Threshold control strategy for a Filippov model with group defense of pests and a constant-rate release of natural enemies

Baolin Kang; Xiang Hou; Bing Liu; Baolin Kang; Xiang Hou; Bing Liu

doi:10.3934/mbe.2023537

Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering

2023, Volume 20, Issue 7: 12076-12092. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2023537

Previous Article Next Article

Research article Special Issues

Threshold control strategy for a Filippov model with group defense of pests and a constant-rate release of natural enemies

1.
College of Mathematics and Information Science, Anshan Normal University, Anshan 114007, China
2.
Research Center for Theoretical Ecology, School of Geography and Environment, Jiangxi Normal University, Nanchang 330022, China

Academic Editor: Yan Liu

Received: 29 January 2023 Revised: 27 March 2023 Accepted: 17 April 2023 Published: 15 May 2023

In this paper, we establish an integrated pest management Filippov model with group defense of pests and a constant rate release of natural enemies. First, the dynamics of the subsystems in the Filippov system are analyzed. Second, the dynamics of the sliding mode system and the types of equilibria of the Filippov system are discussed. Then the complex dynamics of the Filippov system are investigated by using numerical analysis when there is a globally asymptotically stable limit cycle and a globally asymptotically stable equilibrium in two subsystems, respectively. Furthermore, we analyze the existence region of a sliding mode and pseudo equilibrium, as well as the complex dynamics of the Filippov system, such as boundary equilibrium bifurcation, the grazing bifurcation, the buckling bifurcation and the crossing bifurcation. These complex sliding bifurcations reveal that the selection of key parameters can control the population density no more than the economic threshold, so as to prevent the outbreak of pests.

Keywords:

Citation: Baolin Kang, Xiang Hou, Bing Liu. Threshold control strategy for a Filippov model with group defense of pests and a constant-rate release of natural enemies[J]. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2023, 20(7): 12076-12092. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2023537

Related Papers:

[1]	Wei Liu, Qinghua Zuo, Chen Xu . Finite-time and global Mittag-Leffler stability of fractional-order neural networks with S-type distributed delays. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(4): 8339-8352. doi: 10.3934/math.2024405
[2]	Li Wan, Qinghua Zhou, Hongbo Fu, Qunjiao Zhang . Exponential stability of Hopfield neural networks of neutral type with multiple time-varying delays. AIMS Mathematics, 2021, 6(8): 8030-8043. doi: 10.3934/math.2021466
[3]	Snezhana Hristova, Antonia Dobreva . Existence, continuous dependence and finite time stability for Riemann-Liouville fractional differential equations with a constant delay. AIMS Mathematics, 2020, 5(4): 3809-3824. doi: 10.3934/math.2020247
[4]	Jin Gao, Lihua Dai . Anti-periodic synchronization of quaternion-valued high-order Hopfield neural networks with delays. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(8): 14051-14075. doi: 10.3934/math.2022775
[5]	Yucai Ding, Hui Liu . A new fixed-time stability criterion for fractional-order systems. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(4): 6173-6181. doi: 10.3934/math.2022343
[6]	Qinghua Zhou, Li Wan, Hongbo Fu, Qunjiao Zhang . Exponential stability of stochastic Hopfield neural network with mixed multiple delays. AIMS Mathematics, 2021, 6(4): 4142-4155. doi: 10.3934/math.2021245
[7]	Muhammad Tariq, Sotiris K. Ntouyas, Hijaz Ahmad, Asif Ali Shaikh, Bandar Almohsen, Evren Hincal . A comprehensive review of Grüss-type fractional integral inequality. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(1): 2244-2281. doi: 10.3934/math.2024112
[8]	Saad Ihsan Butt, Artion Kashuri, Muhammad Umar, Adnan Aslam, Wei Gao . Hermite-Jensen-Mercer type inequalities via Ψ-Riemann-Liouville k-fractional integrals. AIMS Mathematics, 2020, 5(5): 5193-5220. doi: 10.3934/math.2020334
[9]	Iman Ben Othmane, Lamine Nisse, Thabet Abdeljawad . On Cauchy-type problems with weighted R-L fractional derivatives of a function with respect to another function and comparison theorems. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(6): 14106-14129. doi: 10.3934/math.2024686
[10]	Rabah Khaldi, Assia Guezane-Lakoud . On a generalized Lyapunov inequality for a mixed fractional boundary value problem. AIMS Mathematics, 2019, 4(3): 506-515. doi: 10.3934/math.2019.3.506

Abstract

1. Introduction and preliminaries

Let $W$ be a set and $H:W\longrightarrow W$ be a mapping. A point $w\in W$ is called a fixed point of $H\$ if $w = Hw.$ Fixed point theory plays a fundamental role in functional analysis (see ^[15]). Shoaib ^[17] introduced the concept of $\alpha$ -dominated mapping and obtained some fixed point results (see also ^[1,2]). George et al. ^[11] introduced a new space and called it rectangular $b$ -metric space ( $r.b.m.$ space). The triangle inequality in the $b$ -metric space was replaced by rectangle inequality. Useful results on $r.b.m.$ spaces can be seen in (^[5,6,8,9,10]). Ćirić introduced new types of contraction and proved some metrical fixed point results (see ^[4]). In this article, we introduce Ćirić type rational contractions for $\alpha$ -dominated mappings in $r.b.m.$ spaces and proved some metrical fixed point results. New interesting results in metric spaces, rectangular metric spaces and $b$ -metric spaces can be obtained as applications of our results.

Definition 1.1. ^[11] Let $U$ be a nonempty set. A function $d_{lb}:U\times U\rightarrow \lbrack 0, \infty)$ is said to be a rectangular $b$ -metric if there exists $b\geq 1$ such that

(ⅰ) $d_{lb}(\theta, \nu) = d_{lb}(\nu, \theta$ );

(ⅱ) $d_{lb}(\theta, \nu) = 0$ if and only if $\theta = \nu;$

(ⅲ) $d_{lb}(\theta, \nu)\leq b[d_{lb}(\theta, q)+d_{lb}(q, l)+d_{lb}(l, \nu)]$ for all $\theta, \nu \in U$ and all distinct points $q, l\in U \backslash \{ \theta, \nu \}.$

The pair $(U, d_{lb})$ is said a rectangular $b$ -metric space (in short, $r.b.m.$ space) with coefficient $b$ .

