- Research Article
- Open Access
- Published:
Some Subclasses of Meromorphic Functions Associated with a Family of Integral Operators
Journal of Inequalities and Applications volume 2009, Article number: 931230 (2009)
Abstract
Making use of the principle of subordination between analytic functions and a family of integral operators defined on the space of meromorphic functions, we introduce and investigate some new subclasses of meromorphic functions. Such results as inclusion relationships and integral-preserving properties associated with these subclasses are proved. Several subordination and superordination results involving this family of integral operators are also derived.
1. Introduction and Preliminaries
Let denote the class of functions of the form

which are analytic in the punctured open unit disk

Let , where
is given by (1.1) and
is defined by

Then the Hadamard product (or convolution) of the functions
and
is defined by

Let denote the class of functions of the form

which are analytic and convex in and satisfy the condition

For two functions and
, analytic in
, we say that the function
is subordinate to
in
, and write

if there exists a Schwarz function , which is analytic in
with

such that

Indeed, it is known that

Furthermore, if the function is univalent in
, then we have the following equivalence:

Analogous to the integral operator defined by Jung et al. [1], Lashin [2] introduced and investigated the following integral operator:

defined, in terms of the familiar Gamma function, by

By setting

we define a new function in terms of the Hadamard product (or convolution):

Then, motivated essentially by the operator , we now introduce the operator

which is defined as

where (and throughout this paper unless otherwise mentioned) the parameters and
are constrained as follows:

We can easily find from (1.14), (1.15), and (1.17) that

where is the Pochhammer symbol defined by

Clearly, we know that .
It is readily verified from (1.19) that


By making use of the principle of subordination between analytic functions, we introduce the subclasses ,
,
and
of the class
which are defined by

Indeed, the above mentioned function classes are generalizations of the general meromorphic starlike, meromorphic convex, meromorphic close-to-convex and meromorphic quasi-convex functions in analytic function theory (see, for details, [3–12]).
Next, by using the operator defined by (1.19), we define the following subclasses ,
,
and
of the class
:

Obviously, we know that


In order to prove our main results, we need the following lemmas.
Lemma 1.1 (see [13]).
Let . Suppose also that
is convex and univalent in
with

If is analytic in
with
, then the subordination

implies that

Lemma 1.2 (see [14]).
Let be convex univalent in
and let
be analytic in
with

If is analytic in
and
, then the subordination

implies that

The main purpose of the present paper is to investigate some inclusion relationships and integral-preserving properties of the subclasses

of meromorphic functions involving the operator . Several subordination and superordination results involving this operator are also derived.
2. The Main Inclusion Relationships
We begin by presenting our first inclusion relationship given by Theorem 2.1.
Theorem 2.1.
Let and
with

Then

Proof.
We first prove that

Let and suppose that

where is analytic in
with
Combining (1.21) and (2.4), we find that

Taking the logarithmical differentiation on both sides of (2.5) and multiplying the resulting equation by , we get

By virtue of (2.1), an application of Lemma 1.1 to (2.6) yields , that is
. Thus, the assertion (2.3) of Theorem 2.1 holds.
To prove the second part of Theorem 2.1, we assume that and set

where is analytic in
with
. Combining (1.22), (2.1), and (2.7) and applying the similar method of proof of the first part, we get
, that is
Therefore, the second part of Theorem 2.1 also holds. The proof of Theorem 2.1 is evidently completed.
Theorem 2.2.
Let and
with (2.1) holds. Then

Proof.
In view of (1.25) and Theorem 2.1, we find that


Combining (2.9) and (2.10), we deduce that the assertion of Theorem 2.2 holds.
Theorem 2.3.
Let ,
and
with (2.1) holds. Then

Proof.
We begin by proving that

Let . Then, by definition, we know that

with , Moreover, by Theorem 2.1, we know that
, which implies that

We now suppose that

where is analytic in
with
Combining (1.21) and (2.15), we find that

Differentiating both sides of (2.16) with respect to and multiplying the resulting equation by
, we get

In view of (1.21), (2.14), and (2.17), we conclude that

By noting that (2.1) holds and

we know that

Thus, an application of Lemma 1.2 to (2.18) yields

that is , which implies that the assertion (2.12) of Theorem 2.3 holds.
By virtue of (1.22) and (2.1), making use of the similar arguments of the details above, we deduce that

The proof of Theorem 2.3 is thus completed.
Theorem 2.4.
Let ,
and
with (2.1) holds. Then

Proof.
In view of (1.26) and Theorem 2.3, and by similarly applying the method of proof of Theorem 2.2, we conclude that the assertion of Theorem 2.4 holds.
3. A Set of Integral-Preserving Properties
In this section, we derive some integral-preserving properties involving two families of integral operators.
Theorem 3.1.
Let with
and

