\documentclass[reqno]{amsart}
\usepackage{hyperref}

\AtBeginDocument{{\noindent\small
\emph{Electronic Journal of Differential Equations},
Vol. 2008(2008), No. 88, pp. 1--11.\newline
ISSN: 1072-6691. URL: http://ejde.math.txstate.edu or http://ejde.math.unt.edu
\newline ftp ejde.math.txstate.edu  (login: ftp)}
\thanks{\copyright 2008 Texas State University - San Marcos.}
\vspace{9mm}}

\begin{document}
\title[\hfilneg EJDE-2008/88\hfil Positive periodic solutions]
{Positive periodic solutions for a predator-prey model with
 time delays and impulsive effect}

\author[S. Gao, Y. Li\hfil EJDE-2008/88\hfilneg]
{Shan Gao, Yongkun Li}  % in alphabetical order

\address{Shan Gao \newline
Department of Mathematics, Yunnan University\\
Kunming, Yunnan, 650091, China}
\email{2002711036@163.com}

\address{Yongkun Li \newline
Department of Mathematics, Yunnan University\\
Kunming, Yunnan, 650091, China}
\email{yklie@ynu.edu.cn}

\thanks{Submitted April 7, 2008. Published June 21, 2008.}
\thanks{Supported by the National Natural Sciences Foundation of China and
 the Natural Sciences \hfill\break\indent Foundation of Yunnan Province, China}
\subjclass[2000]{34K13, 34K45, 92D25}
\keywords{Predator-prey model; impulse; positive periodic
 solution; \hfill\break\indent coincidence degree}

\begin{abstract}
 In this article, a two-species predator-prey model with time delays
 and impulsive effect is investigated. By using Mawhin's continuation
 theorem of coincidence degree theory, sufficient conditions are
 obtained for the existence of positive periodic solutions.
\end{abstract}

\maketitle
\numberwithin{equation}{section}
\newtheorem{theorem}{Theorem}[section]
\newtheorem{lemma}[theorem]{Lemma}
\newtheorem{definition}[theorem]{Definition}
\allowdisplaybreaks

\section{Introduction}

In the past few years, predator-prey models and with many
kinds of functional responses have been of great interest to both
applied mathematicians and ecologists see references in this article.
Recently, by using Floquet theory of linear periodic impulsive equation, Song
and Li \cite{s3}  considered the following $T$-periodic
predator-prey model with modified Leslie-Gower and Holling-type II
schemes and impulsive effect
\begin{gather*}
\left.\begin{gathered}
\dot{x}(t)=x(t)\Big(r_{1}(t)-b_{1}(t)x(t)-\frac{a_{1}(t)y(t)}{x(t)+k_{1}(t)}
  \Big)\\
\dot{y}(t)=y(t)\Big(r_{2}(t)-\frac{a_{2}(t)y(t)}{x(t)+k_{2}(t)}\Big)
\end{gathered} \right\} \quad t\neq\tau_{k},\; k\in\mathbb{Z}_{+},
\\
\left.\begin{gathered}
x(\tau_{k}^{+})=(1+h_{k})x(\tau_{k})\\
y(\tau_{k}^{+})=(1+g_{k})y(\tau_{k})
\end{gathered} \right\} \quad t=\tau_{k},\; k\in\mathbb{Z}_{+}.
\end{gather*}
where $b_{1}(t), r_{i}(t), a_{i}(t), k_{i}(t) (i=1,2)$ are
continuous $\omega$-periodic functions such that $b_{1}(t)>0,
r_{i}(t)>0, a_{i}(t)>0, k_{i}(t)>0 (i=1,2)$ and
$\mathbb{Z}_{+}=\{1,2,\dots\}$; $h_{k},g_{k} (k\in \mathbb{Z}_{+})$
are constants and there exists an integer $q>0$ such that
$h_{k+q}=h_{k},g_{k+q}=g_{k},\tau_{k+q}=\tau_{k}+\omega$, and
$1+h_{k}>0, 1+g_{k}>0$ for all $k\in \mathbb{Z}_{+}$.  They obtain
some conditions for the linear stability of trivial periodic
solution and semitrivial periodic solutions.

However, as pointed out in \cite{l2}, naturally, more realistic and
interesting models of single or multiple species growth should take
into account both the seasonality of the changing environment and
the effects of time delays.

 In this paper, we consider the following $\omega$-periodic
predator-prey system with time delays and impulses:
\begin{equation} \label{e11}
\begin{gathered}
\left.\begin{gathered}
\dot{x}(t)=x(t)\Big(r_{1}(t)-b_{1}(t)x(t-\tau(t))
 -\frac{a_{1}(t)y(t-\sigma_{1}(t))}{x(t-\tau_{1}(t))+k_{1}(t)}\Big)\\
\dot{y}(t)=y(t)\Big(r_{2}(t)-\frac{a_{2}(t)y(t-\sigma_{2}(t))}
 {x(t-\tau_{2}(t))+k_{2}(t)}\Big)
\end{gathered} \right\} \quad t\neq t_{k},\; k\in\mathbb{Z}_{+},
\\
\left.\begin{gathered}
x(t_{k}^{+})=I_{k}(x(t_{k}))+x(t_{k}^{-})\\
y(t_{k}^{+})=J_{k}(y(t_{k}))+y(t_{k}^{-})
\end{gathered} \right\} \quad t=t_{k},\; k\in\mathbb{Z}_{+}.
\end{gathered}
\end{equation}
where $x(t_{k}^{+}),x(t_{k}^{-}),y(t_{k}^{+}),y(t_{k}^{-})$
represent the right and the left limit of $x(t_{k})$ and
 $y(t_{k})$, respectively, in this paper, we assume that $x$, $y$ are left
continuous at $t_{k}$; $b_{1}(t)$, $\tau(t)$, $a_{i}(t)$,
$r_{i}(t)$, $k_{i}(t)$, $\sigma_{i}(t)$, $\tau_{i}(t)$ ($i=1,2$)
are all positive periodic continuous functions with period
$\omega>0$ and $\mathbb{Z}_{+}=\{1,2,\dots\}$;
$I_{k},J_{k}\in C(\mathbb{R}^{+},\mathbb{R})$ satisfy that
$I_{k}(u)>-u, J_{k}(v)>-v$, and there exists a positive integer
$p$ such that $t_{k+p}=t_{k}+\omega$,
$I_{k+p}=I_{k}$, $J_{k+p}=J_{k}$, $k\in \mathbb{Z_+}$. Without loss
of generality, we also assume that
$[0,\omega) \cap \{t_{k}: k\in \mathbb{Z_+}\}=\{t_{1},t_{2},\dots,t_{p}\}$.

