Skip to main content
Elsevier - PMC COVID-19 Collection logoLink to Elsevier - PMC COVID-19 Collection
. 2019 Nov 4;544:123379. doi: 10.1016/j.physa.2019.123379

A delayed vaccinated epidemic model with nonlinear incidence rate and Lévy jumps

Kuangang Fan a,, Yan Zhang b, Shujing Gao b, Shihua Chen c
PMCID: PMC7154516  PMID: 32308254

Abstract

A stochastic susceptible–infectious–recovered epidemic model with nonlinear incidence rate is formulated to discuss the effects of temporary immunity, vaccination, and Le.´vy jumps on the transmission of diseases. We first determine the existence of a unique global positive solution and a positively invariant set for the stochastic system. Sufficient conditions for extinction and persistence in the mean of the disease are then achieved by constructing suitable Lyapunov functions. Based on the analysis, we conclude that noise intensity and the validity period of vaccination greatly influence the transmission dynamics of the system.

Keywords: Extinction, Lévy jumps, Nonlinear incidence rate, Stochastic delayed epidemic model, Vaccination

Highlights

  • A stochastic SIR epidemic model with vaccination and temporary immunity is proposed.

  • The effects of nonlinear incidence rate and Le´vy jumps are considered.

  • Sufficient conditions for extinction and persistence in the mean are established.

  • Noise intensity and validity period of vaccination influence transmission dynamics.

1. Introduction

Epidemics exert considerable influence on human life. Controlling and eradicating infectious diseases are ongoing problems that have received increasing attention from numerous authors [1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6]. Various factors, such as vaccination, time delay, impulse and so on, are used to construct mathematical models and seek effective ways to eliminate infectious diseases. Time delay, which has great biologic meaning in epidemic systems, is often used [7], [8], [9], [10]. Many scholars have also paid close attention to the effects of the temporary disease immunity of epidemic models, i.e., a fleeting immunity to a disease after recovery before becoming susceptible again. The phenomenon is common during the transmission of many epidemic diseases, such as influenza, Chlamydia trachomatis, Salmonella and so on. Thus, in current paper, we introduce temporal delays to make epidemic models more realistic and interesting.

Epidemic models are inevitably subject to environmental noise. Most epidemic models are driven by white noise, and many results have been achieved in this area [11], [12], [13], [14], [15], [16], [17], [18], [19]. However, under severe environmental perturbations, such as avian influenza, severe acute respiratory syndrome, volcanic eruptions, earthquakes, and hurricanes, the continuity of solutions may be broken; accordingly, a jump process should be introduced to prevent and control diseases [20], [21], [22], [23].

In the present work, we consider the effects of vaccination and temporary immunity on a stochastic susceptible–infectious–recovered (SIR) epidemic model driven by Lévy noise. A generalized nonlinear incidence rate f(S(t))g(I(t)) is also introduced. Based on the above factors, we formulate the delayed vaccinated SIR epidemic model as follows:

dS(t)=(ΛμS(t)pS(t)βf(S(t))g(I(t))+pS(tτ1)eμτ1+γI(tτ2)eμτ2)dtf(S(t))g(I(t))(σ1dB1(t)+Yγ(u)N~(dt,du)),dI(t)=(βf(S(t))g(I(t))(μ+γ)I(t))dt+f(S(t))g(I(t))(σ1dB1(t)+Yγ(u)N~(dt,du)),dR(t)=(γI(t)+pS(t)μR(t)pS(tτ1)eμτ1γI(tτ2)eμτ2)dt+σ2R(t)dB2(t) (1.1)

where S(t), I(t), and R(t) are the numbers of susceptible, infectious, and recovered populations, respectively. Λ represents the constant recruitment of susceptible individuals, μ is the natural death rate of populations, β is the transmission rate, γ represents the recovery rate, p denotes the proportional coefficient of the vaccinated for the susceptible, τ1 represents the validity period of the vaccination and τ2 is the length of the immunity period. All parameters are assumed to be positive constants.

Herein, σi2(t) (i=1,2) is the intensity of white noise and σi>0 (i=1,2); and Bi(t) (i=1,2) is the standard Brownian motions, which are defined on a complete probability space (Ω,F,P) with filtration {Ft}tR+ satisfying the usual conditions [21]. N is a Poisson counting measure with compensator N~ and characteristic measure λ on a measurable subset Y of (0,) which satisfies λ(Y)<; λ is assumed to be a lévy measure, such that N~(dt,du)=N(dt,du)λN~(du)dt; γ:Y×ΩR is bounded and continuous with respect to λ and is B(Y)×Ft-measurable, where B(Y) is a σ-algebra with respect to the set Y, Ft is a sub σ-algebra of F, and F is a σ-algebra of subsets of a given set Ω [22]. In this paper, Bi and N are assumed to be independent of each other.

As the first two equations do not depend on the last equation in system (1.1), therefore, we only consider the equations as follows:

dS(t)=(ΛμS(t)pS(t)βf(S(t))g(I(t))+pS(tτ1)eμτ1+γI(tτ2)eμτ2)dtf(S(t))g(I(t))(σ1dB1(t)+Yγ(u)N~(dt,du)),dI(t)=(βf(S(t))g(I(t))(μ+γ)I(t))dt+f(S(t))g(I(t))(σ1dB1(t)+Yγ(u)N~(dt,du)). (1.2)

The initial conditions of model (1.2) are

S(ξ)=ϕ1(ξ)0,I(ξ)=ϕ2(ξ)0,ξ[τ,0],ϕi(0)>0,i=1,2, (1.3)

where (ϕ1(ξ),ϕ2(ξ)) L1([τ,0];R+2) is the space of continuous functions mapping the interval [τ,0] into R+2, herein, R+2={(x1,x2):xi>0,i=1,2}, τ=max{τ1,τ2}. According to the phenomena observed in nature, such as bee colonies, we assume that the self-regulating competitions within the same species are strictly positive, that is,

Assumption (H1) γ(u) is a bounded function and |Λμγ(u)|θ<1, uY.

