
Citation: Bruno Buonomo, Giuseppe Carbone, Alberto d'Onofrio. Effect of seasonality on the dynamics of an imitation-based vaccination model with public health intervention[J]. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2018, 15(1): 299-321. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2018013
[1] | Jinhu Xu, Yicang Zhou . Bifurcation analysis of HIV-1 infection model with cell-to-cell transmission and immune response delay. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2016, 13(2): 343-367. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2015006 |
[2] | Yu Yang, Gang Huang, Yueping Dong . Stability and Hopf bifurcation of an HIV infection model with two time delays. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2023, 20(2): 1938-1959. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2023089 |
[3] | Shunyi Li . Hopf bifurcation, stability switches and chaos in a prey-predator system with three stage structure and two time delays. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2019, 16(6): 6934-6961. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2019348 |
[4] | Dan Liu, Shigui Ruan, Deming Zhu . Stable periodic oscillations in a two-stage cancer model of tumor and immune system interactions. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2012, 9(2): 347-368. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2012.9.347 |
[5] | Jiawei Deng, Ping Jiang, Hongying Shu . Viral infection dynamics with mitosis, intracellular delays and immune response. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2023, 20(2): 2937-2963. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2023139 |
[6] | Kaushik Dehingia, Anusmita Das, Evren Hincal, Kamyar Hosseini, Sayed M. El Din . Within-host delay differential model for SARS-CoV-2 kinetics with saturated antiviral responses. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2023, 20(11): 20025-20049. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2023887 |
[7] | Yan Wang, Minmin Lu, Daqing Jiang . Viral dynamics of a latent HIV infection model with Beddington-DeAngelis incidence function, B-cell immune response and multiple delays. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2021, 18(1): 274-299. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2021014 |
[8] | Wanxiao Xu, Ping Jiang, Hongying Shu, Shanshan Tong . Modeling the fear effect in the predator-prey dynamics with an age structure in the predators. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2023, 20(7): 12625-12648. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2023562 |
[9] | Huan Kong, Guohong Zhang, Kaifa Wang . Stability and Hopf bifurcation in a virus model with self-proliferation and delayed activation of immune cells. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2020, 17(5): 4384-4405. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2020242 |
[10] | Juan Wang, Chunyang Qin, Yuming Chen, Xia Wang . Hopf bifurcation in a CTL-inclusive HIV-1 infection model with two time delays. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2019, 16(4): 2587-2612. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2019130 |
According to clinical data, drug treatment against persistent human infections sometimes fails to consistently eradicate the infection from the host [1,2,3], such as human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), hepatitis B virus (HBV), and hepatitis C virus (HCV). For all these viruses, drug treatment is not effective, and for HIV, lifelong therapy is commonly required to control viral replication [4,5]. The main reason is that these viruses are able to suppress and impair immune responses, resulting in persistent infection [6,7]. An alternative strategy is to use drug therapies to boost virus-specific immune response and then induce sustained viral suppression in the absence of drugs. Antiviral therapy aimed at boosting specific immune responses has attracted more and more attentions recently. In 2003, Komarova et al. [6] used mathematical models to study immune response dynamics during therapy in the context of immunosuppressive infections. They showed that a single phase of antiviral drug therapy is also possible to establish sustained immunity. They assumed that the degree of immune expansion depends on virus load and the response inhibits virus growth. This assumption is natural for any branch of the adaptive immune system, such as CD4 T cells, CD8 T cells, or antibodies. Denote by y(t) and z(t), respectively, the virus population and immune cell population at time t. Komarova et al. [6] proposed the following system of ordinary differential equations:
y′(t)=ry(t)(1−y(t)K)−py(t)z(t)−by(t),z′(t)=cy(t)z(t)1+dy(t)−qy(t)z(t)−μz(t). | (1.1) |
The virus population grows at a rate described by the logistic function. The viral replication rate is a linear decreasing function of viral loads with a maximum value of r and it vanishes at a viral load K. The treatment is modeled as a reduction in r. Immune cells kill virus at a rate pyz. b and μ are the natural decay rates of viral particles and immune cells, respectively. Immune expansion is modeled by the growth function cyz1+dy. When the virus load is low, the level of immune response is simply proportional to both the viral load and the immune cells. The immune response saturates when the virus load is sufficiently high. Immune cells are inhibited by the virus at a rate qyz. Komarova et al. presented a simple relationship between the timing of therapy and efficacy of the drugs. In the presence of strong viral suppression, they showed that therapy should be stopped relatively early because a longer duration of treatment may lead to a failure. On the other hand, in the presence of weaker viral suppression, stopping treatment too early is detrimental, and therapy has to be continued beyond a time threshold. Essentially, model (1.1) has two stable equilibria: a virus dominant equilibrium with no sustained immunity and an immune control equilibrium with sustained immunity. This bistability allows a solution from the basin of the attraction of the virus dominant equilibrium to be lifted to that of the immune control equilibrium via a single phase of therapy.
Model (1.1) assumes that the immune response is instantaneous. Nevertheless, it has been established that the immune response process involves a sequence of events such as antigenic activation, selection, and proliferation of the immune cells [8]. Moreover, oscillatory viral loads and immune cells were observed from clinical data [9], while the oscillatory behavior is not exhibited in model (1.1). A natural question is what is the cause of the oscillations. In 2014, Shu et al. [10] incorporated the time lag during the immune response process into model (1.1). By studying the dynamics between an immunosuppressive infection and antiviral immune response, they demonstrated that the time lag is the main factor causing oscillations. Here, τ is denoted as the time lag for the immune system to trigger a sequence of events. The activation rate of immune cells at time t depends on the virus load and the number of immune cells at time t−τ. The above assumptions lead to the following system:
y′(t)=ry(t)(1−y(t)K)−py(t)z(t)−by(t),z′(t)=cy(t−τ)z(t−τ)1+dy(t−τ)−qy(t)z(t)−μz(t). | (1.2) |
It was shown that the delayed antiviral immune response may induce sustained periodic oscillations, transient oscillations and even sustained aperiodic oscillations (chaos), and the model can admit two stable equilibria and can also allow a stable equilibrium to coexist with a stable periodic solution.
In the aforementioned work, the mortality of the population during the time lag has been ignored. Consideration of the survival probability during the time lag requires an additional delay-dependent multiplier in the nonlinear delayed feedback term. The death of the free viral particles depends on the mature immune cells instead of all the newly generated immune cells. We denote z(t) as the population of mature immune cells at time t, and consider the following delay differential equation with a delay-dependent coefficient:
y′(t)=f(y(t))−py(t)z(t)−by(t),z′(t)=e−δτh(y(t−τ))z(t−τ)−qy(t)z(t)−μz(t). | (1.3) |
Here, f(y) describes the virus population growth function; δ>0 is the death rate of the immature immune cells during the time lag; e−δτ represents the survival probability of the immature immune cells surviving τ time units before becoming mature; h(y)z denotes the immune cell growth function; the other parameters have the same meaning as in model (1.2). In addition to more general virus and immune cell growth functions, model (1.3) differs from model (1.2) in the sense that it introduces an additional delay-dependent survival probability e−δτ. As we shall see later, this quantity will make a significant difference in the bifurcation analysis. For instance, model (1.3) does not possess any positive equilibrium for sufficiently large τ and its global Hopf branches always have bounded τ components. However, for model (1.2), the existence condition of positive equilibrium is independent of τ and the global Hopf branches always have unbounded τ components. Furthermore, there exists only one stability switch of positive equilibrium for model (1.2), but the stability of positive equilibrium for our model (1.3) may switch multiple times.
Actually, the model (1.3) can be derived from a stage structured population model for u(t,a) as below
y′(t)=f(y(t))−py(t)z(t)−by(t),∂tu(t,a)+∂au(t,a)=−(μ(a)+q(a)y(t))u(t,a), |
with the stage-specific decay rate of immune cells, μ(a), inhibition rate of immune cells, q(a),
μ(a)={μ,a≥τ,δ,a<τ, q(a)={q,a≥τ,0,a<τ, |
where u(t,a) is the population of immune cells at age a and time t. Note that the population of mature immune cells is z(t)=∫∞τu(t,a)da. We integrate along characteristic lines to find
z′(t)=u(t,τ)−u(t,∞)−qy(t)z(t)−μz(t)=u(t−τ,0)e−δτ−u(t,∞)−qy(t)z(t)−μz(t). |
Note that u(t,∞)=0 and u(t−τ,0)=h(y(t−τ))z(t−τ). The equation for z(t) follows.
Throughout this paper, we assume that the virus population growth function f(y) and the immune expansion rate h(y) satisfy the following conditions:
(H1) f(y) is continuously differentiable, f(0)=0 and f′(0)>b; there exists ˉy>0 such that f(ˉy)=0, and (y−ˉy)f(y)<0 for positive y≠ˉy; f″(y)<0 for y∈[0,ˉy].