Our purpose of this paper is by using continuation theorem of
coincidence degree theory \cite{g1} to establish criteria to guarantee
the existence of positive periodic solutions of system \eqref{e11}.


\section{Notation and preliminaries}

To obtain our main result of this paper, we first need to make
the following preparations.
For any non-negative integer $q$, let
\begin{align*}
&C^{(q)}[0,\omega;\,t_{1},t_{2},\dots,t_{p}]\\
& =  \Big\{x:[0,\omega]\to\mathbb{R}\text{ such that
$x^{(q)}(t)$  exists for $t \neq t_{1}, \dots, t_{p}$;
$x^{(q)}(t_{k}^{+}),\; x^{(q)}(t_{k}^{-})$} \\
&\quad \text{exists at $t_{1},\dots,t_{p}$; and $x^{(j)}(t_{k}) = x^{(j)}(t_{k}^{-})$,
$k =1,2,\dots,p$, $j = 0,1,2,\dots,q$}\Big\}
\end{align*}
with the norm
\[
\|x\|_{q} =\max\{\sup_{t\in[0,\omega]}|x^{(j)}(t)|\}_{j=0}^{q}.
\]
It is easy to see that $C^{(q)}[0,\omega; t_{1},t_{2},\dots,t_{p}]$
is a Banach space and the functions
in $C[0,\omega;\ t_{1},t_{2},\dots,t_{p}]$ are continuous with respect
 to $t$ different from $t_{1},t_{2},\dots,t_{p}$. Let
\[
PC_{\omega}=\big\{x\in C[0,\omega;t_{1},t_{2},\dots, t_{p}]:
x(0)=x(\omega)\big\}
\]
with the same norm as that of $C[0,\omega;t_{1},t_{2}, \dots,t_{p}]$.

 Let $X, Y$ be normed vector spaces,
$L :$ Dom\,$L \subset X \to Y$ be a linear mapping, and
$N : X \to Y$ be a continuous mapping. The mapping $L$ will be
called a Fredholm mapping of index zero if dim
$\ker L = \mathop{\rm codim}\mathop{\rm Im}L < +\infty$ and
$\mathop{\rm Im}L$ is closed in $Y$. If $L$ is a Fredholm
mapping of index zero, and there exist continuous projectors:
$P : X \to X$ and $Q : Y \to Y$ such that
$\mathop{\rm Im}P =\ker L$, $\ker Q =\mathop{\rm Im}L =\mathop{\rm Im}(I-Q)$.
It follows that mapping
$L |_{\mathop{\rm Dom}L \cap \ker P}: (I-P)X \to \mathop{\rm Im}L$
is invertible. We denote the inverse of that mapping
by $K_{P}$. If $\Omega$ is an open bounded subset of $X$, the
mapping $N$ will be called $L$-compact on $\overline{\Omega}$ if
$QN(\overline{\Omega})$ is bounded and
$K_{P}(I-Q)N : \overline{\Omega} \to X$ is compact.
Since $\mathop{\rm Im}Q$ is isomorphic to $\ker L$,
there exists an isomorphism $J :\mathop{\rm Im}Q \to \ker L$.

\begin{definition} \label{def21} \rm
The set $F$ is said to be quasi-equicontinuous in $[0,\omega]$ if
for any $\epsilon>0$ there exists $\delta>0$ such that if
$x\in F$, $k\in\mathbb{Z}_{+}$,
$t_{1},t_{2}\in(t_{k-1},t_{k})\cap[0,\omega]$, $|t_{1}-t_{2}|<\delta$,
then $|x(t_{1})-x(t_{2})|<\epsilon$.
\end{definition}

\begin{lemma}[\cite{b1}] \label{lem21}
The set $F\subset PC_{\omega}$ is relatively compact if and
only if
\begin{itemize}
\item[(1)] $F$ is bounded, that is,
$\|f\|_{PC_{\omega}}=\|f\|_{0}=\sup_{t\in[0,\omega]}|f(t)|\leq M$
for each $f\in F$ and some $M>0$;
\item[(2)] $F$ is quasi-equicontinuous in $\mathop{\rm Dom}f$.
\end{itemize}
\end{lemma}

Now, we introduce Mawhin's continuation theorem.

\begin{lemma}[\cite{g1}] \label{lem22}
Let $\Omega\subset X$ be an open bounded set and let $N :X\to Y$ be
a continuous operator which is $L$-compact on
$\overline{\Omega}$. Assume
\begin{itemize}
\item[(a)] for each $\lambda \in (0,1)$, $x\in \partial\Omega\cap
\mathop{\rm Dom}L$, $Lx\neq\lambda Nx$,
\item[(b)] for each $x\in\partial\Omega\cap\ker L$, $QNx\neq0$,
\item[(c)] $\deg(JQN,\Omega\cap\ker L,0)\neq0$.
\end{itemize}
Then $Lx=Nx$ has at least one solution in
$\overline{\Omega}\cap\mathop{\rm Dom}L$.
\end{lemma}

Throughout this paper, we assume that there exist
$p_{1k},p_{2k},q_{1k},q_{2k}\in\mathbb{R}$, $k\in Z_+$ such that
\begin{gather*}
\inf_{u>0}\frac{I_{k}(u)}{u}\geq q_{1k}>-1,\quad
\sup_{u>0}\frac{I_{k}(u)}{u}\leq p_{1k}<+\infty, \\
\inf_{v>0}\frac{J_{k}(v)}{v}\geq q_{2k}>-1,\quad
\sup_{v>0}\frac{J_{k}(v)}{v}\leq p_{2k}<+\infty.
\end{gather*}
For convenience, we introduce the notation
\begin{gather*}
\overline{f}=\frac{1}{\omega}\int_{0}^{\omega}f(t)\,\mathrm{d}t,\quad
f^{M}=\max_{t\in[0,\,\omega]}\{f(t)\},\\
l_{1k}=\max\big\{|\ln(1+p_{1k})|,|\ln(1+q_{1k})|\big\},\quad
l_{2k}=\max\big\{|\ln(1+p_{2k})|,|\ln(1+q_{2k})|\big\}
\end{gather*}
where $f$ is a continuous $\omega$-periodic function and $k\in Z_+$.