We also establish the following assumptions on functions f(S) and g(I):

Assumption (H2) f(S) is a continuously differentiable function and monotonically increasing on R+, f(0)=0. A constant l>0 exists, such that mlinf0<Slf(S)S<, and Mlsup0<Slf(S)S<.

Assumption (H3) g(I) is twice continuously differentiable, and g(I)I is monotone decreasing on R+, g(0)=0, and g(0)>0.

The aim of this paper is to prove the existence and uniqueness of a global positive solution. The extinction and persistence in the mean of the system are also discussed.

2. Preliminaries

In this section, we list some notations, definitions and lemmas. First, we denote

fu=supt0f(t),fl=inft0f(t),f(t)=1t0tf(s)ds,f=lim supt+f(t),f=lim inft+f(t),

where f(t) is a continuous and bounded function defined on [0,+).

Then, we give the Itoˆ’s formula for general stochastic differential equations. Define the n-dimensional stochastic equation [24]:

dX=f(t,X)dt+g(t,X)dB1(t) (2.1)

with initial value X(t0)=X0. Here, f(t,X)=(f1(t,X),f2(t,X),,fn(t,X)) is a n-dimensional vector function, (g(t,X))n×l is a n×l matrix function and B1(t)=(B1(t),B2(t),,Bl(t)) is a ldimensional standard Brownian motion defined on the probability space (Ω,F,P). Define the differential operator L associated with Eq. (2.1)

L=t+i=1nfi(t,X)xi+12i,j=1nk=1lgik(t,X)gjk(t,X)2xixj.

If function V(t,X)2,1(Rn×R;R), then we have

LV(t,X)=Vt+i=1nfi(t,X)Vxi+12i,j=1nk=1lgik(t,X)gjk(t,X)2Vxixj.

Thus, the Itoˆ’s formula is listed as follows

Lemma 2.1 [24]

Let X(t) satisfy Eq. (2.1) and function V(t,X)2,1(Rn×R;R) . Then

dV(t,X)=LV(t,X)dt+VX(t,X)g(t,X)dB1(t),

here, VX(t,X)=(V(t,X)x1,V(t,X)x1,,V(t,X)xn) .

Lemma 2.2 [25]

Suppose that x(t)[Ω×R+,R+0] , here R+0{a|a>0,aR} . 1+γi(u)>0,uY and there exists a positive constant C such that Y(ln(1+γi(u)))2λ(du)<C , then

(1) If positive constants λ0 , T and λ0 exist such that

lnx(t)λtλ00tx(s)ds+i=1nβiBi(t)+i=1n0tYln(1+γi(u))N~(dt,du),

for all tT , where βi is a constant, 1in , then,

xλλ0a.s.,ifλ00;limtx(t)=0a.s.,ifλ0<0.

(2) If positive constants λ0 , T and λ0 exist such that

lnx(t)λtλ00tx(s)ds+i=1nβiBi(t)+i=1n0tYln(1+γi(u))N~(dt,du),

for all tT , then, xλλ0a.s .

3. Existence and uniqueness of the global solution

Denote

Γ={(S,I)R+2:S+IΛμN0}

and then we discuss the existence and uniqueness of the global positive solution and the positive invariant of system (1.2) with positive initial value (1.3).

Theorem 3.1

If Assumption (H1) hold, then for any initial value (S(0),I(0))L1([τ,0];R+2) , a unique solution (S(t),I(t))R+2 of system (1.2) exists on tτ and the solution will remain in R+2 with probability one.

Proof

According to the local Lipschitz condition of system (1.2), we obtain that for any initial value X0=(S(0),I(0))R+2, a unique local solution (S(t),I(t)) exists on [τ,τe), herein, τe represents the explosion time. To prove that the solution is global, it is required to obtain that τe= a.s. Then, we suppose that k01 is sufficiently large such that S(0) and I(0) lie within the interval [1k0,k0]. For each integer k>k0, we define the stopping time τk =inf{t[τ,τe]:S(t)(1k,k),orI(t)(1k,k)}. Then, τk increases as k. Denote τ=limk+τk, thus ττe. In the following, we need to show that τ=. If not, there are constants T>0 and ε(0,1) satisfying P{τ<}>ε. Thus, an integer k1k0 exists such that P{τkT}ε, for all k>k1. Construct a C2-function V:R+2R+ by

V(S,I)=(SaalnSa)+(I1lnI)+peμτ1tτ1tS(s)ds+γeμτ2tτ2tI(s)ds, (3.1)

where a is a constant that will be given later. By virtue of Itoˆ’s formula, we derive