Then the integral operator defined by

belongs to the class .
Proof.
Let . Then, from (3.2), we find that

By setting

we observe that is analytic in
with
. It follows from (3.3) and (3.4) that

Differentiating both sides of (3.5) with respect to logarithmically and multiplying the resulting equation by
, we get

Since (3.1) holds, an application of Lemma 1.1 to (3.6) yields

which implies that the assertion of Theorem 3.1 holds.
Theorem 3.2.
Let with
and (3.1) holds. Then the integral operator
defined by (3.2) belongs to the class
.
Proof.
By virtue of (1.25) and Theorem 3.1, we easily find that

The proof of Theorem 3.2 is evidently completed.
Theorem 3.3.
Let with
and (3.1) holds. Then the integral operator
defined by (3.2) belongs to the class
.
Proof.
Let . Then, by definition, we know that there exists a function
such that

Since , by Theorem 3.1, we easily find that
, which implies that

We now set

where is analytic in
with
. From (3.3), and (3.11), we get

Combining (3.10), (3.11), and (3.12), we find that

By virtue of (1.21), (3.10), and (3.13), we deduce that

The remainder of the proof of Theorem 3.3 is much akin to that of Theorem 2.3. We, therefore, choose to omit the analogous details involved. We thus find that

which implies that . The proof of Theorem 3.3 is thus completed.
Theorem 3.4.
Let with
and (3.1) holds. Then the integral operator
defined by (3.2) belongs to the class
.
Proof.
In view of (1.26) and Theorem 3.3, and by similarly applying the method of proof of Theorem 3.2, we deduce that the assertion of Theorem 3.4 holds.
Theorem 3.5.
Let with
and

Then the function defined by

belongs to the class .
Proof.
Let and suppose that

Combining (3.17) and (3.18), we have

Now, in view of (3.17), (3.18), and (3.19), we get

Since (3.16) holds, an application of Lemma 1.1 to (3.20) yields

that is, . We thus complete the proof of Theorem 3.5.
Theorem 3.6.
Let with
and (3.16) holds. Then the function
defined by (3.17) belongs to the class
.
Proof.
By virtue of (1.25) and Theorem 3.5, and by similarly applying the method of proof of Theorem 3.2, we conclude that the assertion of Theorem 3.6 holds.
Theorem 3.7.
Let with
and (3.16) holds. Then the function
defined by (3.17) belongs to the class
.
Proof.
Let . Then, by definition, we know that there exists a function
such that (3.9) holds. Since
, by Theorem 3.5, we easily find that
, which implies that

We now set

where is analytic in
with
. From (3.17) and (3.23), we get

Combining (3.22), (3.23), and (3.24), we find that

Furthermore, by virtue of (1.22), (3.22), and (3.25), we deduce that

The remainder of the proof of Theorem 3.7 is similar to that of Theorem 2.3. We, therefore, choose to omit the analogous details involved. We thus find that

which implies that . The proof of Theorem 3.7 is thus completed.
Theorem 3.8.
Let with
and (3.16) holds. Then the function
defined by (3.17) belongs to the class
.
Proof.
By virtue of (1.26) and Theorem 3.7, and by similarly applying the method of proof of Theorem 3.2, we deduce that the assertion of Theorem 3.8 holds.
4. Subordination and Superordination Results
In this section, we derive some subordination and superordination results associated with the operator . By similarly applying the methods of proof of the results obtained by Cho et al. [15], we get the following subordination and superordination results. Here, we choose to omit the details involved. For some other recent sandwich-type results in analytic function theory, one can find in [16–30] and the references cited therein.
Corollary 4.1.
Let . If

where

then the subordination relationship

implies that

Furthermore, the function is the best dominant.
Corollary 4.2.
Let . If

where

then the subordination relationship

implies that

Furthermore, the function is the best dominant.
Denote by the set of all functions
that are analytic and injective on
, where

and such that for
. If
is subordinate to
, then
is superordinate to
. We now derive the following superordination results.
Corollary 4.3.
Let . If

where is given by (4.2), also let the function
be univalent in
and
, then the subordination relationship

implies that

Furthermore, the function is the best subordinant.
Corollary 4.4.
Let . If

where is given by (4.6), also let the function
be univalent in
and
, then the subordination relationship

implies that

Furthermore, the function is the best subordinant.
Combining the above mentioned subordination and superordination results involving the operator , we get the following "sandwich-type results".
Corollary 4.5.
Let . If

where is given by (4.2), also let the function
be univalent in
and
, then the subordination chain

implies that

Furthermore, the functions and
are, respectively, the best subordinant and the best dominant.
Corollary 4.6.
Let . If

where is given by (4.6), also let the function
be univalent in
and
, then the subordination chain