(H2) h(y) is continuously differentiable, h(0)=0 and h′(0)>q; h′(y)>0 and h″(y)<0 for all y≥0.
The assumptions (H1)-(H2) are biological conditions for infection dynamics. For instance, f(0)=0 means no new infection in the absence of virus; f′(0)>b indicates that the intrinsic growth rate is greater than the decay rate. Similarly, h(0)=0 implies that immune cells cannot reproduce without the presence of virus; h′(0)>q guarantees that the initial expansion rate is greater than the inhibition rate.
The rest of this paper is organized as follows. We first present some preliminary results concerning the well-posedness of model (1.3), and describe global dynamics of the ordinary differential equation system (2.4) in Section 2. Local and global stability analysis of equilibria as well as local and global Hopf bifurcation analysis are given in Section 3. In Section 4, numerical simulations based on the bifurcation analysis are reported and discussed. Finally, we give a brief summary in Section 5.
To establish the well-posedness of model (1.3), we choose the phase space C×C, where C is the Banach space of continuous functions on [−τ,0] defined by C:={ϕ:[−τ,0]→R is continuous}, and the norm is defined by ‖ϕ‖=sup. The nonnegative cone of \mathcal{C} is denoted by \mathcal{C^{+}} . As usual, \phi_t\in\mathcal{C} is defined by \phi_t(\theta) = \phi(t+\theta) for \theta\in[-\tau, 0] . For biological applications, the initial condition of (1.3) is given as
(y_0,z_0)\in X: = \mathcal{C}^{+}\times\mathcal{C}^{+}. |
The existence and uniqueness of the solution of model (1.3) follows from the standard theory of functional differential equations [11]. Using the same manner as in proving [12,Proposition 2.1], we can easily show that the solution of (1.3) with initial conditions in X is nonnegative, which implies that X is positively invariant under the solution map of (1.3).
Next, we shall prove that all solutions of (1.3) are ultimately bounded. It follows from the first equation in (1.3) that y'(t)\leq f(y) , which yields \limsup\limits_{t\rightarrow\infty}y(t)\leq\bar y . By the nonnegativity of the solution of (1.3) and (\textbf{H}_{1}) - (\textbf{H}_{2}) , we obtain
\begin{aligned} \left(y(t)+\frac{p}{h'(0)}z(t+\tau)\right)'&\leq M_f+\left(e^{-\delta\tau}{h(y)\over h'(0)y}-1\right)py(t)z(t)-by(t)-\frac{\mu p}{h'(0)}z(t+\tau)\\ &\leq M_f-\gamma (y(t)+\frac{p}{h'(0)}z(t+\tau)), \end{aligned} |
where M_f = \max\limits_{y\geq0}f(y) and \gamma = \min\{b, \mu\} . Thus,
\limsup\limits_{t\rightarrow\infty}\left(y(t)+\frac{p}{h'(0)}z(t+\tau)\right)\leq {M_f\over \gamma}, |
which implies that y(t) and z(t) are ultimately bounded in X . To summarize, we obtain the following proposition.
Proposition 2.1. The solutions of model (1.3) with the initial conditions in X are nonnegative, and the region
\Gamma = \left\{(\phi, \psi)\in X: \|\phi\|\leq \bar{y}, \ \phi(-\tau)+{p\over h'(0)}\psi(0)\leq {M_f\over \gamma}\right\} |
is positively invariant and absorbing in X ; namely, all solutions ultimately enter \Gamma .
Clearly, model (1.3) always has a trivial equilibrium E_0 = (0, 0) . Since f'(0) > b , there also exists a boundary equilibrium E_b = (\tilde{y}, 0) , where \tilde{y} is the unique positive root of f(y) = by . We call E_b the virus dominant equilibrium (VDE). Assume that E^* = (y^*, z^*) is a positive equilibrium with y^* > 0 and z^* > 0 , then it must satisfy the following equilibrium equations
\begin{equation} e^{-\delta\tau}h(y^*) = qy^*+\mu, \ \ z^* = {f(y^*)-b y^* \over py^*}. \end{equation} | (2.1) |
Obviously, z^* > 0 if and only if y^* < \tilde{y} . Hence, E^* exists if and only if y^* is a positive root of
\begin{equation} {h(y)\over y+\mu/q} = qe^{\delta\tau} \end{equation} | (2.2) |
with y^* < \tilde{y} . It is easily to calculate that \text{sign}\left({h(y)\over y+\mu/q}\right)' = \text{sign} \ g(y) , where g(y) = h'(y)(y+{\mu\over q})-h(y) . Note that g(0) > 0, g(\infty) < 0 and g'(y) = h''(y)(y+\mu/q) < 0 . There exists a unique y_c > 0 such that g(y_c) = 0 , and (y-y_c)g(y) < 0 for y\neq y_c . Therefore, {h(y)\over y+\mu/q} is strictly increasing on [0, y_c) , and strictly decreasing on (y_c, \infty) . We denote
\begin{equation} s: = {h(y_c)\over y_c+\mu/q} = \sup\limits_{y\geq0}{h(y)\over y+\mu/q}. \end{equation} | (2.3) |
If s < qe^{\delta\tau} , (2.2) has no positive root. If s\ge qe^{\delta\tau} , (2.2) has exactly two positive roots (counting multiplicity) y_1^* and y_2^* such that y_1^*\le y_c\le y_2^* . These two roots coincide (i.e., y_1^* = y_2^* = y_c ) if and only if s = qe^{\delta\tau} . Throughout this paper, we make the following assumption to ensure the existence of positive roots for (2.2).
(H3) s > q and \tau\le\tau_{max} , where \tau_{max} = \frac{1}{\delta}\ln\frac s q .
If ( \textbf{H}_{3} ) is violated, there does not exist any positive equilibrium for our model and the boundary equilibrium is locally asymptotically stable. Summarizing the above analysis, we obtain the following result.
Proposition 2.2. Assume that (H1)-(H3) are satisfied.
(i) If y_1^*\geq \tilde{y} holds, then there are two equilibria: E_{0} = (0, 0) and E_{b} = (\tilde{y}, 0) .
(ii) If y_1^* < \tilde{y}\leq y_2^* \ \mathit{\text{or}} \ \ y_1^* = y_2^* < \tilde{y} holds, then there are three equilibria: E_{0}, E_{b} and E_1^* = (y_1^*, z_1^*) .
(iii) If y_1^* < y_2^* < \tilde{y} holds, then there are four equilibria: E_{0}, E_b, E_1^* and E_2^* = (y_2^*, z_2^*).
When \tau = 0 , model (1.3) reduces to an ODE system which generalizes (1.1)
\begin{equation} \begin{aligned} y'(t) = & f(y(t))-py(t)z(t)-by(t),\\ z'(t) = & h(y(t))z(t)-q y(t)z(t)-\mu z(t). \end{aligned} \end{equation} | (2.4) |
We next provide a complete description about its global dynamics.
Lemma 2.3. System (2.4) has no closed orbits.
Proof. Using an argument similar to Proposition 2.1, we can show that
\Gamma_0 = \left\{(\phi, \psi)\in \mathbb{R}_+^2: \phi\leq \bar{y}, \ \phi+{p\over h'(0)}\psi\leq {M_f\over \gamma}\right\} |
is positively invariant and absorbing in \mathbb{R}_+^2 . Thus, it suffices to show that System (2.4) has no closed orbits in \Gamma_0 .
Let (P(y, z), Q(y, z)) denote the vector field of (2.4), then we have
\frac{\partial(BP)}{\partial y}+\frac{\partial(BQ)}{\partial z} = \frac{1}{z(t)}(\frac{f(y)}{y})', \ \ \text{where} \ \ B(y, z) = {1\over yz}. |
Note that ( \textbf{H}_{1} ) implied that (\frac{f(y)}{y})' < 0 for all y\leq \bar y . Thus, \frac{\partial(BP)}{\partial y}+\frac{\partial(BQ)}{\partial z} < 0 in \Gamma_0 . The nonexistence of closed orbits for (2.4) follows from the classical Dulac-Bendixson criterion. This ends the proof.