dV(S,I)=(1aS)[(ΛμSpSβf(S)g(I)+pS(tτ1)eμτ1+γI(tτ2)eμτ2)dtσ1f(S)g(I)dB1(t)]+aσ12f2(S)g2(I)2S2dtaY[ln(1f(S)Sg(I)γ(u))+f(S)Sg(I)γ(u)]λ(du)dtY[aln(1f(S)Sg(I)γ(u))+f(S)g(I)γ(u)]N~(dt,du)+(11I)[(βf(S)g(I)(μ+γ)I)dt+σ1f(S)g(I)dB1(t)]+σ12f2(S)g2(I)2I2dtY[ln(1+f(S)g(I)Iγ(u))f(S)g(I)Iγ(u)]λ(du)dt+Y[f(S)g(I)γ(u)ln(1+f(S)g(I)Iγ(u))]N~(dt,du)+pSeμτ1dtpS(tτ1)eμτ1dt+γIeμτ2dtγI(tτ2)eμτ2dt=(1aS)[(ΛμSpSβf(S)g(I)+pS(tτ1)eμτ1+γI(tτ2)eμτ2)]dt+[aσ12f2(S)g2(I)2S2aY[ln(1f(S)Sg(I)γ(u))+f(S)Sg(I)γ(u)]λ(du)]dt+[(11I)(βf(S)g(I)(μ+γ)I)+σ12f2(S)g2(I)2I2]dtY[ln(1+f(S)g(I)Iγ(u))f(S)g(I)Iγ(u)]λ(du)dt+(pSeμτ1pS(tτ1)eμτ1+γIeμτ2γI(tτ2)eμτ2)dtσ1(1aS)f(S)g(I)dB1(t)+σ1(11I)f(S)g(I)dB1(t)Y[aln(1f(S)Sg(I)γ(u))+f(S)g(I)γ(u)]N~(dt,du)+Y[ln(1+f(S)g(I)Iγ(u))+f(S)g(I)γ(u)]N~(dt,du)=LV(S,I)dtσ1(Sa)f(S)Sg(I)dB1(t)+σ1(I1)f(S)g(I)IdB1(t)Y[aln(1f(S)Sg(I)γ(u))+f(S)g(I)γ(u)]N~(dt,du)+Y[ln(1+f(S)g(I)Iγ(u))+f(S)g(I)γ(u)]N~(dt,du). (3.2)

Here, LV:R+2R+ is defined as follows

LV(S,I)=(1aS)[(ΛμSpSβf(S)g(I)+pS(tτ1)eμτ1+γI(tτ2)eμτ2)]aY[ln(1f(S)Sg(I)γ(u))+f(S)Sg(I)γ(u)]λ(du)+aσ12f2(S)g2(I)2S2+[(11I)(βf(S)g(I)(μ+γ)I)+σ12f2(S)g2(I)2I2]Y[ln(1+f(S)g(I)Iγ(u))f(S)g(I)Iγ(u)]λ(du)+(pSeμτ1pS(tτ1)eμτ1+γIeμτ2γI(tτ2)eμτ2)(Λ+μa+pa+μ+γ)(μ+p(1eμτ1))SaΛS+[aβf(S)Sg(I)μγ(1eμτ2)]I+aσ12f2(S)g2(I)2S2+σ12f2(S)g2(I)2I2aY[ln(1f(S)Sg(I)γ(u))+f(S)Sg(I)γ(u)]λ(du)Y[ln(1+f(S)g(I)Iγ(u))f(S)g(I)Iγ(u)]λ(du)(Λ+μa+pa+μ+γ)+[aβMN0g(0)μγ(1eμτ2)]I+aσ12f2(S)g2(I)2S2+σ12f2(S)g2(I)2I2+aYφ1λ(du)+Yφ2λ(du), (3.3)

where φ1=ln(1f(S)Sg(I)γ(u))f(S)Sg(I)γ(u), φ2=ln(1+f(S)g(I)Iγ(u))+f(S)g(I)Iγ(u), and we choose a=μ+γ(1eμτ2)βMN0g(0).

On the other hand, we achieve that

d(S+I+peμttτ1teμSS(s)ds+γeμttτ2teμSI(s)ds)=[ΛμSpS+pS(tτ1)eμτ1+γI(tτ2)eμτ2]dtf(S(t))g(I(t))(σ1dB1(t)+Yγ(u)N~(dt,du))(μ+γ)Idt+f(S(t))g(I(t))(σ1dB1(t)+Yγ(u)N~(dt,du))+γI(t)dtγI(tτ2)eμτ2dtpμeμttτ1teμsS(s)dsdtγμeμttτ2teμsI(s)dsdt+pS(t)dtpS(tτ1)eμτ1dt=[Λμ(S+I+peμttτ1teμSS(s)ds+γeμttτ2teμSI(s)ds)]dt

Thus,

S+I+peμttτ1teμSS(s)ds+γeμttτ2teμSI(s)dsΛμ+eμt[S(0)+I(0)+pτ10eμSS(s)ds+γτ20eμSI(s)dsΛμ]Λμ,ifS(0)+I(0)+pτ10eμSS(s)ds+γτ20eμSI(s)dsΛμ,S(0)+I(0)+pτ10eμSS(s)ds+γτ20eμSI(s)ds,ifS(0)+I(0)+pτ10eμSS(s)ds+γτ20eμSI(s)ds>Λμ.K.

Then applying Taylor formula to function ln(1t) here t=f(S)Sg(I)γ(u) and Assumption (H1) to φ1, we have that

φ1=ln(1f(S)Sg(I)γ(u))f(S)Sg(I)γ(u)=f(S)Sg(I)γ(u)+(f(S)Sg(I)γ(u))22(1δf(S)Sg(I)γ(u))2f(S)Sg(I)γ(u)(MN0g(0)Iγ(u))22(1δMN0g(0)Iγ(u))2(MN0g(0))2θ22(1MN0g(0)θ)2

Here δ(0,1) is an arbitrary number. Similarly, we can obtain that

φ2=ln(1+f(S)g(I)Iγ(u))+f(S)g(I)Iγ(u)(MN0g(0))2θ22(1mN0g(0)θ)2

Then

LV(S,I)(Λ+μa+pa+μ+γ)+aσ12K22MN02(g(0))2+σ12MN02(g(0))2K2+(a+1)MN02(g(0))2θ22(1MN0g(0)θ)2K˜

Therefore, we achieve that

dV(S,I)K˜dtσ1(Sa)f(S)Sg(I)dB1(t)+σ1(I1)f(S)g(I)IdB1(t)Y[aln(1f(S)Sg(I)γ(u))+f(S)g(I)γ(u)]N~(dt,du)+Y[ln(1+f(S)g(I)Iγ(u))+f(S)g(I)γ(u)]N~(dt,du). (3.4)

Taking integral on the above inequality from 0 to τkT, then

0τkTdV(S,I)0τkTK˜dt0τkTσ1(Sa)f(S)Sg(I)dB1(t)+0τkTσ1(I1)f(S)g(I)IdB1(t)0τkTY[aln(1f(S(s))S(s)g(I(s))γ(u))+f(S(s))g(I(s))γ(u)]N~(ds,du)+0τkTY[ln(1+f(S(s))g(I(s))I(s)γ(u))+f(S(s))g(I(s))γ(u)]N~(ds,du), (3.5)

where τkT=min{τk,T}. Consequently,

EV(S(τkT),I(τkT))V(S(0),I(0))+K˜E(τkT)V(S(0),I(0))+K˜T.