Definition 1.2. ^[11] Let $(U, d_{lb})$ be an $r.b.m.$ space with coefficient $b$ .

(ⅰ) A sequence $\{ \theta_{n}\}$ in $(U, d_{lb})$ is said to be Cauchy sequence if for each $\varepsilon > 0$ , there corresponds $n_{0}\in \mathbb{N}$ such that for all $n, m\geq n_{0}$ we have $d_{lb}(\theta_{m}, \theta_{n}) < \varepsilon$ or $\lim_{n, m\rightarrow +\infty }d_{lb}(\theta_{n}, \theta_{m}) = 0.$

(ⅱ) A sequence $\{ \theta_{n}\}$ is rectangular $b$ -convergent (for short, ( $d_{lb}$ )-converges) to $\theta$ if $\lim_{n\rightarrow +\infty }d_{lb}(\theta _{n}, \theta) = 0.$ In this case $\theta$ is called a ( $d_{lb}$ )-limit of $\{ \theta _{n}\}.$

(ⅲ) $(U, d_{lb})$ is complete if every Cauchy sequence in $U \; d_{lb}$ -converges to a point $\theta \in U$ .

Let $\varpi _{b}$ , where $b\geq 1,$ denote the family of all nondecreasing functions $\delta _{b}:[0, +\infty)\rightarrow \lbrack 0, +\infty)$ such that $\sum_{k = 1}^{+\infty }b^{k}\delta _{b}^{k}(t) < +\infty$ and $b\delta _{b}(t) < t$ for all $t > 0,$ where $\delta _{b}^{k}$ is the $k^{th}$ iterate of $\delta _{b}.$ Also $b^{n+1}\delta _{b}^{n+1}(t) = b^{n}b\delta _{b}(\delta _{b}^{n}(t)) < b^{n}\delta _{b}^{n}(t).$

Example 1.3. ^[11] Let $U \; = \mathbb{N}.$ Define $d_{lb}:U\times U\rightarrow \mathbb{R} ^{+}\cup \{0\}$ such that $d_{lb}(u, v) = d_{lb}(v, u)$ for all $u, v\in U$ and $\alpha > 0$

$\begin{equation*} d_{lb}(u,v) = \left\{ \begin{array}{c} 0,\text{ if }u = v; \\ 10\alpha ,\text{ if }u = 1,\text{ }v = 2; \\ \alpha ,\text{ if }u\in \{1,2\}\text{ and }v\in \{3\}; \\ 2\alpha ,\text{ if }u\in \{1,2,3\}\text{ and }v\in \{4\}; \\ 3\alpha ,\text{ if }u\text{ or }v\notin \{1,2,3,4\}\text{ and }u\neq v. \end{array} \right. \end{equation*}$

Then $(U, d_{lb})$ is an $r.b.m.$ space with $b = 2 > 1.$ Note that

$\begin{equation*} d(1,4)+d(4,3)+d(3,2) = 5\alpha \lt 10\alpha = d(1,2). \end{equation*}$

Thus $d_{lb}$ is not a rectangular metric.

Definition 1.4. ^[17] Let $(U, d_{lb})$ be an $r.b.m.$ space with coefficient $b$ . Let $S:U\rightarrow U$ be a mapping and $\alpha :U\times U\rightarrow \lbrack 0, +\infty)$ . If $A\subseteq U,$ we say that the $S$ is $\alpha$ -dominated on $A,$ whenever $\alpha (i, Si)\geq 1$ for all $i\in A.$ If $A = U$ , we say that $S$ is $\alpha$ -dominated $.$

For $\theta, \nu \in U$ , $a > 0,$ we define $D_{lb}(\theta, \nu)$ as

$\begin{equation*} D_{lb}( \theta,\nu ) = \max \{d_{lb}( \theta,\nu ),\frac{d_{lb}\left( \theta,S \theta\right) .d_{lb}\left( \nu ,S\nu \right) }{ a+d_{lb}\left( \theta,\nu \right) },d_{lb}( \theta,S \theta ),d_{lb}(\nu ,S\nu )\}. \end{equation*}$

2. Main result

Now, we present our main result.

Theorem 2.1. Let $(U, d_{lb})$ be a complete $r.b.m.$ space with coefficient $b$ , $\alpha :U\times U\rightarrow \lbrack 0, \infty), \; S:U\rightarrow U$ , $\{ \theta_{n}\}$ be a Picard sequence and $S$ be a $\alpha$ -dominated mapping on $\{ \theta_{n}\}.$ Suppose that, for some $\delta _{b}\in \varpi _{b}$ , we have

$\begin{equation} d_{lb}(S \theta,S\nu )\leq \delta _{b}(D_{lb}( \theta,\nu )), \end{equation}$

(2.1)

for all $\theta, \nu \in \{ \theta_{n}\}$ with $\alpha (\theta, \nu)\geq 1$ . Then $\{ \theta_{n}\}$ converges to $\theta^{\ast }\in U.$ Also, if (2.1) holds for $\theta^{\ast }$ and $\alpha (\theta_{n}, \theta^{\ast })\geq 1$ for all $n\in \mathbb{N} \cup \{0\}$ , then $S$ has a fixed point $\theta^{\ast }$ in $U.$

Proof. Let $\theta_{0}\in U$ be arbitrary. Define the sequence $\{ \theta _{n}\}$ by $\theta_{n+1} = S \theta_{n}$ for all $n\in \mathbb{N} \cup \{0\}.$ We shall show that $\{ \theta_{n}\}$ is a Cauchy sequence. If $\theta _{n} = \theta_{n+1},$ for some $n\in \mathbb{N},$ then $\theta_{n}$ is a fixed point of $S$ . So, suppose that any two consecutive terms of the sequence are not equal. Since $S:U\rightarrow U$ be an $\alpha$ -dominated mapping on $\{ \theta_{n}\}$ , $\alpha (\theta _{n}, S \theta_{n})\geq 1$ for all $n\in \mathbb{N} \cup \{0\}$ and then $\alpha (\theta_{n}, \theta_{n+1})\geq 1$ for all $n\in \mathbb{N} \cup \{0\}.$ Now by using inequality (2.1), we obtain