We linearize system (2.4) at E_0 = (0, 0) and calculate that the two eigenvalues are f'(0)-b > 0 and -\mu < 0 . Thus, E_0 is a saddle point. For the linearized system at E_b = (\tilde{y}, 0) , the two eigenvalues are
\lambda_1 = f'(\tilde{y})-b \lt 0 \ \ \text{and} \ \ \lambda_2 = h(\tilde{y})-q\tilde{y}-\mu. |
From the proof of Proposition 2.2, we know h(\tilde{y})-q\tilde{y}-\mu < 0 if \tilde{y} < y_1^* or \tilde{y} > y_2^* , and h(\tilde{y})-q\tilde{y}-\mu > 0 provided that y_1^* < \tilde{y} < y_2^* . This shows that E_b is stable if y_1^* > \tilde{y} or y_2^* < \tilde{y} , and E_b is a saddle point if y_1^* < \tilde{y} < y_2^* . For the linearized system at E_1^* = (y_1^*, z_1^*) , the associated characteristic equation is
\lambda^2+(-f'(y_1^*)+pz_1^*+b)\lambda+py_1^*z_1^*(h'(y_1^*)-q) = 0. |
It follows from (2.1) and ( \textbf{H}_{1} ) that -f'(y_1^*)+pz_1^*+b = -f'(y_1^*)+f(y_1^*)/y_1^* > 0. This, together with h'(y_1^*)-q > 0 , implies that all eigenvalues must have negative real parts, and hence E_1^* is asymptotically stable. At E_2^* = (y_2^*, z_2^*) , the two eigenvalues \lambda_1 and \lambda_2 satisfy
\lambda_1+\lambda_2 = f'(y_2^*)-{f(y_2^*)\over y_2^*} \lt 0, \ \ \lambda_1\lambda_2 = py_2^*z_2^*(h'(y_2^*)-q) \lt 0. |
This implies that one eigenvalue must be positive and the other negative. Thus, E_2^* is a saddle point whenever it exists. Summarizing the above analysis, we obtain the following global stability results on model (2.4).
Theorem 2.4. Assume that ( \textbf{H}_{1} )-( \textbf{H}_{2} ) are satisfied and s > q .
(i) If y_1^* > \tilde{y} holds, then E_0 is a saddle point and E_b attracts all solutions with initial conditions in \{(y(t), z(t))\in \mathbb{R}_+^2: y(0) > 0, z(0)\geq0\} .
(ii) If y_1^* < \tilde{y} < y_2^* holds, then both E_0 and E_b are saddle points and E_1^* attracts all solutions with initial conditions in \{(y(t), z(t))\in \mathbb{R}_+^2: y(0) > 0, z(0) > 0\} .
(iii) If y_1^* < y_2^* < \tilde{y} holds, then both E_0 and E_2^* are saddle points, and for any initial condition (y(0), z(0)) with y(0) > 0 , the solution of (2.4) approaches either E_b or E_1^* , the stable manifold of E_2^* separate the basins of attraction of E_b and E_1^* .
In this section, we study the dynamics of model (1.3) with \tau > 0 .
By linearizing (1.3) at E_0 = (0, 0) , we find two eigenvalues f'(0)-b > 0 and -\mu < 0 . Hence, E_0 is a saddle point. The characteristic equation associated with the linearization of model (1.3) at E_b is
(\lambda-f'(\tilde{y})+b)\left(\lambda+q\tilde{y}+\mu-e^{-\delta\tau}h(\tilde{y})e^{-\lambda\tau}\right) = 0. |
One eigenvalue is \lambda_{1} = f'(\tilde{y})-b < 0 . Hence E_b is locally asymptotically stable if all zeros of
\Delta_b(\lambda) = \lambda+q\tilde{y}+\mu-e^{-\delta\tau}h(\tilde{y})e^{-\lambda\tau} |
have negative real parts. By [13,Lemma 6], there exists at least one positive eigenvalue if q\tilde{y}+\mu < e^{-\delta\tau}h(\tilde{y}) , or equivalently, y_1^* < \tilde{y} < y_2^* . On the other hand, if q\tilde{y}+\mu > e^{-\delta\tau}h(\tilde{y}) , that is, either \tilde{y} < y_1^* or \tilde{y} > y_2^* , then all eigenvalues have negative real parts. For the critical case q\tilde{y}+\mu = e^{-\delta\tau}h(\tilde{y}) ; namely, either \tilde{y} = y_1^* or \tilde{y} = y_2^* , one eigenvalue is 0 , and all other eigenvalues have negative real parts. By using the method of normal forms, we obtain that E_b is locally asymptotically stable. To summarize, we have the following result on the local stability of E_0 and E_b .
Theorem 3.1. Consider model (1.3) under the assumptions ( \textbf{H}_{1} )-( \textbf{H}_{3} ). E_0 is a saddle point. If either \tilde{y}\le y_1^* or \tilde{y}\ge y_2^* , then E_b is locally asymptotically stable; while E_b is unstable if y_1^* < \tilde{y} < y_2^* .
To establish the global stability of E_b , we first show that the infection is persistent.
Lemma 3.2. \liminf\limits_{t\rightarrow\infty}y(t) > 0 for any solution of (1.3) with the initial condition in X_1 = \{(\phi, \psi)\in X: \phi(0) > 0, \psi(0)\geq0\} .
Proof. We claim that \limsup\limits_{t\rightarrow\infty}y(t) > 0 . If not, then y(t)\to0 as t\to\infty . It then follows from (1.3) that z(t)\to0 as t\to\infty . This contradicts to the fact that E_0 is unstable. Thus, y(t) is weakly persistent. By using [14,Theorem 3.4.6] and Proposition 2.1, there exists a global attractor for the solution semiflow of (1.3). This, together with [15,Theorem 2.3], implies that y(t) is actually strongly persistent; that is, \liminf\limits_{t\rightarrow\infty}y(t) > 0 .
Our next result is concerned with global stability of E_b .
Theorem 3.3. Assume that ( \textbf{H}_{1} )-( \textbf{H}_{3} ) hold. Then E_b of model (1.3) is globally asymptotically stable in the region X_1 provided that \tau\geq\tau_b , where \tau_b: = {1\over \delta}\ln{h'(0)\tilde{y}\over q\tilde{y}+\mu} . Moreover, the condition \tau\geq\tau_b implies that \tilde{y}\leq y_1^* .
Proof. By Proposition 2.1 and Theorem 3.1, it suffices to show that E_b is globally attractive in X_1\cap\Gamma , which is a positively invariant set of (1.3). Let (y(t), z(t)) be a solution of (1.3) with the initial condition in X_1 , it follows from Lemma 3.2 that y(t) > 0 for t > 0 . Motivated by the earlier work in [16], we construct a Lyapunov functional L: X_1\cap\Gamma\rightarrow\mathbb{R} by
L(y_t,z_t) = y_t(0)-\tilde{y}\ln(y_t(0))+cz_t(0)+ce^{-\delta\tau}\int^{0}_{-\tau}h(y_{t}(\theta))z_{t}(\theta)d\theta, |
where c is a constant to be determined later. Calculating the time derivative of L along the solution, and using b = f(\tilde{y})/\tilde{y} , h(y)\leq h'(0)y for all y\geq0 , we obtain
\begin{aligned} {dL\over dt} = &\frac{f(y)}{y}(y-\tilde{y})-b(y-\tilde{y})+(p\tilde{y}-c\mu)z+ce^{-\delta\tau}h(y)z-(cq+p)yz, \\ \leq&(\frac{f(y)}{y}-\frac{f(\tilde{y})}{\tilde{y}})(y-\tilde{y})+(p\tilde{y}-c\mu)z+(ce^{-\delta\tau}h'(0)-cq-p)yz. \end{aligned} |
Assumption ( \textbf{H}_{1} ) implies that (\frac{f(y)}{y}-\frac{f(\tilde{y})}{\tilde{y}})(y-\tilde{y})\leq0 for all y\leq\bar y . Since h'(0)e^{-\delta\tau}-q > 0 , the condition \tau\geq\tau_b is the same as {p\tilde y\over\mu}\leq {p\over e^{-\delta\tau}h'(0)-q} . We may choose a constant c\in[{p\tilde y\over\mu}, {p\over e^{-\delta\tau}h'(0)-q}] such that dL/dt\leq0 . Moreover, dL/dt = 0 if and only if y(t) = \tilde y and z(t) = 0 . Thus the maximal compact invariant set in \{dL/dt = 0\} is the singleton \{E_b\} . By the LaSalle invariance principle [11], E_b is globally attractive in X_1\cap\Gamma . Since X_1\cap\Gamma is absorbing in X_1 , we conclude that E_b is globally attractive in X_1 . By Theorem 3.2, E_b is globally asymptotically stable in X_1 if \tau\geq\tau_b .
If \tau\geq\tau_b , then e^{-\delta\tau}h'(0)\tilde y-q\tilde y-\mu\leq0 = e^{-\delta\tau}h(y_1^*)-qy_1^*-\mu \le e^{-\delta\tau}h'(0)y_1^*-qy_1^*-\mu . Since e^{-\delta\tau}h'(0) > q , we obtain \tilde y\le y_1^* .
Here, we remark that if y_1^* = y_2^* < \tilde{y} , then two positive equilibria E_1^* and E_2^* coincide, and E_b is locally asymptotically stable.
In this subsection, we investigate the stability of E_1^* and identify parameter regions in which the time delay can destabilize E_1^* , lead to Hopf bifurcation and induce sustained oscillations.