\section{Main result}

Let
\begin{gather*}
H_{1}=\ln\Big(\frac{\overline{r_{1}}+\frac{1}{\omega}
\ln(\prod_{k=1}^{p}(1+p_{1k}))}{\overline{b_{1}}}\Big),\\
 M_{1}=H_{1}+2\omega\overline{r_{1}}
 +\ln\Big(\prod_{k=1}^{p}(1+p_{1k})\Big)+\sum_{k=1}^{p}l_{1k};
\\
H_{2}=\ln\Big(\frac{\overline{r_{2}}+\frac{1}{\omega}
\ln(\prod_{k=1}^{p}(1+q_{2k}))}
{\overline{(\frac{a_{2}}{k_{2}})}}\Big), \\
M_{2}=H_{2}-2\omega\overline{r_{2}}-\ln\Big(\prod_{k=1}^{p}(1+p_{2k})\Big)
-\sum_{k=1}^{p}l_{2k};
\\
H_{3}=\ln\Big(\frac{(k_{2}^{M}+\mathrm{e}^{M_{1}})(\overline{r_{2}}
+\frac{1}{\omega}\ln(\prod_{k=1}^{p}
(1+p_{2k})))}{\overline{a_{2}}}\Big),\\
M_{3}=H_{3}+2\omega\overline{r_{2}}+\ln\Big(\prod_{k=1}^{p}(1+p_{2k})\Big)
+\sum_{k=1}^{p}l_{2k}; \\
H_{4}=\ln\Big(\frac{\overline{r_{1}}+\frac{1}{\omega}
 \ln(\prod_{k=1}^{p}(1+q_{1k}))-\mathrm{e}^{M_{3}}
 \overline{(\frac{a_{1}}{k_{1}})}}{\overline{b_{1}}}\Big),
\\
M_{4}=H_{4}-2\omega\overline{r_{1}}-\ln\Big(\prod_{k=1}^{p}(1+p_{1k})\Big)
-\sum_{k=1}^{p}l_{1k};
\end{gather*}
Our main result of this paper is as follows:

\begin{theorem} \label{thm31}
If
\begin{gather*}
\overline{r_{1}}+\frac{1}{\omega}\ln\Big(\prod_{k=1}^{p}(1+p_{1k})\Big)>0,\\
\overline{r_{2}}+\frac{1}{\omega}\ln\Big(\prod_{k=1}^{p}(1+q_{2k})\Big)>0,\\
\overline{r_{1}}+\frac{1}{\omega}\ln\Big(\prod_{k=1}^{p}(1+q_{1k})\Big)-
\mathrm{e}^{M_{3}}\overline{(\frac{a_{1}}{k_{1}})}>0,
\end{gather*}
then  \eqref{e11} has at least one $\omega$-periodic positive
solution.
\end{theorem}

\begin{proof}
Let $x(t)=\mathrm{e}^{u(t)},\ y(t)=\mathrm{e}^{v(t)}$ then
\eqref{e11} is reformulated as
\begin{equation} \label{e31}
\begin{gathered}
\left.\begin{gathered}
\dot{u}(t)=r_{1}(t)-b_{1}(t)\exp\{u(t-\tau(t))\}
 -\frac{a_{1}(t)\exp\{v(t-\sigma_{1}(t))\}}
{\exp\{u(t-\tau_{1}(t))\}+k_{1}(t)}\\
\dot{v}(t)=r_{2}(t)-\frac{a_{2}(t)
 \exp\{v(t-\sigma_{2}(t))\}}{\exp\{u(t-\tau_{2}(t))\}+k_{2}(t)}
\end{gathered} \right\} \\
\text{ for $t\neq t_{k},\; k\in\mathbb{Z}_{+}$, and}
\\
\left.\begin{gathered}
u(t_{k}^{+})=e_{k}(u(t_{k}))+u(t_{k}^{-})\\
v(t_{k}^{+})=f_{k}(v(t_{k}))+v(t_{k}^{-})
\end{gathered} \right\} \quad t=t_{k},k\in\mathbb{Z}_{+},
\end{gathered}
\end{equation}
where
\begin{gather*}
e_{k}(u(t_{k}))=\ln\Big(\frac{I_{k}(\exp\{u(t_{k})\})
 +\exp\{u(t_{k})\}}{\exp\{u(t_{k})\}}\Big),
\\
f_{k}(v(t_{k}))=\ln\Big(\frac{J_{k}(\exp\{v(t_{k})\})
 +\exp\{v(t_{k})\}}{\exp\{v(t_{k})\}}\Big).
\end{gather*}
It is easy to see that
\begin{gather*}
\ln(1+q_{1k})\leq e_{k}(u(t_{k})) \leq \ln(1+p_{1k}), \\
\ln(1+q_{2k})\leq f_{k}(v(t_{k})) \leq \ln(1+p_{2k}).
\end{gather*}
If system \eqref{e31} has an $\omega$-periodic solution $(u(t),v(t))$,
then
\[
(\mathrm{e}^{u(t)},\ \mathrm{e}^{v(t)})= (x^{\ast}(t),\ y^{\ast}(t))
\]
is a positive $\omega$-periodic solution to system \eqref{e11}. So, in the
following, we discuss the existence of $\omega$-periodic
solution to system $\eqref{e31}$. Here, we denote
\begin{gather*}
A(t)= r_{1}(t)-b_{1}(t)\exp\{u(t-\tau(t))\}-\frac{a_{1}(t)\exp\{v(t-\sigma_{1}(t))\}}
{\exp\{u(t-\tau_{1}(t))\}+k_{1}(t)},\\
B(t)=
r_{2}(t)-\frac{a_{2}(t)\exp\{v(t-\sigma_{2}(t))\}}{\exp\{u(t-\tau_{2}(t))\}+k_{2}(t)}.
\end{gather*}