$\begin{eqnarray*} d_{lb}( \theta_{n+1}, \theta_{n+2}) & = &d_{lb}(S \theta_{n},S \theta_{n+1})\leq \delta _{b}(D_{lb}( \theta_{n}, \theta_{n+1})) \\ &\leq &\delta _{b}(\max \{d_{lb}( \theta_{n}, \theta_{n+1}),\frac{ d_{lb}\left( \theta_{n}, \theta_{n+1}\right) .d_{lb}\left( \theta_{n+1}, \theta_{n+2}\right) }{a+d_{lb}\left( \theta_{n}, \theta_{n+1}\right) }, \\ &&d_{lb}( \theta_{n}, \theta_{n+1}),d_{lb}( \theta_{n+1}, \theta_{n+2})\}) \\ &\leq &\delta _{b}(\max \{d_{lb}( \theta_{n}, \theta_{n+1}),d_{lb}( \theta_{n+1}, \theta_{n+2})\}). \end{eqnarray*}$

If $\max \{d_{lb}(\theta_{n}, \theta_{n+1}), d_{lb}(\theta_{n+1}, \theta _{n+2})\} = d_{lb}(\theta_{n+1}, \theta_{n+2}),$ then

$\begin{eqnarray*} d_{lb}( \theta_{n+1}, \theta_{n+2}) &\leq &\delta _{b}(d_{lb}( \theta_{n+1}, \theta_{n+2})) \\ &\leq &b\delta _{b}(d_{lb}( \theta_{n+1}, \theta_{n+2})). \end{eqnarray*}$

This is the contradiction to the fact that $b\delta _{b}(t) < t$ for all $t > 0.$ So

$\begin{equation*} \max \{d_{lb}( \theta_{n}, \theta_{n+1}),d_{lb}( \theta_{n+1}, \theta_{n+2})\} = d_{lb}( \theta_{n}, \theta_{n+1}). \end{equation*}$

Hence, we obtain

$\begin{equation*} d_{lb}( \theta_{n+1}, \theta_{n+2})\leq \delta _{b}(d_{lb}( \theta_{n}, \theta_{n+1}))\leq \delta _{b}^{2}(d_{lb}( \theta_{n-1}, \theta_{n})) \end{equation*}$

Continuing in this way, we obtain

$\begin{equation} d_{lb}( \theta_{n+1}, \theta_{n+2})\leq \delta _{b}^{n+1}(d_{lb}( \theta_{0}, \theta_{1})). \end{equation}$

(2.2)

Suppose for some $n, m\in \mathbb{N}$ with $m > n,$ we have $\theta_{n} = \theta_{m}$ . Then by (2.2)

$\begin{eqnarray*} d_{lb}( \theta_{n}, \theta_{n+1}) & = &d_{lb}( \theta_{n},S \theta_{n}) = d_{lb}( \theta_{m},S \theta_{m}) = d_{lb}( \theta_{m}, \theta_{m+1}) \\ &\leq &\delta _{b}^{m-n}\left( d_{lb}( \theta_{n}, \theta _{n+1})\right) \lt b\delta _{b}\left( d_{lb}( \theta_{n}, \theta_{n+1})\right) \end{eqnarray*}$

As $d_{lb}(\theta_{n}, \theta_{n+1}) > 0,$ so this is not true, because $b\delta _{b}(t) < t$ for all $t > 0.$ Therefore, $\theta_{n}\neq \theta_{m}$ for any $n, m\in \mathbb{N}$ . Since $\sum_{k = 1}^{+\infty }b^{k}\delta _{b}^{k}(t) < +\infty,$ for some $\nu \in \mathbb{N},$ the series $\sum_{k = 1}^{+\infty }b^{k}\delta _{b}^{k}(\delta _{b}^{\nu -1}(d_{lb}(\theta_{0}, \theta_{1})))$ converges. As $b\delta _{b}(t) < t,$ so

$\begin{equation*} b^{n+1}\delta _{b}^{n+1}(\delta _{b}^{\nu -1}(d_{lb}( \theta_{0}, \theta_{1}))) \lt b^{n}\delta _{b}^{n}(\delta _{b}^{\nu -1}(d_{lb}( \theta _{0}, \theta_{1}))), \text{ for all }n\in \mathbb{N}. \end{equation*}$

Fix $\varepsilon > 0.$ Then $\frac{\varepsilon }{2} = \varepsilon ^{\prime } > 0.$ For $\varepsilon ^{\prime },$ there exists $\nu (\varepsilon ^{\prime })\in \mathbb{N}$ such that

$\begin{equation} b\delta _{b}(\delta _{b}^{\nu (\varepsilon ^{\prime })-1}(d_{lb}( \theta _{0}, \theta_{1})))+b^{2}\delta _{b}^{2}(\delta _{b}^{\nu (\varepsilon ^{\prime })-1}(d_{lb}( \theta_{0}, \theta_{1})))+\cdots \lt \varepsilon ^{\prime } \end{equation}$

(2.3)

Now, we suppose that any two terms of the sequence $\{ \theta_{n}\}$ are not equal. Let $n, m\in \mathbb{N}$ with $m > n > \nu (\varepsilon ^{\prime }).$ Now, if $m > n+2$ ,

