In the real world, from the principle of ecosystem balance and saving resources, we only need to control the prey under the economic threshold level, and not to eradicate the prey totally. Thus we focus on the permanence of system (1.1).
First, we give the definition of permanence.
Definition 4.1 System (1.1) is said to be permanent if there exist positive constants m and M such that each positive solution of system (1.1) satisfies , , , for t large enough.
Theorem 4.1 Assume that:
where M, , , q are defined in (2.4), (4.7), (4.10), (4.13), respectively, then system (1.1) is permanent.
Proof Firstly, we will prove that there exists a constant such that for t sufficiently large. The second equation of (1.1) is equivalent to the following equality:
(4.1)
According to (4.1), we define
Calculating the derivative of , we obtain
(4.2)
Applying Lemma 2.5, (4.2) can be re-written as follows:
(4.3)
By hypothesis (A2), there is an arbitrary small positive such that
(4.4)
where .
Let be determined as follows:
Then, for any , it is impossible that for all . Suppose that the claim is invalid, then there is such that for all . It follows from the fourth and the eight equations of system (1.1) that
(4.5)
for all . Consider the following auxiliary impulsive system of (4.5):
(4.6)
By using Lemma 2.3, the unique positive periodic solution of (4.6) is
This is globally asymptotically stable by hypothesis (A3). Taking into account the comparison theorem of an impulsive differential equation, there exists () such that
For , we have
(4.7)
Then
(4.8)
According to (4.4), we have
By (4.3) and (4.8), we get
(4.9)
Let .
We will show that for all . Otherwise, there exists a such that for , and . From the second equation of system (1.1) and (4.8), we have
This is a contradiction. Thus, we have , .
By (4.4) and (4.9), we have
This means that as . It is a contradiction with .
Therefore, for any , the inequality cannot hold for all . So there exist the following two possibilities.
-
(i)
If holds for all t large enough, then our goal is obtained.
-
(ii)
If is oscillatory about . Setting
(4.10)
we prove that for all t large enough. Suppose that there exist two positive constants γ, η such that and for all , where γ is large enough, and the inequality (4.8) holds true for . Since is continuous, bounded, and is not affected by impulses, we conclude that is uniformly continuous. Hence, there exists a constant ( and is independent of the choice of γ) such that for . If , our aim is obtained. If , from the second equation of (1.1), we obtain, for , . According to the assumption and for , we have for . Then we derive that . It is clear that for . If , then we have for . The same arguments can be continued. We obtain for . Since the interval is arbitrarily chosen, we get for t large enough. In view of our arguments above, the choice of is independent of the positive solution of (1.1), which satisfies for t large enough.
Next, by the first and the fifth equations of system (1.1), we have
(4.11)
Consider the auxiliary system of (4.11) as follows:
(4.12)
By hypothesis (A4), and applying Lemma 2.4, we have
By the comparison theorem, there exists a positive constant sufficiently small such that as t is large enough. Taking into account the comparison theorem of an impulsive differential equation, we obtain
From (3.3), let , then .
Finally, by the third equation of system (1.1), we have
(4.13)
Consider the auxiliary system of (4.13),
(4.14)
It is easy to calculate that
Applying the comparison theorem, by hypothesis (A5), there exists a positive constant small enough when t is large enough, such that
Then taking , we have , . Considering Lemma 2.5 and the above discussion, we can find that system (1.1) is permanent. This completes the proof. □