To use the continuation theorem of coincidence degree
theory to establish the existence of an $\omega$-periodic solution
of \eqref{e31}, we take
\[
X= PC_{\omega} \times PC_{\omega},\quad  Y = X \times \mathbb{R}^{2p}.
\]
Then $X$ is a Banach space with the norm
\[
\|x\|_{X} = \|(u,v)\|_{X} = \|u\|_{0} + \|v\|_{0} = \sup_{t\in[0,
\omega]}|u(t)| + \sup_{t\in[0, \omega]}|v(t)|,
\]
and $Y$ is also a Banach space with the norm
\[
\|z\|_{Y} = \|x\|_{X}+\|y\|_{2},\quad x\in X,\; y\in\mathbb{R}^{2p},
\]
where $\|\cdot\|_{2}$ in $\mathbb{R}^{n}$ is defined as
\[
\|\xi\|_{2}=\|(\xi_{1},\xi_{2},\dots,\xi_{n})\|_{2}=\sum_{i=1}^{n}|\xi_{i}|.
\]
So if $x=(u,v)\in X\cap\mathbb{R}^{2}$, then $\|x\|_{X}=\|x\|_{2}$.
 Let
\begin{gather*}
\mathop{\rm Dom}L = \Big\{(u,v): u,v \in C^{(1)}[0,\omega; t_{1},
t_{2}, \dots, t_{p}]; u(0)=u(\omega), v(0)=v(\omega)\Big\},
\\
L  :  \mathop{\rm Dom}L \cap X \to Y
\\
(u,v) \to (\dot{u},\dot{v},\Delta u(t_{1}),\dots,\Delta
u(t_{p}),\Delta v(t_{1}),
   \dots,\Delta    v(t_{p})),
\end{gather*}
and let   $ N : X \to Y$ with
\[
N(x)=N(u,v)=\big(A(t),B(t),\Delta u(t_{1}),\dots,\Delta
u(t_{p}),\Delta v(t_{1}),\dots,\Delta v(t_{p})\big).
\]
Obviously,
$\ker L = \Big\{(u,v): u,v \in \mathbb{R}, t\in[0, \omega]
 \Big\} = \mathbb{R}^{2}$,
\begin{align*}
 \mathop{\rm Im}L &= \Big\{z=(f,g,c_{1},\dots,c_{p},d_{1},\dots,d_{p})
 \in Y :  \int_{0}^{\omega}f(s)\,\mathrm{d}s+\sum_{k=1}^{p}c_{k}=0,\\
 &\quad \int_{0}^{\omega}g(s)\,\mathrm{d}s +
 \sum_{k=1}^{p}d_{k}=0\,\Big\}
\end{align*}
and
$\dim \ker L = \mathop{\rm codim}\mathop{\rm Im}L = 2$.
So that, $\mathop{\rm Im}L$ is closed in $Y$, $L$ is a Fredholm mapping
of index zero. Define the two projectors
\begin{gather*}
Px=\frac{1}{\omega},\int_{0}^{\omega}x(t)\,\mathrm{d}t,\\
Qz=\Big(\frac{1}{\omega}\big[\int_{0}^{\omega}f(s)\,\mathrm{d}s
+\sum_{k=1}^{p}c_{k}\big],
\frac{1}{\omega}\,\big[\int_{0}^{\omega}g(s)\,\mathrm{d}s
+\sum_{k=1}^{p}d_{k}\big],
\underbrace{0,\dots,0}_{2p}\Big).
\end{gather*}
It is easy to show that $P$ and $Q$ are continuous and satisfy
\[
\mathop{\rm Im}P=\ker L=\mathbb{R}^{2},\quad
\mathop{\rm Im}L=\ker Q=\mathop{\rm Im}(I-Q).
\]
Further, let $L_{P}=L\big|_{\mathop{\rm Dom}L\cap\ker P}$ and the
generalized inverse $K_{P}=L_{P}^{-1}$ is given by
\begin{align*}
K_{P}z&=\Big(\int_{0}^{t}f(s)\,\mathrm{d}s+\sum_{t>t_{k}}c_{k}
-\frac{1}{\omega}\int_{0}^{\omega}\int_{0}^{t}f(s)\,\mathrm{d}s\,\mathrm{d}t
-\sum_{k=1}^{p}c_{k}+\frac{1}{\omega}\sum_{k=1}^{p}t_{k}c_{k},\\
   & \quad\int_{0}^{t}g(s)\,\mathrm{d}s+\sum_{t>t_{k}}d_{k}
   -\frac{1}{\omega}\int_{0}^{\omega}\int_{0}^{t}g(s)\,\mathrm{d}s\,\mathrm{d}t
   -\sum_{k=1}^{p}d_{k}+\frac{1}{\omega}\sum_{k=1}^{p}t_{k}d_{k}\,\Big).
\end{align*}
Thus, the expression of $QNx$ is
\[
\Big(\frac{1}{\omega}\big[\int_{0}^{\omega}A(s)\,
 \mathrm{d}s\,+\,\sum_{k=1}^{p}e_{k}(u(t_{k}))\big]
 ,\ \frac{1}{\omega}\,\big[\int_{0}^{\omega}B(s)\,\mathrm{d}s\
+\,\sum_{k=1}^{p}f_{k}(v(t_{k}))\big],\ \underbrace{0, \dots,
0}_{2p}\Big),
\]
and then
\begin{align*}
&K_{P}(I-Q)Nx\\
&=\Big(\int_{0}^{t}A(s)\,\mathrm{d}s+\sum_{t>t_{k}}e_{k}(u(t_{k}))
-\frac{1}{\omega}\int_{0}^{\omega}\int_{0}^{t}A(s)\,\mathrm{d}s\,\mathrm{d}t
+\frac{1}{\omega}\sum_{k=1}^{p}t_{k}e_{k}(u(t_{k}))\\
    &\quad +(\frac{1}{2}-\frac{t}{\omega})\,\int_{0}^{\omega}A(s)\,\mathrm{d}s
    -(\frac{1}{2}+\frac{t}{\omega})\,\sum_{k=1}^{p}e_{k}(u(t_{k}))\ ,\\
    & \quad \int_{0}^{t}B(s)\,\mathrm{d}s+\sum_{t>t_{k}}f_{k}(v(t_{k}))
    -\frac{1}{\omega}\int_{0}^{\omega}\int_{0}^{t}B(s)\,\mathrm{d}s\,\mathrm{d}t
    +\frac{1}{\omega}\sum_{k=1}^{p}t_{k}f_{k}(v(t_{k}))\\
    &\quad +(\frac{1}{2}-\frac{t}{\omega})\,\int_{0}^{\omega}B(s)\,\mathrm{d}s
    -(\frac{1}{2}+\frac{t}{\omega})\,\sum_{k=1}^{p}f_{k}(v(t_{k}))\Big).
\end{align*}
Hence, $QN$ and $K_{P}(I-Q)N$ are both continuous. Using Lemma \ref{lem21},
it is easy to show that $K_{P}(I-Q)N(\overline{\Omega})$ is compact
for any open bounded set $\Omega\subset X$. Moreover,
$QN(\overline{\Omega})$ is bounded. Therefore, $N$ is $L$-compact on
$\overline{\Omega}$ for any open bounded set $\Omega\subset X$.