$\begin{eqnarray*} d_{lb}( \theta_{n}, \theta_{m}) &\leq &b[d_{lb}( \theta_{n}, \theta_{n+1})+d_{lb}( \theta_{n+1}, \theta_{n+2})+d_{lb}( \theta_{n+2}, \theta_{m})] \\ &\leq &b[d_{lb}( \theta_{n}, \theta_{n+1})+d_{lb}( \theta_{n+1}, \theta_{n+2})]+b^{2}[d_{lb}( \theta_{n+2}, \theta_{n+3}) \\ &&+d_{lb}( \theta_{n+3}, \theta_{n+4})+d_{lb}( \theta_{n+4}, \theta_{m})] \\ &\leq &b[\delta _{b}^{n}\left( d_{lb}( \theta_{0}, \theta _{1})\right) +\delta _{b}^{n+1}\left( d_{lb}( \theta_{0}, \theta_{1})\right) ]+b^{2}[\delta _{b}^{n+2}\left( d_{lb}( \theta_{0}, \theta_{1})\right) \\ &&+\delta _{b}^{n+3}\left( d_{lb}( \theta_{0}, \theta_{1})\right) ]+b^{3}[\delta _{b}^{n+4}\left( d_{lb}( \theta_{0}, \theta _{1})\right) +\delta _{b}^{n+5}\left( d_{lb}( \theta_{0}, \theta_{1})\right) ]+\cdots \\ &\leq &b\delta _{b}^{n}(d_{lb}( \theta_{0}, \theta_{1}))+b^{2}\delta _{b}^{n+1}(d_{lb}( \theta_{0}, \theta_{1}))+b^{3}\delta _{b}^{n+2}\left( d_{lb}( \theta_{0}, \theta_{1})\right) +\cdots \\ & = &b\delta _{b}(\delta _{b}^{n-1}(d_{lb}( \theta_{0}, \theta_{1})))+b^{2}\delta _{b}^{2}(\delta _{b}^{n-1}(d_{lb}( \theta_{0}, \theta_{1})))+\cdots . \end{eqnarray*}$

By using (2.3), we have

$\begin{eqnarray*} &&d_{lb}( \theta_{n}, \theta_{m}) \\ & \lt &b\delta _{b}(\delta _{b}^{\nu (\varepsilon ^{\prime })-1}(d_{lb}( \theta_{0}, \theta_{1})))+b^{2}\delta _{b}^{2}(\delta _{b}^{\nu (\varepsilon ^{\prime })-1}(d_{lb}( \theta_{0}, \theta_{1})))+\cdots \lt \varepsilon ^{\prime } \lt \varepsilon . \end{eqnarray*}$

Now, if $m = n+2$ , then we obtain

$\begin{eqnarray*} &&d_{lb}( \theta_{n}, \theta_{n+2}) \\ &\leq &b[d_{lb}( \theta_{n}, \theta_{n+1})+d_{lb}( \theta_{n+1}, \theta_{n+3})+d_{lb}( \theta_{n+3}, \theta_{n+2})] \\ &\leq &b[d_{lb}( \theta_{n}, \theta_{n+1})+b[d_{lb}( \theta_{n+1}, \theta_{n+2})+d_{lb}( \theta_{n+2}, \theta_{n+4})+d_{lb}( \theta_{n+4}, \theta_{n+3})] \\ &&+d_{lb}( \theta_{n+3}, \theta_{n+2})] \\ &\leq &bd_{lb}( \theta_{n}, \theta_{n+1})+b^{2}d_{lb}( \theta_{n+1}, \theta_{n+2})+bd_{lb}( \theta_{n+2}, \theta_{n+3})+b^{2}d_{lb}( \theta_{n+3}, \theta_{n+4}) \\ &&+b^{3}[d_{lb}( \theta_{n+2}, \theta_{n+3})+d_{lb}( \theta_{n+3}, \theta_{n+5})+d_{lb}( \theta_{n+5}, \theta_{n+4})] \\ &\leq &bd_{lb}( \theta_{n}, \theta_{n+1})+b^{2}d_{lb}( \theta_{n+1}, \theta_{n+2})+\left( b+b^{3}\right) d_{lb}( \theta_{n+2}, \theta_{n+3})+b^{2}d_{lb}( \theta_{n+3}, \theta_{n+4}) \\ &&+b^{3}d_{lb}( \theta_{n+5}, \theta_{n+4})+b^{4}[d_{lb}( \theta_{n+3}, \theta_{n+4})+d_{lb}( \theta_{n+4}, \theta_{n+6})+d_{lb}( \theta_{n+6}, \theta_{n+5})] \\ &\leq &bd_{lb}( \theta_{n}, \theta_{n+1})+b^{2}d_{lb}( \theta_{n+1}, \theta_{n+2})+\left( b+b^{3}\right) d_{lb}( \theta_{n+2}, \theta_{n+3}) \\ &&+\left( b^{2}+b^{4}\right) d_{lb}( \theta_{n+3}, \theta_{n+4})+b^{3}d_{lb}( \theta_{n+5}, \theta_{n+4})+b^{4}d_{lb}( \theta_{n+6}, \theta_{n+5}) \\ &&+b^{5}[d_{lb}( \theta_{n+4}, \theta_{n+5})+d_{lb}( \theta_{n+5}, \theta_{n+7})+d_{lb}( \theta_{n+7}, \theta_{n+6})] \\ &\leq &bd_{lb}( \theta_{n}, \theta_{n+1})+b^{2}d_{lb}( \theta_{n+1}, \theta_{n+2})+\left( b+b^{3}\right) d_{lb}( \theta_{n+2}, \theta_{n+3}) \\ &&+\left( b^{2}+b^{4}\right) d_{lb}( \theta_{n+3}, \theta_{n+4})+\left( b^{3}+b^{5}\right) d_{lb}( \theta_{n+4}, \theta_{n+5})+\cdots \\ & \lt &2[bd_{lb}( \theta_{n}, \theta_{n+1})+b^{2}d_{lb}( \theta_{n+1}, \theta_{n+2})+b^{3}d_{lb}( \theta_{n+2}, \theta_{n+3}) \\ &&+b^{4}d_{lb}( \theta_{n+3}, \theta_{n+4})+b^{5}d_{lb}( \theta_{n+4}, \theta_{n+5})+\cdots ] \\ &\leq &2[b\delta _{b}^{n}(d_{lb}( \theta_{0}, \theta_{1}))+b^{2}\delta _{b}^{n+1}(d_{lb}( \theta_{0}, \theta_{1}))+b^{3}\delta _{b}^{n+2}\left( d_{lb}( \theta_{0}, \theta_{1})\right) +\cdots ] \\ & \lt &2[b\delta _{b}(\delta _{b}^{\nu (\varepsilon ^{\prime })-1}(d_{lb}( \theta_{0}, \theta_{1})))+b^{2}\delta _{b}^{2}(\delta _{b}^{\nu (\varepsilon ^{\prime })-1}(d_{lb}( \theta_{0}, \theta_{1})))+\cdots ] \lt 2\varepsilon ^{\prime } = \varepsilon . \end{eqnarray*}$