Let Ωk={τkT}, then P(Ωk)ε. For each ωΩk, S(τk,ω), or I(τk,ω) equals either k or 1k, and

V(S(τk,ω),I(τk,ω))min{k1lnk,1k1+lnk}.

Thus,

V(S(0),I(0))+KTE[1Ωk(ω)V(S(ω),I(ω))]εmin{k1lnk,1k1+lnk}, (3.6)

where 1Ωk is the indicator function of Ωk. Letting k, we obtain the contradiction.

The proof is completed.

Next, we prove that Γ is a positively invariant set of system (1.2).

Theorem 3.2

The region Γ is almost surely positive invariant of system (1.2) .

Proof

Suppose (S(θ),I(θ))Γ, θ[τ,0] and n00 be sufficiently large such that S(θ)(1n0,Λμ] and I(θ)(1n0,Λμ]. For each integer nn0, the stopping times are defined as follows

τn=inf{t>0|(S(t),I(t))=X(t)Γ,(S(t),I(t))(1n,Λμ]2},
τ=inf{t>0|(S(t),I(t))Γ}.

We need to show that P(τ<t)=0 for all t>0.

Notice that P(τ<t)P(τn<t), then we have to prove lim supn+P(τn<t)=0. Define the function

W(S,I)=1S+1I,

then

dW(S,I)=LW(S,I)dt+σ1f(S)g(I)S2dB1(t)σ1f(S)g(I)I2dB1(t)+Y[f(S)g(I)γ(u)S(Sf(S)g(I)γ(u))f(S)g(I)γ(u)I(I+f(S)g(I)γ(u))]N~(dt,du)

here,

LW(S,I)=ΛS2+μ+pS+βf(S)g(I)S2pS(tτ1)eμτ1S2γI(tτ2)eμτ2S2+σ12f2(S)g2(I)S3+Y(f(S)S)2g2(I)γ2(u)S(1f(S)Sg(I)γ(u))λ(du)βf(S)g(I)I2+μ+γI+σ12f2(S)g2(I)I3+Yf2(S)(g(I)I)2γ2(u)I(1+f(S)g(I)Iγ(u))λ(du)

Then

dW(S,I)[μ+p+βf(S)g(I)S+σ12f2(S)g2(I)S2+Y(f(S)S)2g2(I)γ2(u)S(1f(S)Sg(I)γ(u))λ(du)]dtS+[μ+γ+σ12f2(S)g2(I)I2+Yf2(S)(g(I)I)2γ2(u)I(1+f(S)g(I)Iγ(u))λ(du)]dtI+Y[f(S)g(I)γ(u)S(Sf(S)g(I)γ(u))f(S)g(I)γ(u)I(I+f(S)g(I)γ(u))]N~(dt,du)+σ1f(S)g(I)S2dB1(t)σ1f(S)g(I)I2dB1(t)

Thus,

dWηW(X)dt+σ1f(S)g(I)S2dB1(t)σ1f(S)g(I)I2dB1(t)+Y[f(S)g(I)γ(u)S(Sf(S)g(I)γ(u))f(S)g(I)γ(u)I(I+f(S)g(I)γ(u))]N~(dt,du) (3.7)

where

η=max{u+p+βf(S)g(I)S+σ12f2(S)g2(I)S2+Y(f(S)S)2g2(I)γ2(u)S(1f(S)Sg(I)γ(u))λ(du);μ+γ+σ12f2(S)g2(I)I2+Yf2(S)(g(I)I)2γ2(u)I(1+f(S)g(I)Iγ(u))λ(du)}

Taking integral and expectation on both sides of (3.7) and by virtue of Fubini Theorem, then we derive

E(W(X(s)))W(X0)+η0sE(W(X(ξ)))dξ.

Applying Gronwall Lemma, we obtain that

E(W(X(s)))W(X0)eηs.

for all s[0,tτn]. Thus,

E(W(X(tτn)))W(X0)eη(tτn)W(X0)eηt,t0. (3.8)

In consideration of W(X(tτn))>0 and some component of X(τn) being less than or equal to 1n, we achieve that

E(W(X(tτn)))E(W(X(τn))1{τn<t})nP(τn<t). (3.9)

By (3.8), (3.9), we obtain that

P(τn<t)W(X0)eηtn,

for all t0. Therefore,

lim supn+P(τn<t)=0.

The proof is completed.

4. The extinction of diseases

In this section, to discuss the extinction of the disease, we define

R0=βMN0g(0)Λ(μ+γ)(μ+p(1eμτ1)),

and for the sake of simplicity, we denote x(t)=1t0tx(s)ds, then the following theorem is obtained.