Now, it needs to show that there exists a domain $\Omega$ that
satisfies all the requirements given in Lemma \ref{lem22}. Corresponding to
operator equation $Lx=\lambda Nx$, $\lambda\in(0,1)$, $x=(u,v)$, we
get
\begin{equation} \label{e32}
\begin{gathered}
\left.\begin{gathered}
\dot{u}(t)=\lambda\Big[r_{1}(t)-b_{1}(t)\exp\{u(t-\tau(t))\}
-\frac{a_{1}(t)\exp\{v(t-\sigma_{1}(t))\}}{\exp\{u(t-\tau_{1}(t))\}
 +k_{1}(t)}\Big]\\
\dot{v}(t)=\lambda\Big[r_{2}(t)-\frac{a_{2}(t)\exp\{v(t-\sigma_{2}(t))\}}
{\exp\{u(t-\tau_{2}(t))\}+k_{2}(t)}\Big]
\end{gathered} \right\}\\
\text{for $t\neq t_{k}$, $k\in\mathbb{Z}_{+}$, and}
\\
\left.\begin{gathered}
u(t_{k}^{+})=\lambda e_{k}(u(t_{k}))+u(t_{k}^{-})\\
v(t_{k}^{+})=\lambda f_{k}(v(t_{k}))+v(t_{k}^{-})
\end{gathered} \right\} \quad t=t_{k},\; k\in\mathbb{Z}_{+}.
\end{gathered}
\end{equation}
Suppose $x=(u,v)$ is an $\omega$-periodic solution to system
\eqref{e32}. By integrating \eqref{e32} over $[0,\omega]$ we obtain
\begin{equation} \label{e33}
\begin{gathered}
\begin{aligned}
&\int_{0}^{\omega}\,r_{1}(t)\,\mathrm{d}t+\sum_{k=1}^{p}\,e_{k}(u(t_{k}))\\
&=\int_{0}^{\omega}\Big[b_{1}(t)\exp\{u(t-\tau(t))\}
+\frac{a_{1}(t)\exp\{v(t-\sigma_{1}(t))\}}{\exp\{u(t-\tau_{1}(t))\}
+k_{1}(t)}\Big]\,\mathrm{d}t,
\end{aligned}\\
\int_{0}^{\omega}\,r_{2}(t)\,\mathrm{d}t+\sum_{k=1}^{p}\,f_{k}(v(t_{k}))
=\int_{0}^{\omega}\frac{a_{2}(t)\exp\{v(t-\sigma_{2}(t))\}}{\exp\{u(t-\tau_{2}(t))\}+k_{2}(t)}\,\mathrm{d}t.
\end{gathered}
\end{equation}