It follows that

$\begin{equation} \lim\limits_{n,m\rightarrow +\infty }d_{lb}( \theta_{n}, \theta_{m}) = 0. \end{equation}$

(2.4)

Thus $\{ \theta_{n}\}$ is a Cauchy sequence in $(U, d_{lb})$ . As $(U, d_{lb})$ is complete, so there exists $\theta^{\ast }$ in $U$ such that $\{ \theta_{n}\}$ converges to $\theta^{\ast },$ that is,

$\begin{equation} \lim\limits_{n\rightarrow +\infty }d_{lb}( \theta_{n}, \theta^{\ast }) = 0. \end{equation}$

(2.5)

Now, suppose that $d_{lb}(\theta^{\ast }, S \theta^{\ast }) > 0$ . Then

$\begin{eqnarray*} d_{lb}( \theta^{\ast },S \theta^{\ast }) &\leq &b[d_{lb}( \theta^{\ast }, \theta_{n})+d_{lb}( \theta_{n}, \theta_{n+1})+d_{lb}( \theta_{n+1},S \theta^{\ast }) \\ &\leq &b[d_{lb}( \theta^{\ast }, \theta_{n+1})+d_{lb}( \theta_{n}, \theta_{n+1})+d_{lb}(S \theta_{n},S \theta^{\ast }). \end{eqnarray*}$

Since $\alpha (\theta_{n}, \theta^{\ast })\geq 1,$ we obtain

$\begin{eqnarray*} d_{lb}( \theta^{\ast },S \theta^{\ast }) &\leq &bd_{lb}( \theta^{\ast }, \theta_{n+1})+bd_{lb}( \theta_{n}, \theta_{n+1})+b\delta _{b}(\max \{d_{lb}( \theta_{n}, \theta^{\ast }), \\ &&\frac{d_{lb}\left( \theta^{\ast },S \theta^{\ast }\right) .d_{lb}\left( \theta_{n}, \theta_{n+1}\right) }{a+d_{lb}\left( \theta_{n}, \theta^{\ast }\right) },\text{ }d_{lb}( \theta_{n}, \theta_{n+1})\text{ }d_{lb}( \theta^{\ast },S \theta^{\ast })\}). \end{eqnarray*}$

Letting $n\rightarrow +\infty$ , and using the inequalities (2.4) and (2.5), we obtain $d_{lb}(\theta^{\ast }, S \theta^{\ast })\leq b\delta _{b}(d_{lb}(\theta^{\ast }, S \theta^{\ast })).$ This is not true, because $b\delta _{b}(t) < t$ for all $t > 0$ and hence $d_{lb}(\theta^{\ast }, S \theta^{\ast }) = 0$ or $\theta^{\ast } = S \theta^{\ast }$ . Hence $S$ has a fixed point $\theta^{\ast }$ in $U.$

Remark 2.2. By taking fourteen different proper subsets of $D_{lb}(\theta, \nu),$ we can obtainvnew results as corollaries of our result in a complete $r.b.m.$ space with coefficient $b.$

We have the following result without using $\alpha$ -dominated mapping.

Theorem 2.3. Let $(U, d_{lb})$ be a complete $r.b.m.$ space with coefficient $b, \; S:U\rightarrow U$ , $\{ \theta_{n}\}$ be a Picard sequence. Suppose that, for some $\delta _{b}\in \varpi _{b}$ , we have

$\begin{equation} d_{lb}(S \theta,S\nu )\leq \delta _{b}(D_{lb}( \theta,\nu )) \end{equation}$

(2.6)

for all $\theta, \nu \in \{ \theta_{n}\}$ . Then $\{ \theta_{n}\}$ converges to $\theta^{\ast }\in U.$ Also, if (2.6) holds for $\theta^{\ast }$ , then $S$ has a fixed point $\theta^{\ast }$ in $U.$

We have the following result by taking $\delta _{b}\left(t\right) = ct$ , $t\in \mathbb{R} ^{+}$ with $0 < c < \frac{1}{b}$ without using $\alpha$ -dominated mapping.

Theorem 2.4. Let $(U, d_{lb})$ be a complete $r.b.m.$ space with coefficient $b$ , $S:U\rightarrow U$ , $\{ \theta_{n}\}$ be a Picard sequence. Suppose that, for some $0 < c < \frac{1}{b}$ , we have

$\begin{equation} d_{lb}(S \theta,S\nu )\leq c(D_{lb}( \theta,\nu )) \end{equation}$

(2.7)

for all $\theta, \nu \in \{ \theta_{n}\}$ . Then $\{ \theta_{n}\}$ converges to $\theta^{\ast }\in U.$ Also, if (2.7) holds for $\theta^{\ast }$ , then $S$ has a fixed point $\theta^{\ast }$ in $U.$

Ran and Reurings ^[16] gave an extension to the results in fixed point theory and obtained results in partially ordered metric spaces. Arshad et al. ^[3] introduced $\preceq$ -dominated mappings and established some results in an ordered complete dislocated metric space. We apply our result to obtain results in ordered complete $r.b.m.$ space.

Definition 2.5. $(U, \preceq, d_{lb})$ is said to be an ordered complete $r.b.m.$ space with coefficient $b$ if

(ⅰ) $(U, \preceq)$ is a partially ordered set.

(ⅱ) $(U, d_{lb})$ is an $r.b.m.$ space.

Definition 2.6. ^[3] Let $U$ be a nonempty set, $\preceq$ is a partial order on $\theta.$ A mapping $S:U\rightarrow U$ is said to be $\preceq$ -dominated on $A$ if $a\preceq Sa$ for each $a\in A\subseteq \theta.$ If $A = U,$ then $S:U\rightarrow U$ is said to be $\preceq$ -dominated.

We have the following result for $\preceq$ -dominated mappings in an ordered complete $r.b.m.$ space with coefficient $b$ .