Theorem 4.1

Suppose (S(t),I(t)) be any solution of system (1.2) with an initial value (1.3) . Thus (1) If σ1ˆ2>β2MN022mN0(μ+γ) , then

lim suptlnI(t)tβ2MN022σ1ˆ2mN0(μ+γ)<0a.s.;

(2) If R01<Λ2σ1ˆ2g2(0)mN02(μ+γ)(μ+p(1eμτ1))2 and σ1ˆ2β(μ+p(1eμτ1))MN0Λg(0)mN0 , then

lim suptlnI(t)t(μ+γ)(R01Λ2g2(0)σ1ˆ2mN02(μ+γ)(μ+p(1eμτ1))2)<0a.s.

where σ1ˆ2=σ12+Yγ2(u)(1+MN0g(0)θ)2λ(du) .

Proof

Applying Itoˆ’s formula, we derive that

dlnI(t)=[βf(S(t))g(I(t))I(t)(μ+γ)σ122f2(S(t))g2(I(t))I2(t)]dt+σ1f(S(t))g(I(t))I(t)dB1(t)+Y[ln(1+f(S(s))g(I(s))I(s)γ(u))f(S(s))g(I(s))I(s)γ(u)]λ(du)dt+Yln(1+f(S(s))g(I(s))I(s)γ(u))N~(dt,du). (4.1)

Then

lnI(t)t=lnI(0)t+βf(S)g(I)I(μ+γ)σ122g2(I(t))I2(t)f2(S(t))+M1(t)t+M2(t)t+1t0tY[ln(1+f(S(s))g(I(s))I(s)γ(u))f(S(s))g(I(s))I(s)γ(u)]λ(du)dsβf(S)g(0)(μ+γ)g2(0)2σ1ˆ2f2(S(t))+M1(t)t+M2(t)t+lnI(0)t (4.2)

Here, M1(t)=0tσ1f(S(s))g(I(s))I(s)dB1(s) and M2(t)=0tYln(1+f(S(s))g(I(s))I(s)γ(u))N~(ds,du).

on the other hand, we have

d(S+I+peμτ1tτ1tS(s)ds+γeμτ2tτ2tI(s)ds)=[Λ(μ+p(1eμτ1))S(μ+γ(1eμτ2))I]dt. (4.3)

then,

S+I+peμτ1tτ1tS(s)ds+γeμτ2tτ2tI(s)dstS(0)+I(0)+peμτ1τ10S(s)ds+γeμτ2τ20I(s)dst=Λ(μ+p(1eμτ1))S(t)(μ+γ(1eμτ2))I(t) (4.4)

Therefore,

S(t)=Λμ+p(1eμτ1)μ+γ(1eμτ2)μ+p(1eμτ1)I(t)ϕ(t), (4.5)

and here, ϕ(t)=S+I+peμτ1tτ1tS(s)ds+γeμτ2tτ2tI(s)dstS(0)+I(0)+peμτ1τ10S(s)ds+γeμτ2τ20I(s)dst, thus limtϕ(t)=0. According to (4.5), we obtain that

lnI(t)tβMN0g(0)S(t)(μ+γ)g2(0)σ1ˆ2mN02S2(t)+M1(t)t+M2(t)t+lnI(0)t=βMN0g(0)Λμ+p(1eμτ1)(μ+γ)g2(0)σ1ˆ2mN02Λ2(μ+p(1eμτ1))2βMN0g(0)μ+γ(1eμτ2)μ+p(1eμτ1)I(t)+g2(0)σ1ˆ2mN0Λμ+p(1eμτ1)μ+γ(1eμτ2)μ+p(1eμτ1)I(t)+g2(0)σ1ˆ2mN0Λμ+p(1eμτ1)ϕ(t)g2(0)σ1ˆ22mN0(μ+γ(1eμτ2)μ+p(1eμτ1)I(t))2g2(0)σ1ˆ22mN0(2μ+γ(1eμτ2)μ+p(1eμτ1)I(t)ϕ(t)+ϕ2(t))βMN0g(0)ϕ(t)+M1(t)t+M2(t)t+lnI(0)t(μ+γ)(βMN0g(0)Λ(μ+γ)(μ+p(1eμτ1))1g2(0)σ1ˆ2mN0Λ22(μ+γ)(μ+p(1eμτ1))2)MN0g(0)μ+γ(1eμτ2)μ+p(1eμτ1)(βg(0)σ1ˆ2ΛmN0MN0(μ+p(1eμτ1)))I(t)+M1(t)t+M2(t)t+ψ(t)(μ+γ)(βMN0g(0)Λ(μ+γ)(μ+p(1eμτ1))1g2(0)σ1ˆ2mN0Λ22(μ+γ)(μ+p(1eμτ1))2)+M1(t)t+M2(t)t+ψ(t) (4.6)

where

ψ(t)=g2(0)σ1ˆ2mN0Λμ+p(1eμτ1)ϕ(t)βMN0g(0)ϕ(t)+lnI(0)tg2(0)σ1ˆ22mN0(2μ+γ(1eμτ2)μ+p(1eμτ1)I(t)ϕ(t)+ϕ2(t))

In addition,

M1,M1t=σ120tf2(S(s))g2(I(s))I2(s)ds,
M2,M2t=0tY(ln(1+f(S(s))g(I(s))I(s)γ(u)))2λ(du)ds,

and

ln(1g(0)mN0θ)ln(1+f(S(s))g(I(s))I(s)γ(u))ln(1+g(0)MN0θ)

Then, we have that

M2,M2tmax{(ln(1+g(0)MN0θ))2,(ln(1g(0)mN0θ))2}λ(Y)t,

and

lim suptM1,M1tt=σ12lim supt1t0tf2(S(s))g2(I(s))I2(s)dsσ12MN02g2(0)(Λμ)2<a.s.
lim suptM2,M2ttmax{(ln(1+g(0)MN0θ))2,(ln(1g(0)mN0θ))2}λ(Y)<,a.s.