 From \eqref{e32} and \eqref{e33}, we have
\begin{gather}
\int_{0}^{\omega}\,|\dot{u}(t)|\,\mathrm{d}t
 <2\int_{0}^{\omega}r_{1}(t)\,\mathrm{d}t
+\sum_{k=1}^{p}\,e_{k}(u(t_{k})), \label{e34}\\
\int_{0}^{\omega}\,|\dot{v}(t)|\,\mathrm{d}t
 <2\int_{0}^{\omega}r_{2}(t)\,\mathrm{d}t
+\sum_{k=1}^{p}\,f_{k}(v(t_{k})). \label{e35}
\end{gather}
Since $u(t),v(t)\in PC_{\omega}$, there exist
$\xi_{1},\xi_{2},\eta_{1},\eta_{2}\in[0,\omega]$ such that
\begin{equation} \label{e36}
\begin{gathered}
u(\xi_{1})=\min_{t\in[0,\omega]}u(t),\quad
u(\eta_{1})=\max_{t\in[0,\omega]}u(t),\\
v(\xi_{2})=\min_{t\in[0,\omega]}v(t),\quad
v(\eta_{2})=\max_{t\in[0,\omega]}v(t).
\end{gathered}
\end{equation}
Then by \eqref{e33} and \eqref{e36}, we obtain
\begin{gather*}
\overline{r_{1}}+\frac{1}{\omega}\sum_{k=1}^{p}\,e_{k}(u(t_{k}))
\geq\frac{1}{\omega}\int_{0}^{\omega}\,b_{1}(t)\mathrm{e}^{u(\xi_{1})}\,
\mathrm{d}t\,,\\
\overline{r_{2}}+\frac{1}{\omega}\sum_{k=1}^{p}\,f_{k}(v(t_{k}))
\leq\frac{1}{\omega}\int_{0}^{\omega}\,\frac{a_{2}(t)
\mathrm{e}^{v(\eta_{2})}}{k_{2}(t)}\,\mathrm{d}t\,;
\end{gather*}
that is,
\[
u(\xi_{1})\leq\ln\big[\frac{\overline{r_{1}}+
\frac{1}{\omega}\sum_{k=1}^{p}\,e_{k}(u(t_{k}))}{\overline{b_{1}}}\Big]
\leq \ln\big[\frac{\overline{r_{1}}+\frac{1}{\omega}
\ln\big(\prod_{k=1}^{p}(1+p_{1k})\big)}{\overline{b_{1}}}\big]=:
H_{1}
\]
and
\[
v(\eta_{2})\geq \ln\big[\frac{\overline{r_{2}}+\frac{1}{\omega}
\sum_{k=1}^{p}\,f_{k}(v(t_{k}))}
{\overline{\big(\frac{a_{2}}{k_{2}}\big)}}\big]
 \geq\ln\big[\frac{\overline{r_{2}}+\frac{1}{\omega}
\ln\big(\prod_{k=1}^{p}(1+q_{2k})\big)}
{\overline{\big(\frac{a_{2}}{k_{2}}\big)}}\big]=:
H_{2}.
\]
Hence
\begin{align*}
u(t)&\leq u(\xi_{1})\,+\,\int_{0}^{\omega}\,|\dot{u}(t)|\,\mathrm{d}t
+\sum_{k=1}^{p}\,|e_{k}(u(t_{k}))|\\
&\leq H_{1}+2\omega\overline{r_{1}}+\ln\big(\prod_{k=1}^{p}(1+p_{1k})\big)
+\sum_{k=1}^{p}l_{1k}=: M_{1}
\end{align*}
and
\begin{align*}
v(t)&\geq v(\eta_{2})-\int_{0}^{\omega}\,|\dot{v}(t)|\,\mathrm{d}t-\sum_{k=1}^{p}
\,|f_{k}(v(t_{k}))|\\
&\geq H_{2}-2\omega\overline{r_{2}}-\ln\big(\prod_{k=1}^{p}(1
+p_{2k})\big)-\sum_{k=1}^{p}l_{2k}=: M_{2}.
\end{align*}
So we have
\[
\overline{r_{2}}+\frac{1}{\omega}\sum_{k=1}^{p}\,f_{k}(v(t_{k}))
\geq\frac{1}{\omega}\int_{0}^{\omega}\,
\frac{a_{2}(t)\mathrm{e}^{v(\xi_{2})}}{k_{2}(t)+\mathrm{e}^{M_{1}}}\,
\mathrm{d}t
\geq\frac{1}{\omega}\int_{0}^{\omega}\,\frac{a_{2}(t)\mathrm{e}^{v(\xi_{2})}}
{k_{2}^{M}+\mathrm{e}^{M_{1}}}\,\mathrm{d}t\,;
\]
that is,
\begin{align*}
v(\xi_{2})&\leq\ln\Big(\frac{\big(k_{2}^{M}
+\mathrm{e}^{M_{1}}\big)\big(\overline{r_{2}}+\frac{1}{\omega}\sum_{k=1}^{p}\,f_{k}(v(t_{k}))\big)}
{\overline{a_{2}}}\Big)\\
&\leq\ln\Big(\frac{\big(k_{2}^{M}
+\mathrm{e}^{M_{1}}\big)\big(\overline{r_{2}}+\frac{1}{\omega}\ln(\prod_{k=1}^{p}
(1+p_{2k}))\big)}{\overline{a_{2}}}\Big)=: H_{3}.
\end{align*}
Thus
\begin{align*}
v(t)&\leq v(\xi_{2})+\int_{0}^{\omega}\,|\dot{v}(t)|\,\mathrm{d}t
+\sum_{k=1}^{p}\,|f_{k}(v(t_{k}))|\\
&\leq H_{3}
+2\omega\overline{r_{2}}+\ln\big(\prod_{k=1}^{p}(1+p_{2k})\big)
+\sum_{k=1}^{p}l_{2k}=: M_{3}.
\end{align*}
Similarly, we have
\[
\overline{r_{1}}+\frac{1}{\omega}\sum_{k=1}^{p}\,e_{k}(u(t_{k}))
\leq\frac{1}{\omega}\int_{0}^{\omega}\,b_{1}(t)\mathrm{e}^{u(\eta_{1})}\,\mathrm{d}t
+\frac{1}{\omega}\int_{0}^{\omega}\,\frac{a_{1}(t)
\mathrm{e}^{M_{3}}}{k_{1}(t)}\,\mathrm{d}t;
\]
that is,
\begin{align*}
u(\eta_{1})&\geq \ln\Big[\frac{\overline{r_{1}}
+\frac{1}{\omega}\sum_{k=1}^{p}\,e_{k}(v(t_{k}))
-\mathrm{e}^{M_{3}}\overline{\big(\frac{a_{1}}{k_{1}}\big)}}
{\overline{b_{1}}}\Big]\\
&\geq \ln\Big[\frac{\overline{r_{1}}+
\frac{1}{\omega}\ln\big(\prod_{k=1}^{p}(1+q_{1k})\big)
-\mathrm{e}^{M_{3}}\overline{\big(\frac{a_{1}}{k_{1}}\big)}}
{\overline{b_{1}}}\Big]=: H_{4}.
\end{align*}
Then
\begin{align*}
u(t)&\geq u(\eta_{1})-\int_{0}^{\omega}\,|\dot{u}(t)|\,\mathrm{d}t
-\sum_{k=1}^{p}\,|e_{k}(u(t_{k}))|\\
&\geq H_{4}-2\omega\overline{r_{1}}-\ln\big(\prod_{k=1}^{p}(1+p_{1k})\big)
-\sum_{k=1}^{p}l_{1k}=: M_{4}.
\end{align*}
Now, we have
\[
M_{4}\leq u(t)\leq M_{1},\quad  M_{2}\leq v(t)\leq M_{3}.
\]
Let
$D=|M_{1}|+|M_{2}|+|M_{3}|+|M_{4}|$.
We have
\[
\|x\|_{X}=\|u\|_{0}+\|v\|_{0}\leq D.
\]
Clearly, $D$ is independent of $\lambda$. Denote $M=D+D_{0}$, where
$D_{0}$ is taken sufficiently large such that each solution
$(u^{*},v^{*})$ of
\begin{equation} \label{e37}
\begin{gathered}
\int_{0}^{\omega}\,r_{1}(t)\,\mathrm{d}t+\sum_{k=1}^{p}\,e_{k}(u(t_{k}))
=\int_{0}^{\omega}\Big[b_{1}(t)\mathrm{e}^{u}
+\frac{a_{1}(t)\mathrm{e}^{v}}{\mathrm{e}^{u}+k_{1}(t)}\Big]\,\mathrm{d}t,
\\
\int_{0}^{\omega}\,r_{2}(t)\,\mathrm{d}t+\sum_{k=1}^{p}\,f_{k}(v(t_{k}))
=\int_{0}^{\omega}\frac{a_{2}(t)\mathrm{e}^{v}}{\mathrm{e}^{u}+k_{2}(t)}\,\mathrm{d}t
\end{gathered}
\end{equation}
satisfies $\|(u^{*},v^{*})\|_{X}<D_{0}$, and we can obtain $D_{0}$
by repeating the above arguments. Then $\|(u^{*},v^{*})\|_{X}<M$.