The characteristic equation associated with the linearization of system (1.3) at equilibrium E_i^* \ (i = 1, 2) is
\begin{equation} \Delta_i(\lambda) = \lambda^{2}+a_{1,i}\lambda+a_{0,i}+(b_{1,i}\lambda+b_{0,i})e^{-\lambda\tau} = 0, \end{equation} | (3.1) |
where
\begin{aligned} a_{0,i} & = ({f(y_{i}^{*})\over y_{i}^{*}}-f'(y_{i}^{*}))h(y_{i}^{*})e^{-\delta\tau}-pqy_{i}^{*}z_{i}^{*}, \ \ a_{1,i} = {f(y_{i}^{*})\over y_{i}^{*}}-f'(y_{i}^{*})+h(y_{i}^{*})e^{-\delta\tau} \gt 0,\\ b_{0,i} & = (f'(y_{i}^{*})-{f(y_{i}^{*})\over y_{i}^{*}})h(y_{i}^{*})e^{-\delta\tau}+py_{i}^{*}z_{i}^{*}h'(y_{i}^{*})e^{-\delta\tau}, \ \ b_{1,i} = -h(y_{i}^{*})e^{-\delta\tau} \lt 0. \end{aligned} |
We first investigate the stability of E_1^* , regarding \tau as the bifurcation parameter. In the proof of Theorem 2.4, we have demonstrated that, when \tau = 0 , all eigenvalues of (3.1) with i = 1 lie to the left of the imaginary axis and E_1^* is locally asymptotically stable. As \tau increases, E_1^* may lose its stability only when some eigenvalues cross the imaginary axis to the right. In view of
a_{0,1}+b_{0,1} = p y_{1}^{*}z_{1}^{*}(h'(y_{1}^{*})e^{-\delta\tau}-q) \gt 0, |
0 is not an eigenvalue for any \tau\geq0 . For simplicity, we drop the subscript 1 in the following arguments. Substituting \lambda = i\omega (\omega > 0) into (3.1) and separating the real and imaginary parts, we obtain
\begin{equation*} \label{pair1} \begin{aligned} \omega^{2}-a_{0} & = b_{0}\cos(\omega\tau)+b_{1}\omega\sin(\omega\tau),\\ -a_{1}\omega & = b_{1}\omega\cos(\omega\tau)-b_{0}\sin(\omega\tau).\\ \end{aligned} \end{equation*} |
Squaring and adding both the above equations lead to
\begin{equation} G(\omega,\tau): = \omega^{4}+c_1(\tau)\omega^{2}+c_0(\tau) = 0, \end{equation} | (3.2) |
where
c_1(\tau) = ({f(y_{1}^{*})\over y_{1}^{*}}-f'(y_{1}^{*}))^{2}+2pqy_{1}^{*}z_{1}^{*} \gt 0, \ \ c_0(\tau) = a_{0}^{2}-b_{0}^{2}. |
Then i\omega \; (\omega > 0) is an imaginary root of (3.1) if and only if G(\omega, \tau) = 0 . Since c_1(\tau) > 0 for all 0\leq\tau\le\tau_{max} . we know that G(\omega, \tau) = 0 has exactly one positive root if and only if c_0(\tau) < 0 , or equivalently, a_0 < b_0 .
If a_0 < b_0 , the implicit function theorem implies that there exists a unique C^1 function \omega = \omega^*(\tau) such that G(\omega^*(\tau), \tau) = 0 for 0 < \tau\le\tau_{max} . For i\omega^*(\tau) to be a root of (3.1), \omega^*(\tau) needs to satisfy the system
\begin{equation} \begin{aligned} \sin(\omega(\tau)\tau)& = \frac{b_{1}\omega(\tau)^{3}+(a_{1}b_{0}-a_{0}b_{1})\omega(\tau)}{b_{1}^{2}\omega(\tau)^{2}+b_{0}^{2}}: = g_1(\tau), \\ \cos(\omega(\tau)\tau)& = \frac{(b_{0}-a_{1}b_{1})\omega(\tau)^{2}-a_{0}b_{0}}{b_{1}^{2}\omega(\tau)^{2}+b_{0}^{2}}: = g_2(\tau). \end{aligned} \end{equation} | (3.3) |
Set
\begin{equation} I = \{\tau: 0\leq\tau\leq\tau_{max} \ \ \text{satisfies} \ a_0 \lt b_0\}. \end{equation} | (3.4) |
For \tau\in I , let \theta(\tau) be the unique solution of \sin\theta = g_1 and \cos\theta = g_2 in (0, 2\pi] ; that is,
\theta(\tau) = \left\{ \begin{array}{lll} \arccos g_2(\tau), \ \ \ &\mbox{if} \ \ \omega(\tau)^{2}\leq a_0-{a_1b_0\over b_1},\\ 2\pi-\arccos g_2(\tau), \ \ \ &\mbox{if} \ \ \omega(\tau)^{2} \gt a_0-{a_1b_0\over b_1}. \end{array} \right. |
Following Beretta and Kuang [17], we define
\begin{equation} S_n(\tau) = \tau-{\theta(\tau)+2n\pi\over \omega(\tau)} \ \ \ \text{for} \ \ \tau\in I \ \ \text{with} \ \ n\in\mathbb{N}. \end{equation} | (3.5) |
One can check that \pm i\omega^*(\tau^*) are a pair of purely imaginary eigenvalues of (3.1) if and only if \tau^* is a zero of function S_n(\tau) for some n\in\mathbb{N} . From [17,Theorem 2.2], we have
\text{Sign}\left({d Re\lambda(\tau)\over d\tau}\big|_{\tau = \tau^*}\right) = \text{Sign}\left({\partial G\over\partial\omega}(\omega^*(\tau^*),\tau^*)\right) \text{Sign}\; S'_n(\tau^*). |
Note that {\partial G\over\partial\omega}(\omega^*(\tau^*), \tau^*) > 0 , thus we have the following result concerning the transversality condition.
Lemma 3.4. Assume that S_n(\tau) has a positive root \tau^*\in I for some n\in\mathbb{N} , then a pair of simple purely imaginary roots \pm i\omega^*(\tau^*) of (3.1) exist at \tau = \tau^* , and
\mathit{\text{Sign}}\left({d Re\lambda(\tau)\over d\tau}\big|_{\tau = \tau^*}\right) = \mathit{\text{Sign}}\; S'_n(\tau^*). |
Moreover, this pair of simple purely imaginary roots \pm i\omega^*(\tau^*) cross the imaginary axis from left to right at \tau = \tau^* if S'_n(\tau^*) > 0 , and from right to left if S'_n(\tau^*) < 0 .
It is easily seen that S_n(\tau) > S_{n+1}(\tau) for all \tau\in I, n\in\mathbb{N} . When \tau = 0 , the asymptotic stability of E_1^* implies that S_0(0) < 0 . Denote
\begin{equation} \hat\tau = \sup I: = \sup \{\tau: 0\leq\tau\leq\tau_{max} \ \ \text{satisfies} \ a_0 \lt b_0\}. \end{equation} | (3.6) |
If \hat\tau < \tau_{max} , then c_0(\hat\tau) = 0 , and thus \omega(\tau)\rightarrow0 as \tau\rightarrow\hat\tau^-. This, together with (3.3), yields \lim\limits_{\tau\rightarrow\hat\tau^-}\sin\theta(\tau) = 0 and \lim\limits_{\tau\rightarrow\hat\tau^-}\cos\theta(\tau) = -1 . Therefore, \lim\limits_{\tau\rightarrow\hat\tau^-}\theta(\tau) = \pi, \ \lim\limits_{\tau\rightarrow\hat\tau^-}S_n(\tau) = -\infty.
If \sup\limits_{\tau\in I} S_0(\tau) < 0 , S_n(\tau) has no zeros in I for all n\in\mathbb{N} , which excludes the existence of purely imaginary eigenvalues and thus implies that E_1^* is locally asymptotically stable for all \tau\in[0, \tau_{max}] .
If \sup\limits_{\tau\in I} S_0(\tau) = 0 , S_0(\tau) has a double zero in I , denoted by \tau_* , and S_0'(\tau_*) = 0 . This, together with Lemma 3.4, implies that the transversality condition at \tau_* is not satisfied and all eigenvalues remain to the left of the pure imaginary axis. Thus, E_1^* is still locally asymptotically stable for \tau\in[0, \tau_{max}] .
If \sup\limits_{\tau\in I} S_0(\tau) > 0 , it then follows from S_0(0) < 0 and \lim\limits_{\tau\rightarrow\hat\tau^-}S_n(\tau) = -\infty that S_0(\tau) has at least two zeros in I . For simplicity, we assume that
(H4) \sup\limits_{\tau\in I} S_0(\tau) > 0 and all zeros of S_n(\tau) with odd multiplicity are simple.