Thus,

lim suptMi(t)t=0(i=1,2)andlim suptψ(t)=0. (4.7)

By virtue of the condition (2) and (4.6), we achieve that

lim suptlnI(t)t(μ+γ)(R01Λ2g2(0)σ1ˆ2mN02(μ+γ)(μ+p(1eμτ1))2)<0a.s.

Moreover, by (4.6), we have that

lnI(t)tβMN0g(0)S(t)(μ+γ)g2(0)σ1ˆ2mN02S(t)2+M1(t)t+M2(t)t+lnI(0)t=g2(0)σ1ˆ2mN02[(S(t)βMN0σ1ˆ2g(0)mN0)2β2mN02σ1ˆ4g2(0)mN02](μ+γ)+M1(t)t+M2(t)t+lnI(0)t=g2(0)σ1ˆ2mN02(S(t)βMN0σ1ˆ2g(0)mN0)2+β2MN022σ1ˆ2mN0(μ+γ)+M1(t)t+M2(t)t+lnI(0)t(μ+γ)+β2MN022σ1ˆ2mN0+M1(t)t+M2(t)t+lnI(0)t (4.8)

According to the condition (1) and (4.8), we obtain that

lim suptlnI(t)t(μ+γ)+β2MN022σ1ˆ2mN0<0,a.s.

That is limtI(t)=0. Moreover, we have that

limtS(t)=Λμ+p(1eμτ1)μ+γ(1eμτ2)μ+p(1eμτ1)limtI(t)limtϕ(t)=Λμ+p(1eμτ1).

The conclusion is proven.

Remark 1

From Theorem 4.1, we show that if condition (i) σ1ˆ2>β2MN022mN0(μ+γ), or (ii)σ1ˆ2βMN0(μ+p(1eμτ1))Λg(0)mN0 and R01<Λ2σ1ˆ2g2(0)mN02(μ+γ)(μ+p(1eμτ1))2 hold, then for an arbitrary solution (S(t),I(t)) of system (1.2), we have limtI(t)=0, which implies that the disease is extinct.

5. Persistence in the mean of system

Now we are in the position to discuss the persistence in the mean of the disease and before that some notations are presented in the following.

For the convenience, we denote

R0^=βmN0g(0)Λ(μ+γ)(μ+p(1eμτ1)),
σ1¯=σ12g2(0)MN0+Yg2(0)MN02γ2(u)(1mN0g(0)θ)2λ(du),
λ=(μ+γ)(R01σ1ˆ2g(0)mN0Λ22(μ+γ)(μ+p(1eμτ1))2),
λ0=g(0)MN0μ+γ(1eμτ2)μ+p(1eμτ1)(βσ1ˆ2g(0)mN0ΛMN0(μ+p(1eμτ1))),
I˜=λλ0,I^=(μ+p(1eμτ1))((μ+γ)(R01)σ1¯2Λ22μ2)βg(0)mN0(μ+γ(1eμτ2)),
I=Λμ+p+βMN0g(0)N0.

Theorem 5.1

Suppose that Assumption (H1) hold and then for the solution (S(t),I(t)) of model (1.2) ,

(1) If R0^1>σ1¯2Λ22μ2(μ+γ) , we have

lim inftS(t)I,lim inftI(t)I^;

(2) If R0^1>g(0)σ1ˆ2mN0Λ22(μ+γ)(μ+p(1eμτ1))2 and σ1ˆ2<βMN0(μ+p(1eμτ1))Λg(0)mN0 , we have

lim suptS(t)I,lim suptI(t)I˜.

Proof

Since limI0g(I)I=g(0), then a constant ε>0 exists satisfying g(I)>(g(0)ε)I for all 0<Iε. By virtue of (4.6), we have that

lnI(t)t(μ+γ)(R01g2(0)σ1ˆ2mN0Λ22(μ+γ)(μ+p(1eμτ1))2)+M1(t)t+M2(t)tMN0g(0)μ+γ(1eμτ2)μ+p(1eμτ1)(βg(0)σ1ˆ2ΛmN0MN0(μ+p(1eμτ1)))I(t)+ψ(t) (5.1)

Then

lnI(t)(μ+γ)(R01g2(0)σ1ˆ2mN0Λ22(μ+γ)(μ+p(1eμτ1))2)t+M1(t)+M2(t)MN0g(0)μ+γ(1eμτ2)μ+p(1eμτ1)(βg(0)σ1ˆ2ΛmN0MN0(μ+p(1eμτ1)))0tI(s)ds+ψ(t)t=(μ+γ)(R01g2(0)σ1ˆ2mN0Λ22(μ+γ)(μ+p(1eμτ1))2)tMN0g(0)μ+γ(1eμτ2)μ+p(1eμτ1)(βg(0)σ1ˆ2ΛmN0MN0(μ+p(1eμτ1)))0tI(s)ds+F(t)=λtλ00tI(s)ds+F(t), (5.2)

here, F(t)=M1(t)+M2(t)+ψ(t)t.

Considering limtF(t)t=0, then for an arbitrary ζ>0, there exists a T1=T1(ω)>0 and a set Ωk such that F(t)tζ and P(Ωk)1ζ for all tT1, ωΩk. Let Tˆ=max{T,T1}, then according to Lemma 2.2 and Theorem 3 in Ref. [22], we achieve that

lim suptI(t)λλ0I˜ (5.3)