Let $\Omega=\big\{x=(u,v)\in X,\,\|x\|_{X}<M\big\}$, which satisfies
condition (a) of Lemma~\ref{lem22}.

When $x\in\partial\Omega\cap\ker L=\partial\Omega\cap R^{2}$,
$x$ is a constant vector in $R^{2}$ with $\|x\|_{X}=M$. Then
\begin{align*}
QNx& = \Big(\frac{1}{\omega}\Big[\int_{0}^{\omega}\Big(r_{1}(t)-b_{1}(t)
\exp\{u\} -\frac{a_{1}(t)\exp\{v\}}{\exp\{u\}+k_{1}(t)}\Big)\,\mathrm{d}t
+\sum_{k=1}^{p}e_{k}(u(t_{k}))\Big],\\
 &\frac{1}{\omega}\,\Big[\int_{0}^{\omega}\Big(r_{2}(t)-\frac{a_{2}(t)\exp\{v\}}
 {\exp\{u\}+k_{2}(t)}\Big)\,\mathrm{d}t
 +\sum_{k=1}^{p}f_{k}(v(t_{k}))\Big],\underbrace{0,\dots,0}_{2p}\Big)\\
& \neq 0,
\end{align*}
which shows that condition $(b)$ in Lemma \ref{lem22} holds.

Finally, we prove that condition $(c)$ in Lemma \ref{lem22} is satisfied.
The isomorphism $J$ of $\mathop{\rm Im}Q$ onto $\ker L$ can be defined by
\[
J:\mathop{\rm Im}Q  \to  X,\quad
(f,g,c_{1},\dots,c_{p},d_{1},\dots,d_{p}) \to (f,g).
\]
For $x\in\ker L\cap\Omega$, we have
\begin{align*}
JQNx& =
\Big(\frac{1}{\omega}\Big[\int_{0}^{\omega}\Big(r_{1}(t)-b_{1}(t)\exp\{u\}
-\frac{a_{1}(t)\exp\{v\}}{\exp\{u\}+k_{1}(t)}\Big)\,\mathrm{d}t
+\sum_{k=1}^{p}e_{k}(u(t_{k}))\Big],\\
 &\quad \frac{1}{\omega}\,\Big[\int_{0}^{\omega}\Big(r_{2}(t)
 -\frac{a_{2}(t)\exp\{v\}}{\exp\{u\}+k_{2}(t)}\Big)\,\mathrm{d}t
+\sum_{k=1}^{p}f_{k}(v(t_{k}))\Big]\,\Big)\\
& =\Big(\overline{r_{1}}-\overline{b_{1}}\mathrm{e}^{u}
-\frac{\mathrm{e}^{v}}{\omega}\int_{0}^{\omega}\,\frac{a_{1}(t)}{\mathrm{e}^{u}
+k_{1}(t)}\,\mathrm{d}t+\frac{1}{\omega}\sum_{k=1}^{p}e_{k}(u(t_{k})),\\
&\quad \overline{r_{2}}-\frac{\mathrm{e}^{v}}{\omega}\int_{0}^{\omega}\,\frac{a_{2}(t)}
 {\mathrm{e}^{u}+k_{2}(t)}\,\mathrm{d}t+\frac{1}{\omega}\sum_{k=1}^{p}f_{k}(v(t_{k}))\Big).
\end{align*}
Denote $\varphi:\mathop{\rm Dom}L\times[0,1]\to X$ as the
form
\begin{align*}
\varphi(u,v,\mu)& =
\Big(\overline{r_{1}}-\overline{b_{1}}e^{u},\;
 \overline{r_{2}}-\frac{\mathrm{e}^{v}}
{\omega}\int_{0}^{\omega}\,\frac{a_{2}(t)}{\mathrm{e}^{u}+k_{2}(t)}\,\mathrm{d}t\Big)\\
 &\quad +\mu \Big(-\frac{\mathrm{e}^{v}}{\omega}\int_{0}^{\omega}\,\frac{a_{1}(t)}
 {\mathrm{e}^{u}+k_{1}(t)}\,\mathrm{d}t+\frac{1}{\omega}
\sum_{k=1}^{p}e_{k}(u(t_{k})),
 \ \frac{1}{\omega}\sum_{k=1}^{p}f_{k}(v(t_{k}))\Big),
\end{align*}
where $\mu\in[0,1]$ is a parameter. With the mapping $\varphi$, we
have $\varphi(u,v,\mu)\neq0$ for
$(u,v)\in\partial\Omega\cap\ker L$. Otherwise, there exists a
constant vector $(u,v)$ with $\|(u,v)\|_{X}=M$ implies
$\varphi(u,v,\mu)=0$; i.e.,
\[
\overline{r_{1}}-\overline{b_{1}}\mathrm{e}^{u} -\frac{\mu
\mathrm{e}^{v}}{\omega}\int_{0}^{\omega}\,\frac{a_{1}(t)}{\mathrm{e}^{u}
+k_{1}(t)}\,\mathrm{d}t+\frac{\mu}{\omega}\sum_{k=1}^{p}e_{k}(u(t_{k}))=0
\]
and
\[
\overline{r_{2}}-\frac{\mathrm{e}^{v}}{\omega}\int_{0}^{\omega}\,\frac{a_{2}(t)}
{\mathrm{e}^{u}+k_{2}(t)}\,\mathrm{d}t+\frac{\mu}{\omega}\sum_{k=1}^{p}f_{k}(v(t_{k}))=0.
\]
Similar to the above discussion, we know that $\|(u,v)\|_{X}<M$,
which contradicts $\|(u,v)\|_{X}=M$. From the property of
coincidence degree theory, we can obtain
\begin{align*}
\deg (JQNx,\Omega\cap\ker L,0)
&=\deg (\varphi(u,v,1),\Omega\cap\ker L,0)\\
&=\deg (\varphi(u,v,0),\Omega\cap\ker L,0).
\end{align*}
Obviously, the following algebraic equation  has a unique
solution $(u^{*},v^{*})$
\begin{gather*}
\overline{r_{1}}-\overline{b_{1}}\mathrm{e}^{u}=0,\\
\overline{r_{2}}-\frac{\mathrm{e}^{v}}{\omega}\int_{0}^{\omega}\,
\frac{a_{2}(t)} {\mathrm{e}^{u}+k_{2}(t)}\,\mathrm{d}t=0.
\end{gather*}
So
\[
\deg (JQNx,\Omega\cap\ker L,0)=\deg (\varphi(u,v,0),
\Omega\cap\ker L,0)=1\neq0.
\]
By Lemma \ref{lem22}, the system \eqref{e11} has at least one $\omega$-periodic
solution in $\Omega$. The proof is complete.
\end{proof}