Under assumption ( \textbf{H}_{4} ), each S_n(\tau) has even number of simple zeros. Now, we collect all simple zeros of S_n(\tau) with n\ge0 and list them in increasing order: 0 < \tau_0 < \tau_1 < \cdots < \tau_{2K-1} < \hat\tau (K\in\mathbb{N}^+) . For each integer 0\leq i\leq K-1 , we apply Lemma 3.4 to obtain S'_m(\tau_i) > 0 and S'_m(\tau_{2K-i-1}) < 0 for some m\in\mathbb{N} . Therefore, the pair of simple conjugate purely imaginary eigenvalues \pm i\omega(\tau_i) crosses the imaginary axis from left to right, and the pair of simple conjugate purely imaginary eigenvalues \pm i\omega(\tau_{2K-i-1}) crosses the imaginary axis from right to left. Thus, system (1.3) undergoes a Hopf bifurcation at E_1^* when \tau = \tau_j \ (0\le j\le 2K-1) . Moreover, E_1^* is asymptotically stable for \tau\in[0, \tau_0)\cup(\tau_{2K-1}, \tau_{max}] , and unstable for \tau\in(\tau_0, \tau_{2K-1}) .
For each k = 0, \cdots, 2K-1 , there exists n_k such that \tau_k is a simple zero of S_{n_k}(\tau) . Let T_k be the period of periodic solution bifurcated at \tau_k . Applying the Hopf bifurcation theorem for delay differential equations [11,18], we have
T_k = {2\pi\over \omega(\tau_k)} = {2\pi\tau_k\over \theta(\tau_k)+2n_k\pi}. |
This, together with \theta(\tau_k)\in(0, 2\pi] , implies that T_k > \tau_k if n_k = 0 , and {\tau_k\over n_k+1}\le T_k < {\tau_k\over n_k} if n_k > 0 . To summarize, we have the following results on stability of E_1^* and Hopf bifurcation.
Theorem 3.5. Assume that ( \textbf{H}_{1} )-( \textbf{H}_{3} ) hold, y_1^* < \tilde y and \hat\tau < \tau_{max} . Let I, S_n(\tau), \tau_{max}, \hat\tau be defined in (3.4), (3.5), ( \textbf{H}_{3} ) and (3.6), respectively.
(i) If either I = \emptyset or \sup\limits_{\tau\in I} S_0(\tau)\le 0 , then E_1^* is locally asymptotically stable for all \tau\in[0, \tau_{max}] .
(ii) If ( \textbf{H}_{4} ) holds, then there exist exactly 2K local Hopf bifurcation values, namely, 0 < \tau_0 < \tau_1 < \cdots < \tau_{2K-1} < \hat\tau such that model (3.1) undergoes a Hopf bifurcation at E_1^* when \tau = \tau_j for 0\le j\le 2K-1 . E_1^* is locally asymptotically stable for \tau\in[0, \tau_0)\cup(\tau_{2K-1}, \tau_{max}] , and unstable for \tau\in(\tau_0, \tau_{2K-1}) . Moreover, the period T_k of periodic solution bifurcated at \tau_k satisfies T_k > \tau_k if \tau_k is a simple zero of S_0(\tau) , and {\tau_k\over n_k+1}\le T_k < {\tau_k\over n_k} if \tau_k is a simple zero of S_{n_k}(\tau) with n_k > 0 .
Theorem 3.6. Assume that ( \textbf{H}_{1} )-( \textbf{H}_{3} ) are satisfied. If y_1^* < y_2^* < \tilde{y} holds, then E_2^* is unstable for all \tau\geq 0 . Moreover, if a_{0, 2}\le b_{0, 2} , then the characteristic equation (3.1) with i = 2 has no purely imaginary eigenvalues.
Proof. Note that in (3.1) with i = 2 , \Delta_2(0) = p y_{2}^{*}z_{2}^{*}(h'(y_{2}^{*})e^{-\delta\tau}-q) < 0 . For any \tau\geq 0 , we know that \Delta_2(\infty) > 0 , thus as long as E_2^* exists, the associated characteristic equation must have at least one positive real root and hence E_2^* is always unstable for \tau\geq 0 .
Using a similar argument in the study of root distribution for (3.1) at E_1^* , we note that c_{1, 2}(\tau) > 0, c_{0, 2}(\tau) = a_{0, 2}^2-b_{0, 2}^2 and a_{0, 2}+b_{0, 2} = p y_{2}^{*}z_{2}^{*}(h'(y_{2}^{*})e^{-\delta\tau}-q) < 0 . Thus, G(\omega, \tau) in (3.2) has no positive zeros if a_{0, 2}\le b_{0, 2} . Therefore, (3.1) with i = 2 has no purely imaginary eigenvalues if a_{0, 2}\le b_{0, 2} .
Since E_2^* is unstable (and thus biologically irrelevant) whenever it exists, we name E_1^* , instead of E_2^* , the immune control equilibrium (ICE).
Note that Theorem 3.5 states that if y_1^* < \tilde y and ( \textbf{H}_{4} ) holds, then periodic solutions can bifurcate from E_1^* when \tau is near the local Hopf bifurcation values \tau_k, k = 0, 1, 2, \ldots, 2K-1. For integer n\ge0 , we denote
\begin{equation} J: = \{\tau_0, \tau_1,\cdots,\tau_{2K-1}\}, \ \ J_n: = \{\tau\in J: S_n(\tau) = 0\}, \ \ J^0 = J\setminus J_0. \end{equation} | (3.7) |
According to Theorem 3.5, J_n has even number of bifurcation values, and the period of any periodic solution bifurcated near a bifurcation point in J^0 is bounded from both below and above, while the periodic solution bifurcated near a bifurcation point in J_0 has a lower bound for its period. As we shall see later in the numerical simulation, it seems impossible to find an upper bound for such period. In what follows, we will restrict our investigation on the set J^0 and assume that J^0\neq\emptyset . Especially, we will discuss the global continuation of periodic solutions bifurcated from the point (E_1^*, \tau_k) with \tau_k\in J^0 as the bifurcation parameter \tau varies. We shall use the global Hopf bifurcation theorem for delay differential equations [19] and show that model (1.3) admits periodic solutions globally for all \tau\in(\underline\tau, \bar\tau) , where \underline\tau = \min J^0 and \bar\tau = \max J^0 .
Let x(t) = (y(\tau t), z(\tau t))^T , model (1.3) can be rewritten as a general functional differential equation:
\begin{equation} x'(t) = F(x_{t},\tau,T), \; \; (t,\tau,T)\in\mathbb{R}_{+}\times I\times\mathbb{R}_{+}, \end{equation} | (3.8) |
where x_{t}(\theta) = x(t+\theta) for \theta\in[-1, 0] , and x_{t}\in \mathcal{X}: = C([-1, 0], \mathbb{R}_{+}^2) , and
\begin{equation} F(x_t,\tau,T) = \left( \begin{array}{ll} \tau f(x_{1t}(0))-p\tau x_{1t}(0)x_{2t}(0)-b\tau x_{1t}(0)\\ \tau e^{-\delta\tau} h(x_{1t}(-1))x_{2t}(-1)-q\tau x_{1t}(0)x_{2t}(0)-\mu\tau x_{2t}(0) \end{array} \right) \end{equation} | (3.9) |
with x_t = (x_{1t}, x_{2t})\in\mathcal{X} . Identifying the subspace of \mathcal{X} consisting of all constant functions with \mathbb{R}_{+}^2 , we obtain a restricted function
\begin{equation*} \widetilde{F}(x,\tau,T): = F\mid_{\mathbb{R}_{+}^2\times I\times\mathbb{R}_{+}} = \left( \begin{array}{ll} \tau f(x_1)-p\tau x_1 x_2-b\tau x_1\\ \tau e^{-\delta\tau} h(x_1)x_2-q\tau x_1 x_2-\mu\tau x_2 \end{array} \right). \end{equation*} |
Obviously, \widetilde{F} is twice continuously differentiable, i.e., the condition (\textbf{A1}) in [19] holds. We denote the set of stationary solutions of system (3.8) by {\bf{E}}(F) = \{(\widetilde{x}, \widetilde{\tau}, \widetilde{T})\in\mathbb{R}_{+}^2\times I\times\mathbb{R}_{+}: \; \widetilde{F}(\widetilde{x}, \widetilde{\tau}, \widetilde{T}) = 0 \}. It follows from Proposition 2.2 that (ⅰ) if y_1^* < \tilde{y} < y_2^* holds,
{\bf{E}}(F) = \{(E_0,\tau,T), (E_b,\tau,T), (E_1^*,\tau,T); \; (\tau,T)\in I\times\mathbb{R}_{+}\}; |
(ⅱ) if y_1^* < y_2^* < \tilde{y} holds,
{\bf{E}}(F) = \{(E_0,\tau,T), (E_b,\tau,T), (E_1^*,\tau,T), (E_2^*,\tau,T); \; (\tau,T)\in I\times\mathbb{R}_{+}\}. |
For any stationary solution (\widetilde{x}, \tau, T) , the characteristic function is
\Delta_{(\widetilde{x},\tau,T)}(\lambda) = \lambda \text{Id}-DF(\widetilde{x},\tau,T)(e^{\lambda\cdot}\text{Id}). |
Note that if either y_1^* < \tilde{y} < y_2^* or y_1^* < y_2^* < \tilde{y} holds, 0 is not a eigenvalue of any stationary solution of (3.8) and hence the condition (A2) in [19] holds. It can be checked easily from (3.9) that the smoothness condition (A3) in [19] is satisfied.