Theorem 2.7. Let $(U, \preceq, d_{lb})$ be an ordered complete $r.b.m.$ space with coefficient $b$ , $S:U\rightarrow U, \; \{ \theta_{n}\}$ be a Picard sequence and $S$ be a $\preceq$ -dominated mapping on $\{ \theta _{n}\}.$ Suppose that, for some $\delta _{b}\in \varpi _{b}$ , we have

$\begin{equation} d_{lb}(S \theta,S\nu )\leq \delta _{b}(D_{lb}( \theta,\nu )), \end{equation}$

(2.8)

for all $\theta, \nu \in \{ \theta_{n}\}$ with $\theta \preceq \nu$ . Then $\{ \theta_{n}\}$ converges to $\theta^{\ast }\in U.$ Also, if (2.8) holds for $\theta^{\ast }$ and $\theta_{n}\preceq \theta^{\ast }$ for all $n\in \mathbb{N} \cup \{0\}$ . Then $S$ has a fixed point $\theta^{\ast }$ in $U$ .

Proof. Let $\alpha :U\times U\rightarrow \lbrack 0, +\infty)$ be a mapping defined by $\alpha (\theta, \nu) = 1$ for all $\theta, \nu \in U$ with $\theta \preceq \nu$ and $\alpha (\theta, \nu) = \frac{4}{11}$ for all other elements $\theta, \nu \in U.$ As $S$ is the dominated mappings on $\{ \theta_{n}\},$ so $\theta \preceq S \theta$ for all $\theta \in \{ \theta_{n}\}.$ This implies that $\alpha (\theta, S \theta) = 1$ for all $\theta \in \{ \theta_{n}\}.$ So $S:U\rightarrow U$ is the $\alpha$ -dominated mapping on $\{ \theta_{n}\}.$ Moreover, inequality (2.8) can be written as

$\begin{equation*} d_{lb}(S \theta,S\nu )\leq \delta _{b}(D_{lb}( \theta,\nu )) \end{equation*}$

for all elements $\theta, \nu$ in $\{ \theta_{n}\}$ with $\alpha (\theta, \nu)\geq 1.$ Then, as in Theorem 2.1, $\{ \theta_{n}\}$ converges to $\theta^{\ast }\in U.$ Now, $\theta_{n}\preceq \theta^{\ast }$ implies $\alpha (\theta_{n}, \theta^{\ast })\geq 1.$ So all the conditions of Theorem 2.1 are satisfied. Hence, by Theorem 2.1, $S$ has a fixed point $\theta^{\ast }$ in $U$ .

Now, we present an example of our main result. Note that the results of George et al. ^[11] and all other results in rectangular $b$ -metric space are not applicable to ensure the existence of the fixed point of the mapping given in the following example.

Example 2.8. Let $U = A\cup B,$ where $A = \{\frac{1}{n}:n\in \{2, 3, 4, 5\}\}$ and $B = [1, \infty ].$ Define $d_{l}:U\times U\rightarrow \lbrack 0, \infty)$ such that $d_{l}(\theta, \nu) = d_{l}(\nu, \theta)$ for $\theta, \nu \in U$ and

$\begin{equation*} \left\{ \begin{array}{c} d_{l}(\frac{1}{2},\frac{1}{3}) = d_{l}(\frac{1}{4},\frac{1}{5}) = 0.03 \\ d_{l}(\frac{1}{2},\frac{1}{5}) = d_{l}(\frac{1}{3},\frac{1}{4}) = 0.02 \\ d_{l}(\frac{1}{2},\frac{1}{4}) = d_{l}(\frac{1}{5},\frac{1}{3}) = 0.6 \\ d_{l}( \theta,\nu ) = \left\vert \theta-\nu \right\vert ^{2}\rm{ \ \ \ \ otherwise} \end{array} \right. \end{equation*}$

be a complete $r.b.m.$ space with coefficient $b \; = 4 > 1$ but $\ (U, d_{l})$ is neither a metric space nor a rectangular metric space. Take $\delta _{b}(t) = \frac{t}{10},$ then $b\delta _{b}(t) < t.$ Let $S:U\rightarrow U$ be defined as

$\begin{equation*} S \theta = \left\{ \begin{array}{c} \frac{1}{5}{\rm{ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ if }}\; \theta \in A \\ \frac{1}{3}\rm{ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ if} \theta = 1 \\ 9 \theta^{100}+85\rm{\ otherwise.} \end{array} \right. \end{equation*}$

Let $\theta_{0} = 1.$ Then the Picard sequence $\{ \theta_{n}\}$ is $\{1, \frac{1}{ 3}, \frac{1}{5}, \frac{1}{5}, \frac{1}{5}, \cdots \}$ . Define

$\begin{equation*} \alpha ( \theta,\nu ) = \left\{ \begin{array}{c} \frac{8}{5}{\rm{ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ if}} \theta ,\nu \in \{ \theta_{n}\} \\ \frac{4}{7}\rm{\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ otherwise.} \end{array} \right. \end{equation*}$

Then $S\$ is an $\alpha$ -dominated mapping on $\{ \theta_{n}\}.$ Now, $S$ satisfies all the conditions of Theorem 2.1. Here $\frac{1}{5}$ is the fixed point in $U.$

3. Fixed point results for graphic contractions

Jachymski ^[13] proved the contraction principle for mappings on a metric space with a graph. Let $(U, d)$ be a metric space and $\bigtriangleup$ represents the diagonal of the cartesian product $U\times U.$ Suppose that $G$ be a directed graph having the vertices set $V(G)$ along with $U,$ and the set $E(G)$ denoted the edges of $U_{{}}$ included all loops, i.e., $E(G)\supseteq \bigtriangleup.$ If $G$ has no parallel edges, then we can unify $G$ with pair $(V(G), E(G))$ . If $l$ and $m$ are the vertices in a graph $G,$ then a path in $G$ from $l$ to $m$ of length $N \; (N\in \mathbb{N})$ is a sequence $\{ \theta_{i}\}_{i = o}^{N}$ of $N+1$ vertices such that $l_{o} = l, \; l_{N} = m$ and $(l_{n-1}, l_{n})\in E(G)$ where $i = 1, 2, \cdots N$ (see for detail ^{[7,8,12,14,18,19]}). Recently, Younis et al. ^[20] introduced the notion of graphical rectangular $b$ -metric spaces (see also ^[5,6,21]). Now, we present our result in this direction.

Definition 3.1. Let $\theta$ be a nonempty set and $G = (V(G), E(G))$ be a graph such that $V(G) = U$ and $A\subseteq U$ . A mapping $S:U\rightarrow U$ is said to be graph dominated on $A$ if $(\theta, S \theta)\in E(G)$ for all $\theta \in A$ .