On the other hand, by (4.2), (4.5), we obtain that

lnI(t)t=βf(S)g(I)I(μ+γ)σ122g2(I(t))I2(t)f2(S(t))+M1(t)t+M2(t)t+lnI(0)t+1t0tY[ln(1+f(S(s))g(I(s))I(s))γ(u)f(S(s))g(I(s))I(s)γ(u)]λ(du)dsβ(g(0)ε)mN0S(t)(μ+γ)σ1¯2(Λμ)2+M1(t)t+M2(t)t+lnI(0)t=β(g(0)ε)mN0Λμ+p(1eμτ1)β(g(0)ε)mN0(μ+γ(1eμτ2))μ+p(1eμτ1)I(t)(μ+γ)σ1¯Λ22μ2β(g(0)ε)mN0ϕ(t)+M1(t)+M2(t)+lnI(0)t=(μ+γ)[β(g(0)ε)mN0Λ(μ+p(1eμτ1))(μ+γ)1]σ1¯Λ22μ2β(g(0)ε)mN0(μ+γ(1eμτ2))μ+p(1eμτ1)I(t)β(g(0)ε)mN0ϕ(t)+M1(t)+M2(t)+lnI(0)t=(μ+γ)[R0^1]σ1¯Λ22μ2β(g(0)ε)mN0(μ+γ(1eμτ2))μ+p(1eμτ1)I(t)β(g(0)ε)mN0ϕ(t)+M1(t)+M2(t)+lnI(0)t (5.4)

As 0<S+IN0, then we derive that <lnI(t)<ln(N0). Thus,

I(t)μ+p(1eμτ1)β(g(0)ε)mN0(μ+γ(1eμτ2))((μ+γ)(R0^1)σ1¯2Λ22μ2β(g(0)ε)mN0ϕ(t)+M1(t)+M2(t)tln(N0)lnI(0)t) (5.5)

By virtue of the conclusion limtϕ(t)=0 and the arbitrariness of ε, we obtain that

lim inftI(t)(μ+p(1eμτ1))[(μ+γ)(R0^1)σ1¯2Λ22μ2]βg(0)mN0(μ+γ(1eμτ2))I^. (5.6)

In addition, by virtue of (4.5), (5.6), we have that

lim suptS(t)Λμ+p(1eμτ1)μ+γ(1eμτ2)μ+p(1eμτ1)I^I (5.7)

In the following , we prove

lim inftS(t)I.

By assumptions (H2) and (H3), a constant T2T1>0 exists satisfying

f(S(t))g(I(t))MN0g(0)N0S(t),

for all tT2.

Using the first equation of model (1.2), we achieve that

S(t)S(0)t=Λβt0tf(S(s))g(I(s))dsμ+pt0tS(s)ds+γt0tI(sτ2)eμτ2ds+pt0tS(sτ1)eμτ1dsσ1t0tf(S(s))g(I(s))dB(s)1t0tf(S(s))g(I(s))Yγ(u)N~(ds,du)Λ1t0T2[βf(S(s))g(I(s))+(μ+p)S(s)]dsσ1t0tf(S(s))g(I(s))dB(s)1t0tf(S(s))g(I(s))Yγ(u)N~(ds,du)1tT2t[βMN0g(0)N0+μ+p]S(s)ds (5.8)

Therefore, by Theorem 4.1 and applying the arbitrariness of η, we have

lim inftS(t)Λμ+p+βMN0g(0)N0I.

The desired result is obtained.

Remark 2

From Theorem 5.1, we obtain that if R0^>1+σ1¯2Λ22μ2(μ+γ), and choose A1=min{I,I^}, then the solution (S(t),I(t)) of system (1.2) with an initial condition (1.3) is persistent in the mean. Moreover, denote A2=max{I,I˜}, we can also obtain the condition for the permanence in the mean of the system, that is,

A1lim inftS(t)lim suptS(t)A2,

and

A1lim inftI(t)lim suptI(t)A2.

6. Numerical simulations

In this section, we will perform some numerical simulations to illustrate our theoretical results by Euler numerical approximation [26].

(1) Choose the parameter values in model (1.2) as follows:

Λ=0.6,β=0.2,μ=0.2,γ=0.2,p=0.05,f(S)=S,g(I)=I1+I,
τ1=0.5,τ2=0.5,S(0)=2,I(0)=0.35,Y=(0,+),λ(Y)=1,

and the only difference between conditions of Fig. 1, Fig. 2 is the different values γ(u).

Fig. 1.

Fig. 1

The disease I of system (1.2) goes to extinction with probability one. The red lines, the green lines and the blue lines are solutions of system (1.2), the corresponding deterministic system and the system with white noise, respectively.

Fig. 2.

Fig. 2

The disease I of system (1.2) is persistent with probability one. The red lines, the green lines and the blue lines are solutions of system (1.2), the corresponding deterministic system and the system with white noise, respectively.

In Fig. 1, the intensities of the noises are σ1=0.08 and γ(u)=0.7, then we have that

σ1ˆ2=0.02>β2MN022mN0(μ+γ)=0.008,

and the condition (1) of Theorem 4.1 is satisfied. Thus, the disease I goes to extinction with probability one and Fig. 1 confirms it. Moreover, by Fig. 1, we achieve that the disease is extinct whereas the corresponding deterministic system is persistent because of the effect of the jump noise. In Fig. 2, the intensities of the noises are σ1=0.08 and γ(u)=0.2, then we obtain that

R0^=1.4651>1+σ1¯2Λ22μ2(μ+γ)1,

and the condition (1) of Theorem 5.1 holds. Therefore, the disease I is persistent with probability one.

(2) Let μ=0.26 and the other parameters are the same as those in Fig. 1. Considering different values of τ1 and τ2, then we can observe the effects of the validity period of the vaccination τ1 to system (1.2) (See Fig. 3).

Fig. 3.

Fig. 3

The effects of the validity period τ1 to system (1.2).

From Fig. 1, Fig. 2, Fig. 3, we achieve that the intensity of Lévy noise γ(u) and the validity period of the vaccination τ1 can greatly influence the extinction and persistence of the disease I.

7. Conclusion

A stochastic delay epidemic model is proposed with vaccination and generalized nonlinear incidence rate. The effects of Lévy jumps are considered in this model. The existence of a unique global solution is proven. Sufficient conditions that guarantee diseases to be extinct and persistent in the mean are given. From the analysis and discussion, we derive that noise intensity and the validity period of vaccination greatly influence the extinction and persistence of diseases.