Theorem 3.5 implies that if y_1^* < \tilde y and ( \textbf{H}_{4} ) holds, then for each integer 0\le k\le 2K-1 the stationary solution (E_1^*, \tau_k, 2\pi/(\omega_k\tau_k)) is an isolated center of (3.8), where \omega_k = \omega(\tau_k) is the unique positive zero of G(\omega, \tau) in (3.2), and there is only one purely imaginary characteristic value of the form im (2\pi/\widetilde{T}) with m = 1 and \widetilde{T} = 2\pi/(\omega_k\tau_k) . Moreover, if follows from Lemma 3.4 that the crossing number \zeta_{1}(E_1^*, \tau_k, 2\pi/(\omega_k\tau_k)) at each of these centers is
\begin{equation} \zeta_{1}(E_1^*, \tau_k,\frac{2\pi}{\omega_k\tau_k}) = -\text{Sign}\left({d Re\lambda(\tau)\over d\tau}\big|_{\tau = \tau_k}\right) = \begin{cases} -1,&\ 0\le k\le K-1,\\ 1,&\ K\le k\le 2K-1. \end{cases} \end{equation} | (3.10) |
Thus the condition (A4) in [19] holds. We then define a closed subset \Sigma(F) of \mathcal{X}\times I \times \mathbb{R}_+ by
\Sigma(F) = \mathcal{C}l\{(x,\tau,T)\in \mathcal{X}\times I \times \mathbb{R}_+: x \mbox{ is a nontrivial T-periodic soltuion of (3.8)}\}, |
and for each integer 0\le k\le 2K-1 , let {\bf{C}}(E_1^*, \tau_k, 2\pi/(\omega_k\tau_k)) denote the connected component of (E_1^*, \tau_k, 2\pi/(\omega_k\tau_k)) in \Sigma(F) . By Theorem 3.5, {\bf{C}}(E_1^*, \tau_k, 2\pi/(\omega_k\tau_k)) is a nonempty subset of \Sigma(F) .
To find the interval of \tau in which periodic solutions exist, we shall further investigate the properties of periodic solutions of (3.8).
Lemma 3.7. All nonconstant and nonnegative periodic solutions of (3.8) are uniformly bounded. Actually, we have 0 < y(t), z(t)\le M for any t\in\mathbb{R} , where M = \max\{\bar y, h'(0)M_f/(p\gamma)\} .
Proof. Since y(t) is nonconstant and nonnegative, there exists t_0 > 0 such that y(t_0) > 0 . Integrating the equation for y'(t) gives
e^{\int_{t_0}^t[pz(s)+b]ds}y(t) = y(t_0)+\int_{t_0}^t e^{\int_{t_0}^r[pz(s)+b]ds}f(y(r))dr \gt 0,\; t \gt t_0. |
Hence, y(t) > 0 for all t > t_0 . Since y is periodic, we have y(t) > 0 for all t > 0 . Similarly, if z(t_0) > 0 for some t_0 > 0 , we integrate the equation for z'(t) to obtain
e^{\int_{t_0}^t[qy(s)+\mu]ds}z(t) = z(t_0)+\int_{t_0}^t e^{\int_{t_0}^r[qy(s)+\mu]ds}e^{-\delta\tau}h(y(r-\tau))z(r-\tau)dr \gt 0 |
for all t > t_0 . This together with periodicity of z implies that z(t) > 0 for all t > 0 .
By Proposition 2.1, we have \limsup\limits_{t\rightarrow\infty}y(t)\le\bar y . We claim y(t)\le M for all t\ge 0 . Otherwise, if y(t_1) > M for some t_1\ge0 , then
\lim\limits_{n\rightarrow\infty}y(t_1+nT) = y(t_1) \gt M, |
where T is the period of the nonconstant and nonnegative periodic solutions. This contradicts the fact that y(t) is eventually bounded above by M as t\rightarrow\infty . Thus, M is the upper bound of y(t) . Similarly, from Proposition 2.1, we have \limsup\limits_{t\rightarrow\infty}z(t)\le h'(0)M_f/(p\gamma)\le M . This implies that z(t) is uniformly bounded by M .
Lemma 3.8. System (3.8) has no nontrivial periodic solution of period 1.
Proof. Note that any nontrivial 1 -periodic solution x(t) of system (3.8) is also a nontrivial periodic solution of model (2.4), which does not admit any nontrivial periodic solution via Lemma 2.3.
We are now in the position to state our result concerning the properties of the global Hopf branches.
Theorem 3.9. Assume that ( \textbf{H}_{1} )-( \textbf{H}_{4} ), either y_1^* < \tilde{y} < y_2^* or y_1^* < y_2^* < \tilde{y} holds, \hat\tau < \tau_{max}, J^0\neq\emptyset and a_{0, 2}\le b_{0, 2} . Then for system (3.8), we have the following results:
(i) The connected component {\bf{C}}(E_1^*, \tau_k, 2\pi/(\omega_k\tau_k)) is bounded for all \tau_k\in J^0 .
(ii) Let n\ge1 . If J_n has 2k_n bifurcation values, ordered as \tau_{n, 1} < \cdots < \tau_{n, 2k_n} , then for each i = 1, \cdots, k_n , there exists j > k_n such that \tau_{n, i} and \tau_{n, j} are connected by a global Hopf branch. Similarly, for each j = k_n+1, \cdots, 2k_n , there exists i\le k_n such that \tau_{n, i} and \tau_{n, j} are connected by a global Hopf branch. Especially, if k_n = 1 , then the two bifurcation values of J_n are connected.
(iii) For each \tau\in(\min J_n, \max J_n) with integer n\ge1 , system (3.8) has at least one periodic solution with period in (1/(n+1), 1/n) .
Proof. Lemma 3.7 implies that the projection of {\bf{C}}(E_1^*, \tau_k, 2\pi/(\omega_k\tau_k)) onto \mathcal{X} is bounded. Note that system (3.8) has no periodic solutions of period 1 , and thus no periodic solutions of period 1/n_{k} or 1/(n_{k}+1) for any positive integer n_{k} . It follows from Lemma 3.8 that the period T of a periodic solution on the connected component {\bf{C}}(E_1^*, \tau_k, 2\pi/(\omega_k\tau_k)) satisfies
{1\over n_{k}+1} \lt T \lt {1\over n_{k}} |
with \tau_{k}\in J_{n_k} and n_k\ge1 . Hence, the projection of {\bf{C}}(E_1^*, \tau_k, 2\pi/(\omega_k\tau_k)) onto the T -space is bounded for \tau_k\in J^0 . Note that \tau\in I and I is a bounded interval. Therefore, {\bf{C}}(E_1^*, \tau_k, 2\pi/(\omega_k\tau_k)) is bounded in \mathcal{X}\times I\times \mathbb{R}_+ for any \tau_k\in J^0 . This proves (ⅰ).
From the proof of Theorems 3.1 and 3.6, we know that the stationary solutions (E_0, \tau, T) , (E_b, \tau, T) and (E_2^*, \tau, T) cannot be a center for any \tau and T if either y_1^* < \tilde{y} < y_2^* or y_1^* < y_2^* < \tilde{y} holds and a_{0, 2}\le b_{0, 2} . It then follows from the global bifurcation theorem [19,Theorem 3.3] that \mathcal{E}: = {\bf{C}}(E_1^*, \tau_k, 2\pi/(\omega_k\tau_k))\cap {\bf{E}}(F) is finite and
\sum\limits_{(\widetilde{x},\tau,T)\in \mathcal{E}}\zeta_1(\widetilde{x},\tau,T) = 0. |
If J_n has 2k_n bifurcation values, ordered as \tau_{n, 1} < \cdots < \tau_{n, 2k_n} , then by (3.10), \zeta_1(\widetilde{x}, \tau_{n, i}, T) = -1 for each i = 1, \cdots, k_n , and \zeta_1(\widetilde{x}, \tau_{n, j}, T) = 1 for each j = k_n+1, \cdots, 2k_n . This together with the above equation implies (ⅱ).