Theorem 3.2. Let $(U, d_{lb})$ be a complete rectangular $b$ -metric space endowed with a graph $G$ , $\{ \theta_{n}\}$ be a Picard sequence and $S:U\rightarrow U$ be a graph dominated mapping on $\{ \theta_{n}\}$ . Suppose that the following hold:

(i) there exists $\delta _{b}\in \varpi _{b}$ such that

$\begin{equation} d_{lb}(S \theta,S\nu )\leq \delta _{b}(D_{lb}( \theta,\nu )), \end{equation}$

(3.1)

for all $\theta, \nu \in \{ \theta_{n}\}$ and $(\theta_n, \nu)\in E(G)$ . Then $(\theta_{n}, \theta_{n+1})\in E(G)$ and $\{ \theta_{n}\}$ converges to $\theta^{\ast }.$ Also, if (3.1) holds for $\theta^{\ast }$ and $(\theta_{n}, \theta^{\ast })\in E(G)$ for all $n\in \mathbb{N} \cup \{0\}$ , then $S$ has a fixed point $\theta^{\ast }$ in $U.$

Proof. Define $\alpha :U\times U\rightarrow \lbrack 0, +\infty)$ by

$\begin{equation*} \alpha ( \theta,\nu ) = \left\{ \begin{array}{c} 1,{\rm{\ if }}\; \theta,\nu \in U,\text{ }( \theta,\nu )\in E(G) \\ \frac{1}{4},\rm{ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ otherwise}. \end{array} \right. \end{equation*}$

Since $S$ is a graph dominated on $\{ \theta_{n}\},$ for $\theta \in \{ \theta_{n}\}, \; (\theta, S \theta)\in E(G)$ . This implies that $\alpha (\theta, S \theta) = 1$ for all $\theta \in \{ \theta_{n}\}.$ So $S:U\rightarrow U$ is an $\alpha$ -dominated mapping on $\{ \theta_{n}\}.$ Moreover, inequality (3.1) can be written as

$\begin{equation*} d_{lb}(S \theta,S\nu )\leq \delta _{b}(D_{lb}( \theta,\nu )), \end{equation*}$

for all elements $\theta, \nu$ in $\{ \theta_{n}\}$ with $\alpha (\theta, \nu)\geq 1.$ Then, by Theorem 2.1, $\{ \theta_{n}\}$ converges to $\theta^{\ast }\in U.$ Now, $(\theta_{n}, \theta^{\ast })\in E(G)$ implies that $\alpha (\theta_{n}, \theta^{\ast })\geq 1.$ So all the conditions of Theorem 2.1 are satisfied. Hence, by Theorem 2.1, $S$ has a fixed point $\theta^{\ast }$ in $U$ .

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank the Editor, the Associate Editor and the anonymous referees for sparing their valuable time for reviewing this article. The thoughtful comments of reviewers are very useful to improve and modify this article.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

