vol. 39, no. 1, pp. 39–48, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  32. F. Grond, H. H. Diebner, S. Sahle, A. Mathias, S. Fischer, and O. E. Rossler, “A robust, locally interpretable algorithm for Lyapunov exponents,” Chaos, Solitons and Fractals, vol. 16, no. 5, pp. 841–852, 2003. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  33. C. Masoller, A. C. S. Schifino, and L. Romanelli, “Characterization of strange attractors of lorenz model of general circulation of the atmosphere,” Chaos, Solitons and Fractals, vol. 6, no. C, pp. 357–366, 1995. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  34. S. Lv and M. Zhao, “The dynamic complexity of a three species food chain model,” Chaos, Solitons and Fractals, vol. 37, no. 5, pp. 1469–1480, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Zentralblatt MATH
  35. M. Zhao and S. Lv, “Chaos in a three-species food chain model with a Beddington-DeAngelis functional response,” Chaos, Solitons and Fractals, vol. 40, no. 5, pp. 2305–2316, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Zentralblatt MATH
  36. S. Lv and M. Zhao, “The dynamic complexity of a host-parasitoid model with a lower bound for the host,” Chaos, Solitons and Fractals, vol. 36, no. 4, pp. 911–919, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  37. M. Zhao, H. Yu, and J. Zhu, “Effects of a population floor on the persistence of chaos in a mutual interference host-parasitoid model,” Chaos, Solitons and Fractals, vol. 42, no. 2, pp. 1245–1250, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  38. Z. Gao and S. X. Ding, “Actuator fault robust estimation and fault-tolerant control for a class of nonlinear descriptor systems,” Automatica, vol. 43, no. 5, pp. 912–920, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Zentralblatt MATH