\section{An Example}

Consider the system
\begin{equation} \label{e41}
\begin{gathered}
\left.\begin{gathered}
\dot{x}(t)=x(t)\Big(r_{1}+\sin2\pi t-b_{1}x(t-\tau(t))
-\frac{a_{1}(1+\theta \cos2\pi t)y(t-\sigma_{1}(t))}{x(t-\tau_{1}(t))
+k_{1}}\Big)\\
\dot{y}(t)=y(t)\Big(r_{2}-\frac{a_{2}(1+\theta \cos2\pi
t)y(t-\sigma_{2}(t))}{x(t-\tau_{2}(t))+k_{2}}\Big)
\end{gathered} \right\}\\
\text{ for $t\neq t_{k},k\in\mathbb{Z}_{+}$, and }
\\
\left.\begin{gathered}
x(t_{k}^{+})=(1-h)x(t_{k}^{-})\\
y(t_{k}^{+})=(1-g)y(t_{k}^{-})
\end{gathered} \right\} \quad t=t_{k},k\in\mathbb{Z}_{+},
\end{gathered}
\end{equation}
where $r_{1}=1.1$, $r_{2}=1.25$, $b_{1}=0.6$, $a_{1}=0.05$,
$a_{2}=0.7$, $k_{1}=k_{2}=1$,
 $h=0.5$, $g=0.7$, $\theta=0.5$. Obviously, in this case, $\omega=1, p=1$
 and
\begin{gather*}
H_{1}<-0.38,\quad M_{1}<1.82,\quad H_{3}<-0.66,\quad M_{3}<1.84, \\
0.40<r_{1}+\ln(1-h)<0.41,\quad 0.04<r_{2}+\ln(1-g)<0.05, \\
r_{1}+\ln(1-h)-\mathrm{e}^{M_{3}}\frac{a_{1}}{k_{1}}>0.40-0.32=0.08>0.
\end{gather*}
So that, all conditions of Theorem \ref{thm31} are satisfied. Therefore,
 \eqref{e41} has at least one $\omega$-periodic
positive solution.

\begin{thebibliography}{00}

\bibitem{a1}Z. Amine, R. Ortega, A periodic prey-predator system,
J. Math. Anal. Appl. 185 (1994) 477-489.

\bibitem{b1} D. D. Bainov, P. S. Simeonov;
\emph{Impulsive Differential
Equations: Periodic Solutions and Applications}, Longman Scientific
and Technical, New York, 1993.

\bibitem{c1} F. D. Chen, J. L. Shi;
\emph{On a delayed nonautonomous ratio-dependent
predator-prey model with Holling type functional response and
diffusion}, Appl. Math. Comput. 192(2)(15) (2007) 358-369.

\bibitem{d1}A. D'Onofrio, Pulse vaccination strategy in the SIR
epidemic model: global asymptotic stable eradication in presence of
vaccine failures, Math. Comput. Modell. 36 (2002) 473-489.

\bibitem{f1} Y. H. Fan, W. T. Li;
\emph{Permanence in delayed ratio-dependent
predator-prey models with monotonic functional responses}, Nonlinear
Anal.: Real World Appl. 8(2)(2007) 424-434.

\bibitem{g1} R. E. Gaines, J. L. Mawhin;
\emph{Coincidence Degree and Nonlinear
Differential Equations}, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1977.

\bibitem{h1} H. F. Huo, W. T. Li, J. J. Nieto;
\emph{Periodic solutions of delayed predator-prey
model with the Beddington-DeAngelis functional response}, Chaos,
Solitons \& Fractals, 33(2)(2007) 505-512.

\bibitem{l1}A. Lakmeche, O. Arino, Nonlinear mathematical model of
pulsed therapy of heterogeneous tumor, Nonlinear Anal. 2 (2001)
455-465.

\bibitem{l2} Y. K. Li, Y. Kuang;
\emph{Periodic Solutions of Periodic Delay
 Lotka-Volterra Equations and Systems},
J. Math. Anal. Appl.  255(2001) 260-280.

\bibitem{l3} Y. K. Li;
\emph{Periodic solutions of a periodic delay predator-prey
system}, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 127(1999)1331-1335.

\bibitem{l4} B. Liu, Y. J. Zhang, L. S. Chen;
\emph{The dynamical behaviors of a
Lotka-Volterra predator-prey model concerning integrated pest
management}, Nonlinear Analysis: Real World Applications  6(2)(2005)
227-243.

\bibitem{l5}J. L\'{o}pez-G\'{o}mez, R. Ortega, A. Tineo, The periodic
predator-prey Lotka-Volterra model, Adv. Diff. Equations 1 (1996)
403-423.

\bibitem{s1}Y. Saito, T. Hara and W. Ma, Necessary and sufficient
conditions for permanence and global stability of a Lotka-Volterra
system with two delays, J. Math. Anal. Appl. 236 (1999) 534-556.

\bibitem{s2}B. Shulgin, L. Stone, Z. Agur, Theoretical examination of
pulse vaccination policy in the SIR epidemic model, Math. Comput.
Model. 31 (4/5) (2000) 207-215.

\bibitem{s3}X. Song,
Y. Li, Dynamic behaviors of the periodic predator-prey model with
modified Leslie-Gower Holling-type II schemes and impulsive effect
Nonlinear Anal.: Real World Appl. 9(1)(2008) 64-79.

\bibitem{t1}S.Y. Tang, L.S. Chen, The periodic predator-prey
Lotka-Volterra model with impulsive effect, J. Mech. Med. Biol. 2
(2002) 1-30.

\bibitem{z1} X. Y. Zhou, X. Y. Shi, X. Y. Song;
\emph{Analysis of nonautonomous predator-prey model with
nonlinear diffusion and time delay}, Appl. Math. Comput.  196(1)(15)
(2008) 129-136.

\end{thebibliography}

\end{document}