Note that \tau_{n, 1} = \min J_n and \tau_{n, 2k_n} = \max J_n . The \tau projection of the global bifurcation branch bifurcated from \tau_{n, 1} includes (\tau_{n, 1}, \tau_{n, k_n+1}) , while the \tau projection of the global bifurcation branch bifurcated from \tau_{n, 2k_n} includes (\tau_{n, k_n}, \tau_{n, 2k_n}) . Thus, for any \tau\in(\tau_{n, 1}, \tau_{n, 2k}) , system (3.8) has at least one periodic solution. According to the proof of (ⅰ), the period of this periodic solution lies in (1/(n+1), 1/n) . Thus, (ⅲ) is proved.
In this section, we present some numerical simulations to demonstrate our theoretical results. We will use the Matlab package DDE-BIFTOOL developed by Engelborghs et al. [20,21] to sketch the global Hopf branches {\bf{C}}(E_1^*, \tau_k, 2\pi/(\omega_k\tau_k)) for 0\le k\le 2K-1 . Following the study of ODE model in [6], we choose
f(y) = ry(1-{y\over K}), \ \ h(y) = {cy\over 1+dy}, |
and set the parameter values as follows:
\begin{alignat} {3} r& = 6 \; day^{-1}, & \quad K& = 3 \; virus\; mm^{-3}, &\quad p& = 1 \; mm^{3}\ cells^{-1}\ day^{-1}, \\ b& = 3 \; day^{-1}, & \quad c& = 4 \; mm^3\ virus^{-1}day^{-1}, &\quad d& = 0.5 \; mm^3\ virus^{-1}, \\ \delta & = 0.03 \; day^{-1}, & \quad q& = 1 \; mm^3\ virus^{-1}day^{-1}, &\quad \mu& = 0.5 \; day^{-1}. \end{alignat} | (4.1) |
Here, the units for viral loads y and immune cell density z are virus per \text{mm}^3 and cells per \text{mm}^3 , respectively. The delay \tau has the unit in days. It is easy to calculate
\hat\tau = 17.1939 \lt \tau_{max} = 19.1788 \lt \tau_b = 36.6204. |
From Proposition 2.2, there are exactly two equilibria E_{0} = (0, 0) and E_{b} = (1.5, 0) when \tau > \tau_{max} , and, if \tau\leq\tau_{max} , there exists a third equilibrium E_1^* = (y_1^*, z_1^*) , where y_1^*, z_1^* depend on \tau . This is the unique positive equilibrium when \tau\in[0, \tau_e] and there exists another positive equilibrium E_2^* = (y_2^*, z_2^*) when \tau\in(\tau_e, \tau_{max}) ; see Figure 1. Here, \tau_e is the critical value when y_2^* = \tilde y ; that is,
\tau_e = {1\over\delta}\ln{c\tilde y\over(q\tilde y+\mu)(1+d\tilde y)} = 17.9666. |
At \tau = \tau_{max} , the two positive equilibria coincide: y_1^* = y_2^* .
Theorem 3.1 implies that E_0 is a saddle point, and E_b is locally asymptotically stable for \tau\ge\tau_e , and unstable for \tau < \tau_e , Moreover, by Theorem 3.3, E_b is globally asymptotically stable in the region X_1 provided that \tau\geq\tau_b . It can be verified that the conditions of case (ⅱ) in Theorem 3.5 are satisfied only if 0\leq\tau < \hat\tau . By Theorem 3.5, we know that there are exactly 4 local Hopf bifurcation values with K = 2 , namely,
\tau_0\approx0.2994 \lt \tau_1\approx8.9274 \lt \tau_2\approx13.9287 \lt \tau_3\approx17.0322, |
as shown in Figure 2. Correspondingly,
\omega_0\approx0.9537 \gt \omega_1\approx0.7540 \gt \omega_2\approx0.4994 \gt \omega_3\approx0.1069. |
Clearly, E_1^* is stable for \tau\in[0, \tau_0)\cup(\tau_3, \tau_{max}] and unstable for \tau\in(\tau_0, \tau_3) , which implies that \tau_0 and \tau_3 are stability switches. Remark that \tau_3 < \tau_e .
In Figure 3, we plot the four global Hopf branches {\bf{C}}(E_1^*, \tau_k, 2\pi/(\omega_k\tau_k)) with 0\le k\le 3 . It is observed that the branches {\bf{C}}(E_1^*, \tau_1, 2\pi/(\omega_1\tau_1)) and {\bf{C}}(E_1^*, \tau_2, 2\pi/(\omega_2\tau_2)) are bounded and connected, which agrees with Theorem 3.9. The periodic solutions on these global Hopf branches are plotted on the phase plane of y and z ; see Figures 4–6. As we know, the stability of the periodic solution is completely determined by the associated principal Floquet multiplier: if the principal Floquet multiplier is larger than 1 , then the corresponding periodic solution is unstable, otherwise, the bifurcated periodic solution is stable [11].
By using DDE-BIFTOOL, we can further calculate the associated principal Floquet multipliers; see Figure 7. Note that the periodic solution on the first branch {\bf{C}}(E_1^*, \tau_0, 2\pi/(\omega_0\tau_0)) is stable for small \tau , and becomes unstable as \tau increases; the periodic solution on the second branch {\bf{C}}(E_1^*, \tau_1, 2\pi/(\omega_1\tau_1)) –or equivalently, the third branch {\bf{C}}(E_1^*, \tau_2, 2\pi/(\omega_2\tau_2)) –is always unstable; the periodic solution on the fourth branch {\bf{C}}(E_1^*, \tau_3, 2\pi/(\omega_3\tau_3)) is stable for \tau near \tau_3 , and becomes unstable as \tau decreases. Moreover, for any \tau\in(\tau_1, \tau_2) , model (1.3) has at least one periodic solution on the second (or third) global Hopf branch with period in the interval (\tau/2, \tau) , as shown in Figure 8.
It is interesting to note from Figure 3 that the first and the fourth Hopf branches do not connect. This phenomenon is quite different from that in the existing literature. We have proved that both the periodic solutions and delays on any global Hopf branch are uniformly bounded. According to the global Hopf bifurcation theory [19], either the first and the fourth Hopf branches connect, or these two branches have unbounded periods. From Figure 8, we observe that the periods of periodic oscillations on the fourth branch {\bf{C}}(E_1^*, \tau_3, 2\pi/(\omega_3\tau_3)) seem to be unbounded. To further explore this interesting phenomenon, we numerically sketch in Figure 9 a bifurcation diagram for model (1.3). It is suggested that model (1.3) can have chaotic solutions and thus allow aperiodic oscillations when \tau lies in the interval where the first and fourth Hopf branches disappear. Figure 9 also confirms that \tau_0 and \tau_3 are stability switches: (ⅰ) when \tau crosses \tau_0 from left to right, the positive equilibrium E_1^* becomes unstable, while a stable periodic solution bifurcates; and (ⅱ) when \tau crosses \tau_3 from left to right, E_1^* regains its stability while there exists a stable periodic solution when \tau is close to \tau_3 from the left. It should be mentioned that the bifurcation diagram has a jump at \tau_{max} , which is due to the fact that there exists no positive equilibrium when \tau > \tau_{max} but the positive equilibrium at \tau = \tau_{max} is nonzero.
Considering the fact the immune response process involves a sequence of events such as antigenic activation, selection, and proliferation of the immune cells and the mortality of immune cells during the time lag, we derive an immunosuppressive infection model from a stage structured population model. We find that the time lag \tau plays a key role in the infection and immune response dynamics. As \tau increases, the model dynamics shifts through four possible outcomes: (ⅰ) virus persists without immune response when \tau > \tau_{max} ; (ⅱ) the outcome is initial condition dependent and delay dependent, either the immunity can be completely destroyed, or the immune mediated control can be established when \tau\in(\tau_e, \tau_{max}] ; (ⅲ) immune response controls the virus when \tau\in[0, \tau_0)\cup(\tau_{2K-1}, \tau_e) ; and (ⅳ) sustained oscillation appears or chaotic dynamics occurs when \tau\in(\tau_0, \tau_{2K-1}) . Our theoretical results coincide with the phenomenon of oscillatory viral loads and immune cells observed in clinical data [9].
From numerical simulation, we also observe an unbounded global Hopf bifurcation branch with bounded periodic solutions, bounded delays, but unbounded periods. To the best of our knowledge, this phenomenon is new, because, in the existing literature, either the global Hopf branch is bounded or it is unbounded with unbounded delays. A detailed theoretical study of this interesting numerical phenomenon should enrich the global Hopf bifurcation theory for delay differential equations, and we leave it as a future work.
We are very grateful to the anonymous referees for their valuable comments and suggestions, which help to improve the presentation of this manuscript. H. Shu was partially supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No.11971285, No.11601392), and the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities.
The authors declare there is no conflict of interest.