Finally, some interesting issues merit further investigations. In this paper, we obtain sufficient conditions for the persistence and extinction of the model. However, whether the threshold value could be derived is an interesting issue. In addition, if we also consider the effects of non-autonomous environment to the proposal of epidemic model, how will the properties change? We will investigate these questions in our future work.

Declaration of Competing Interest

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

Acknowledgements

This work is supported by The National Natural Science Foundation of China (11901110, 61763018, 11961003), The Foundation of Education Committee of Jiangxi, China (GJJ160929, GJJ170493, GJJ170824), The National Natural Science Foundation of Jiangxi, China (20192BAB211003, 20192ACBL20004) and The 03 Special Project and 5G Program of Science and Technology Department of Jiangxi, China (20193ABC03A058).

Contributor Information

Kuangang Fan, Email: kuangangfriend@163.com.

Yan Zhang, Email: zhyan8401@163.com.

Shujing Gao, Email: gaosjmath@126.com.

Shihua Chen, Email: shcheng@whu.edu.cn.

References

  • 1.Anderson R., May R. Population biology of infectious diseases: part I. Nature. 1979;280:361–367. doi: 10.1038/280361a0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Ruan S., Wang W. Dynamical behavior of an epidemic model with a nonlinear incidence rate. J. Differential Equations. 2003;188:135–163. [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Wang W. Global behavior of an SEIRS epidemic model with time delays. Appl. Math. Lett. 2002;15(4):423–428. [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Zhang J., Ma Z. Global dynamics of an SEIR epidemic model with saturating contact rate. Math. Biosci. 2003;185:15–32. doi: 10.1016/s0025-5564(03)00087-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Meng X., Chen L., Wu B. A delay SIR epidemic model with pulse vaccination and incubation times. Nonlinear Anal. Real. 2010;11(1):88–98. [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Capasso V., Serio G. A generalization of the kermack-mckendrick deterministic epidemic model. Math. Biosci. 1978;42:41–61. [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Liu Q., Jiang D., Shi N., Hayat T., Alsaedi A. Asymptotic behaviors of a stochastic delayed SIR epidemic model with nonlinear incidence. Commun. Nonlinear Sci. Numer. Simul. 2016;40:89–99. [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Qiu H., Deng W. Optimal harvesting of a stochastic delay competitive Lotka–Volterra model with Lévy jumps. Appl. Math. Compu. 2018;317:210–222. [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Zhang S., Meng X., Feng T. Dynamics analysis and numerical simulations of a stochastic non-autonomous predator–prey system with impulsive effects. Nonlinear Anal. Hybrid Syst. 2017;26:19–37. [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Fan K., Zhang Y., Gao S., Wei X. A class of stochastic delayed SIR epidemic models with generalized nonlinear incidence rate and temporary immunity. Physica A. 2017;481:198–208. [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Bahar A., Mao X. Stochastic delay lotka-volterra model. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 2004;292:364–380. [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Oi H., Liu L., Meng X. Dynamics of a non-autonomous stochastic SIS epidemic model with double epidemic hypothesis. Complexity. 2017;2017:14. [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Meng X., Li L., Gao S. Global analysis and numerical simulations of a novel stochastic eco-epidemiological model with time delay. Appl. Math. Comput. 2018;339:701–726. [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Lei F., Meng X., Cui Y. Nonlinear stochastic analysis for a stochastic SIS epidemic model. J. Nonlinear Sci. Appl. 2017;10(9):5116–5124. [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Qi H., Leng X., Meng X. Periodic solution and ergodic stationary distribution of SEIS dynamical systems with active and latent patients. Qual. Theory Dyn. Syst. 2018 [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Meng X., Zhao S., Feng T. Dynamics of a novel nonlinear stochastic SIS epidemic model with double epidemic hypothesis. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 2016;433:227–242. [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Liu M., Wang K., Wu Q. Survival analysis of stochastic competitive models in a polluted environment and stochastic competitive exclusion principle. Bull. Math. Biol. 2011;73:1969–2012. doi: 10.1007/s11538-010-9569-5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Tang T., Teng Z., Li Z. Threshold behavior in a class of stochastic SIRS epidemic models with nonlinear incidence. Stoch. Anal. Appl. 2015;33:994–1019. [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Zhang Y., Fan K., Gao S., Chen S. A remark on stationary distribution of a stochastic SIR epidemic model with double saturated rates. Appl. Math. Lett. 2018;76:46–52. [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Bao J., Yuan C. Stochastic population dynamics driven by Lévy noise. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 2012;391:363–375. [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Zhou Y., Zhang W. Threshold of a stochastic SIR epidemic model with Lévy jumps. Physica A. 2016;446:204–216. [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Liu Q., Jiang D., Hayat T., Ahmad B. Analysis of a delayed vaccinated SIR epidemic model with temporary immunity and Lévy jumps. Nonlinear Anal-Hybri. 2018;27:29–43. [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Berrhazi B., Fatini M., Laaribi A. A stochastic threshold for an epidemic model with Beddington–DeAngelis incidence, delayed loss of immunity and Lévy noise perturbation. Physica A. 2018;507:312–320. [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Chang Z., Meng X., Lu X. Analysis of a novel stochastic SIRS epidemic model with two different saturated incidence rates. Physica A. 2017;472:103–116. [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Liu M., Wang K. Stochastic Lotka–Volterra systems with Lévy noise. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 2014;410(2):750–763. [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Protter P., Talay D. The Euler scheme for Lévy driven stochastic differential equations. Ann. Probab. 1997;25:393–423. [Google Scholar]

Articles from Physica a are provided here courtesy of Elsevier

RESOURCES