References

[1]	W. Peng, N. L. Ma, D. Zhang, Q. Zhou, X. Yue, S. C. Khoo, et al., A review of historical and recent locust outbreaks: Links to global warming, food security and mitigation strategies, Environ. Res., 191 (2020), 110046. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envres.2020.110046 doi: 10.1016/j.envres.2020.110046
[2]	X. Gao, G. Li, X. Wang, S. Wang, F. Li, Y. Wang, et al., The locust plagues of the Ming and Qing dynasties in the Xiang-E-Gan region, China, Nat. Hazards, 107 (2021), 1149–1165. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-021-04622-y doi: 10.1007/s11069-021-04622-y
[3]	H. I. Freedman, G. S. Wolkowicz, Predator-prey systems with group defence: the paradox of enrichment revisited, Bull. Math. Biol., 48 (1986), 493–508. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02462320 doi: 10.1007/BF02462320
[4]	H. I. Freedman, S. Ruan, Hopf bifurcation in three-species food chain models with group defense, Math. Biosci., 111 (1992), 73–87. https://doi.org/10.1016/0025-5564(92)90079-C doi: 10.1016/0025-5564(92)90079-C
[5]	J. C. Holmes, W. M. Bethel, Modification of intermediate host behaviour by parasites, Zool. J. Linn. Soc., 51 (1972), 123–149.
[6]	A. A. Salih, M. Baraibar, K. K. Mwangi, G. Artan, Climate change and locust outbreak in East Africa, Nat. Clim. Change, 10 (2020), 584–585. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-020-0835-8 doi: 10.1038/s41558-020-0835-8
[7]	C. N. Meynard, M. Lecoq, M. P. Chapuis, C. Piou, On the relative role of climate change and management in the current desert locust outbreak in East Africa, Global. Change. Biol., 26 (2020), 3753–3755. https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.15137 doi: 10.1111/gcb.15137
[8]	M. L. Flint, Integrated Pest Management for Walnuts, 2nd edition, University of California, Oakland, 1987.
[9]	J. C. V. Lenteren, J. Woets, Biological and integrated pest control in greenhouses, Ann. Rev. Entomol, 33 (1988), 239–250. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.en.33.010188.001323 doi: 10.1146/annurev.en.33.010188.001323
[10]	S. Y. Tang, Y. Tian, R. A. Cheke, Dynamic complexity of a predator-prey model for IPM with nonlinear impulsive control incorporating a regulatory factor for predator releases, Math. Model. Anal., 24 (2019), 134–154. https://doi.org/10.3846/mma.2019.010 doi: 10.3846/mma.2019.010
[11]	T. T. Yu, Y. Tian, H. J. Guo, X. Song, Dynamical analysis of an integrated pest management predator Cprey model with weak Allee effect, J. Biol. Dyn., 13 (2019), 218–244. https://doi.org/10.1080/17513758.2019.1589000 doi: 10.1080/17513758.2019.1589000
[12]	B. P. Baker, T. A. Green, A. J. Loker, Biological control and integrated pest management in organic and conventional systems, Biol. Control, 140 (2020), 104095. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocontrol.2019.104095 doi: 10.1016/j.biocontrol.2019.104095
[13]	J. C. Headley, Defining the Economic Threshold, in Pest Control Strategies for the Future, National Academy of Sciences, (1972), 100–108.
[14]	L. G. Higley, D. J. Boethel, Handbook of Soybean Insect Pests, Entomological Society of America, 1994.
[15]	L. P. Pedigo, S. H. Hutchins, L. G. Higley, Economic injury levels in theory and practice, Ann. Rev. Entomol., 31 (1986), 341–368. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.en.31.010186.002013 doi: 10.1146/annurev.en.31.010186.002013
[16]	Y. Tian, K. Sun, L. S. Chen, Geometric approach to the stability analysis of the periodic solution in a semi-continuous dynamic system, Int. J. Biomath., 7 (2014), 1450018. https://doi.org/10.1142/S1793524514500181 doi: 10.1142/S1793524514500181
[17]	S. Y. Tang, W. H. Pang, R. A. Cheke, J. Wu, Global dynamics of a state-dependent feedback control system, Adv. Differ. Equ-Ny, 1 (2015).
[18]	B. Liu, Y. Tian, B. L. Kang, Dynamics on a Holling II predator Cprey model with state-dependent impulsive control, Int. J. Biomath., 5 (2012), 1260006. https://doi.org/10.1142/S1793524512600066 doi: 10.1142/S1793524512600066
[19]	Y. Tian, S. Y. Tang, Dynamics of a density-dependent predator-prey biological system with nonlinear impulsive control, Math. Biosci. Eng., 18 (2021), 7318–7343. https://doi.org/10.3934/mbe.2021362 doi: 10.3934/mbe.2021362
[20]	I. Ullah Khan, S. Ullah, E. Bonyah, B. A. Alwan, A. Alshehri, A state-dependent impulsive nonlinear system with ratio-dependent action threshold for investigating the pest-natural enemy model, Complexity, 2022 (2022), 7903450. https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/7903450 doi: 10.1155/2022/7903450
[21]	V. I. Utkin, Sliding Modes and Their Applications in Variable Structure Systems, Mir Publishers, Moscow, 1994.
[22]	A. F. Filippov, Differential Equations with Discontinuous Righthand Sides, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, 1988.
[23]	V. I. Utkin, Sliding Modes in Control and Optimization, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1992.
[24]	Y. A. Kuznetsov, S. Rinaldi, A. Gragnani, One parameter bifurcations in planar Filippov systems, Int. J. Bifurc. Chaos, 13 (2003), 2157–2188. https://doi.org/10.1142/S0218127403007874 doi: 10.1142/S0218127403007874
[25]	W. J. Qin, S. Y. Tang, C. C. Xiang, Y. Yang, Effects of limited medical resource on a Filippov infectious disease model induced by selection pressure, Appl. Math. Comput., 283 (2016), 339–354. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amc.2016.02.042 doi: 10.1016/j.amc.2016.02.042
[26]	D. Y. Wu, H. Y. Zhao, Y. Yuan, Complex dynamics of a diffusive predator-prey model with strong Allee effect and threshold harvesting, J. Math. Anal. Appl., 469 (2019), 982–1014.
[27]	Y. N. Xiao, X. X. Xu, S. Y. Tang, Sliding mode control of outbreaks of emerging infectious diseases, Bull. Math. Biol., 74 (2012), 2403–2422. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11538-012-9758-5 doi: 10.1007/s11538-012-9758-5
[28]	W. J. Qin, X. W. Tan, X. T. Shi, J. Chen, X. Liu, Dynamics and bifurcation analysis of a Filippov predator-prey ecosystem in a seasonally fluctuating environment, Int. J. Bifurc. Chaos, 29 (2019), 1950020. https://doi.org/10.1142/S0218127419500202 doi: 10.1142/S0218127419500202
[29]	J. Bhattacharyya, P. T. Piiroinen, S. Banerjee, Dynamics of a Filippov predator-prey system with stage-specific intermittent harvesting, Nonlinear Dyn., 105 (2021), 1019–1043. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11071-021-06549-2 doi: 10.1007/s11071-021-06549-2
[30]	K. Enberg, Benefits of threshold strategies and age-selective harvesting in a fluctuating fish stock of Norwegian spring spawning herring Clupea harengus, Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser., 298 (2005), 277–286. https://doi.org/10.3354/meps298277 doi: 10.3354/meps298277
[31]	V. I. Utkin, J. Guldner, J. X. Shi, Sliding Model Control in Electromechanical Systems, Taylor Francis Group, London, 2009.
[32]	C. Dong, C. Xiang, W. Qin, Y. Yang, Global dynamics for a Filippov system with media effects, Math. Biosci. Eng., 19 (2022), 2835–2852. https://doi.org/10.3934/mbe.2022130 doi: 10.3934/mbe.2022130
[33]	C. Erazo, M. E. Homer, P. T. Piiroinen, M. Bernardo, Dynamic cell mapping algorithm for computing basins of attraction in planar Filippov systems, Int. J. Bifurc. Chaos, 27 (2017), 1730041. https://doi.org/10.1142/S0218127417300415 doi: 10.1142/S0218127417300415
[34]	J. Deng, S. Tang, H. Shu, Joint impacts of media, vaccination and treatment on an epidemic Filippov model with application to COVID-19, J. Theor. Biol., 523 (2021), 110698.
[35]	D. M. Xiao, S. R. Ruan, Codimension two bifurcations in a predator Cprey system with group defense, Int. J. Bifurc. Chaos, 11 (2001), 2123–2131.
[36]	X. Hou, B. Liu, Y. Wang, Z. Zhao, Complex dynamics in a Filippov pest control model with group defense, Int. J. Biomath., 15 (2022), 2250053. https://doi.org/10.1142/S179352452250053X doi: 10.1142/S179352452250053X
[37]	R. M. Corless, G. H. Gonnet, D. E. G. Hare, D. J. Jeffrey, D. E. Knuth, On the LambertW function, Adv. Comput. Math., 5 (1996), 329–359.

This article has been cited by:

Haydar Akca, Chaouki Aouiti, Farid Touati, Changjin Xu, Finite-time passivity of neutral-type complex-valued neural networks with time-varying delays, 2024, 21, 1551-0018, 6097, 10.3934/mbe.2024268

Reader Comments

Your name:*

Email:*
© 2023 the Author(s), licensee AIMS Press. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)