[1] | [ R. M. Anderson, The impact of vaccination on the epidemiology of infectious diseases, in The Vaccine Book, B. R. Bloom and P. -H. Lambert (eds. ) The Vaccine Book (Second Edition). Elsevier B. V. , Amsterdam, (2006), 3-31. |
[2] | [ R. M. Anderson,R. M. May, null, Infectious Diseases of Humans. Dynamics and Control, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1991. |
[3] | [ N. Bacaër, Approximation of the basic reproduction number R_0 for vector-borne diseases with a periodic vector population, Bull. Math. Biol., 69 (2007): 1067-1091. |
[4] | [ C. T. Bauch, Imitation dynamics predict vaccinating behaviour, Proc. R. Soc. B, 272 (2005): 1669-1675. |
[5] | [ B. R. Bloom and P. -H. Lambert (eds. ), The Vaccine Book (Second Edition), Elsevier B. V. , Amsterdam, 2006. |
[6] | [ F. Brauer, P. van den Driessche and J. Wu (eds. ), Mathematical Epidemiology, Lecture Notes in Mathematics. Mathematical biosciences subseries, vol. 1945, Springer, Berlin, 2008. |
[7] | [ B. Buonomo,A. d'Onofrio,D. Lacitignola, Modeling of pseudo-rational exemption to vaccination for SEIR diseases, J. Math. Anal. Appl., 404 (2013): 385-398. |
[8] | [ B. Buonomo, A. d'Onofrio and P. Manfredi, Public Health Intervention to shape voluntary vaccination: Continuous and piecewise optimal control, Submitted. |
[9] | [ V. Capasso, null, Mathematical Structure of Epidemic Models, 2nd edition, Springer, 2008. |
[10] | [ L. Cesari, Asymptotic Behavior and Stability Problems in Ordinary Differential Equations, Ergebnisse der Mathematik und ihrer Grenzgebiete, Band 16, Springer-Verlag, New York-Heidelberg, 1971. |
[11] | [ C. Chicone, Ordinary Differential Equations with Applications, Texts in Applied Mathematics, 34, Springer, New York, 2006. |
[12] | [ M. Choisy,J.-F. Guegan,P. Rohani, Dynamics of infectious diseases and pulse vaccination: Teasing apart the embedded resonance effects, Physica D, 223 (2006): 26-35. |
[13] | [ W. Coppel, Stability and Asymptotic Behavior of Differential Equations, Heath, Boston, 1965. |
[14] | [ O. Diekmann,J. A. P. Heesterbeek,J. A. J. Metz, On the definition and the computation of the basic reproduction ratio R_0 in models for infectious diseases in heterogeneous populations, J. Math. Biol., 28 (1990): 365-382. |
[15] | [ A. d'Onofrio, Stability properties of pulses vaccination strategy in SEIR epidemic model, Math. Biosci., 179 (2002): 57-72. |
[16] | [ A. d'Onofrio and P. Manfredi, Impact of Human Behaviour on the Spread of Infectious Diseases: a review of some evidences and models, Submitted. |
[17] | [ A. d'Onofrio,P. Manfredi,P. Poletti, The impact of vaccine side effects on the natural history of immunization programmes: An imitation-game approach, J. Theor. Biol., 273 (2011): 63-71. |
[18] | [ A. d'Onofrio,P. Manfredi,P. Poletti, The interplay of public intervention and private choices in determining the outcome of vaccination programmes, PLoS ONE, 7 (2012): e45653. |
[19] | [ A. d'Onofrio,P. Manfredi,E. Salinelli, Vaccinating behaviour, information and the dynamics of SIR vaccine preventable diseases, Theor. Popul. Biol., 71 (2007): 301-317. |
[20] | [ A. d'Onofrio,P. Manfredi,E. Salinelli, Fatal SIR diseases and rational exemption to vaccination, Math. Med. Biol., 25 (2008): 337-357. |
[21] | [ D. Elliman,H. Bedford, MMR: Where are we now?, Archives of Disease in Childhood, 92 (2007): 1055-1057. |
[22] | [ B. F. Finkenstadt,B. T. Grenfell, Time series modelling of childhood diseases: A dynamical systems approach, Appl. Stat., 49 (2000): 187-205. |
[23] | [ N. C. Grassly,C. Fraser, Seasonal infectious disease epidemiology, Proc. Royal Soc. B, 273 (2006): 2541-2550. |
[24] | [ M. W. Hirsch and H. Smith, Monotone dynamical systems, in Handbook of Differential Equations: Ordinary Differential Equations, vol. Ⅱ, Elsevier B. V. , Amsterdam, 2 (2005), 239-357. |
[25] | [ IMI. Innovative medicine initiative. First Innovative Medicines Initiative Ebola projects get underway, Available from: http://www.imi.europa.eu/content/ebola-project-launch (accessed September 2016). |
[26] | [ A. Kata, A postmodern Pandora's box: Anti-vaccination misinformation on the Internet, Vaccine, 28 (2010): 1709-1716. |
[27] | [ A. Kata, Anti-vaccine activists, Web 2.0, and the postmodern paradigm-An overview of tactics and tropes used online by the anti-vaccination movement, Vaccine, 30 (2012): 3778-3789. |
[28] | [ M. J. Keeling,P. Rohani, null, Modeling Infectious Diseases in Humans and Animals, Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, 2008. |
[29] | [ W. P. London,J. A. Yorke, Recurrent outbreaks of measles, chickenpox and mumps. I. Seasonal variation in contact rates, Am. J. Epidemiol., 98 (1973): 453-468. |
[30] | [ P. Manfredi and A. d'Onofrio (eds), Modeling the Interplay Between Human Behavior and the Spread of Infectious Diseases, Springer, New York, 2013. |
[31] | [ M. Martcheva, An Introduction to Mathematical Epidemiology, Texts in Applied Mathematics, 61, Springer, New York, 2015. |
[32] | [ E. Miller,N. J. Gay, Epidemiological determinants of pertussis, Dev. Biol. Stand., 89 (1997): 15-23. |
[33] | [ J. D. Murray, Mathematical Biology. I. An Introduction. Third Edition, Interdisciplinary Applied Mathematics, 17. Springer-Verlag, New York, 2002. |
[34] | [ Y. Nakata,T. Kuniya, Global dynamics of a class of SEIRS epidemic models in a periodic environment, J. Math. Anal. Appl., 325 (2010): 230-237. |
[35] | [ G. Napier,D. Lee,C. Robertson,A. Lawson,K. G. Pollock, A model to estimate the impact of changes in MMR vaccine uptake on inequalities in measles susceptibility in Scotland, Stat. Methods Med. Res., 25 (2016): 1185-1200. |
[36] | [ L. F. Olsen,W. M. Schaffer, Chaos versus noisy periodicity: Alternative hypotheses for childhood epidemics, Science, 249 (1990): 499-504. |
[37] | [ T. Philipson, Private Vaccination and Public Health an empirical examination for U.S. Measles, J. Hum. Res., 31 (1996): 611-630. |
[38] | [ I. B. Schwartz,H. L. Smith, Infinite subharmonic bifurcation in an SEIR epidemic model, J. Math. Biol., 18 (1983): 233-253. |
[39] | [ H. E. Soper, The interpretation of periodicity in disease prevalence, J. R. Stat. Soc., 92 (1929): 34-73. |
[40] | [ P. van den Driessche,J. Watmough, Reproduction numbers and sub-threshold endemic equilibria for compartmental models of disease transmission, Math. Biosci., 180 (2002): 29-48. |
[41] | [ A. van Lier,J. van de Kassteele,P. de Hoogh,I. Drijfhout,H. de Melker, Vaccine uptake determinants in The Netherlands, Eur. J. Public Health, 24 (2013): 304-309. |
[42] | [ G. S. Wallace, Why Measles Matters, 2014, Available from: http://stacks.cdc.gov/view/cdc/27488/cdc_27488_DS1.pdf (accessed November 2016). |
[43] | [ Z. Wang,C. T. Bauch,S. Bhattacharyya,A. d'Onofrio,P. Manfredi,M. Perc,N. Perra,M. Salathé,D. Zhao, Statistical physics of vaccination, Physics Reports, 664 (2016): 1-113. |
[44] | [ W. Wang,X. Q. Zhao, Threshold dynamics for compartmental epidemic models in periodic environments, J. Dyn. Diff. Eq., 20 (2008): 699-717. |
[45] | [ WHO, Vaccine safety basics, Available from: http://vaccine-safety-training.org/adverse-events-classification.html (accessed November 2016). |
[46] | [ R. M. Wolfe,L. K. Sharp, Anti-vaccinationists past and present, Brit. Med. J., 325 (2002): p430. |
[47] | [ F. Zhang,X. Q. Zhao, A periodic epidemic model in a patchy environment, J. Math. Anal. Appl., 325 (2007): 496-516. |
[48] | [ X. Q. Zhao, Dynamical Systems in Population Biology, CMS Books Math. , vol. 16, Springer-Verlag, New York, 2003. |