implies that

Furthermore, the functions and
are, respectively, the best subordinant and the best dominant.
References
Jung IB, Kim YC, Srivastava HM: The Hardy space of analytic functions associated with certain one-parameter families of integral operators. Journal of Mathematical Analysis and Applications 1993,176(1):138–147. 10.1006/jmaa.1993.1204
Lashin AY: On certain subclasses of meromorphic functions associated with certain integral operators. Computers & Mathematics with Applications. In press Computers & Mathematics with Applications. In press
Ali RM, Ravichandran V: Classes of meromorphic -convex functions. Taiwanese Journal of Mathematics. In press Taiwanese Journal of Mathematics. In press
Cho NE, Kwon OS, Srivastava HM: Inclusion and argument properties for certain subclasses of meromorphic functions associated with a family of multiplier transformations. Journal of Mathematical Analysis and Applications 2004,300(2):505–520. 10.1016/j.jmaa.2004.07.001
El-Ashwah RM, Aouf MK: Hadamard product of certain meromorphic starlike and convex functions. Computers & Mathematics with Applications 2009,57(7):1102–1106. 10.1016/j.camwa.2008.07.044
Haji Mohd M, Ali RM, Keong LS, Ravichandran V: Subclasses of meromorphic functions associated with convolution. Journal of Inequalities and Applications 2009, 2009:-10.
Nunokawa M, Ahuja OP: On meromorphic starlike and convex functions. Indian Journal of Pure and Applied Mathematics 2001,32(7):1027–1032.
Piejko K, Sokół J: Subclasses of meromorphic functions associated with the Cho-Kwon-Srivastava operator. Journal of Mathematical Analysis and Applications 2008,337(2):1261–1266. 10.1016/j.jmaa.2007.04.030
Srivastava HM, Yang D-G, Xu N-E: Some subclasses of meromorphically multivalent functions associated with a linear operator. Applied Mathematics and Computation 2008,195(1):11–23. 10.1016/j.amc.2007.04.065
Wang Z-G, Jiang Y-P, Srivastava HM: Some subclasses of meromorphically multivalent functions associated with the generalized hypergeometric function. Computers & Mathematics with Applications 2009,57(4):571–586. 10.1016/j.camwa.2008.01.038
Wang Z-G, Sun Y, Zhang Z-H: Certain classes of meromorphic multivalent functions. Computers & Mathematics with Applications 2009,58(7):1408–1417. 10.1016/j.camwa.2009.07.020
Yuan S-M, Liu Z-M, Srivastava HM: Some inclusion relationships and integral-preserving properties of certain subclasses of meromorphic functions associated with a family of integral operators. Journal of Mathematical Analysis and Applications 2008,337(1):505–515. 10.1016/j.jmaa.2007.04.018
Eenigenburg P, Miller SS, Mocanu PT, Reade MO: On a Briot-Bouquet differential subordination. In General Mathematics 3, International Series of Numerical Mathematics. Volume 64. Birkhäuser, Basel, Switzerland; 1983:339–348. Revue Roumaine de Mathématiques Pures et Appliquées, vol. 29, no. 7, pp. 567–573, 1984 Revue Roumaine de Mathématiques Pures et Appliquées, vol. 29, no. 7, pp. 567–573, 1984
Miller SS, Mocanu PT: Differential subordinations and univalent functions. The Michigan Mathematical Journal 1981,28(2):157–172.
Cho NE, Kwon OS, Owa S, Srivastava HM: A class of integral operators preserving subordination and superordination for meromorphic functions. Applied Mathematics and Computation 2007,193(2):463–474. 10.1016/j.amc.2007.03.084
Ali RM, Ravichandran V, Khan MH, Subramanian KG: Differential sandwich theorems for certain analytic functions. Far East Journal of Mathematical Sciences 2004,15(1):87–94.
Ali RM, Ravichandran V, Seenivasagan N: Subordination and superordination on Schwarzian derivatives. Journal of Inequalities and Applications 2008, 2008:-18.
Ali RM, Ravichandran V, Seenivasagan N: Subordination and superordination of the Liu-Srivastava linear operator on meromorphic functions. Bulletin of the Malaysian Mathematical Sciences Society 2008,31(2):193–207.
Ali RM, Ravichandran V, Seenivasagan N: Differential subordination and superordination of analytic functions defined by the multiplier transformation. Mathematical Inequalities & Applications 2009,12(1):123–139.
Bulboacă T: Sandwich-type theorems for a class of integral operators. Bulletin of the Belgian Mathematical Society. Simon Stevin 2006,13(3):537–550.
Cho NE, Nishiwaki J, Owa S, Srivastava HM: Subordination and superordination for multivalent functions associated with a class of fractional differintegral operators. Integral Transforms and Special Functions. In press Integral Transforms and Special Functions. In press
Cho NE, Srivastava HM: A class of nonlinear integral operators preserving subordination and superordination. Integral Transforms and Special Functions 2007,18(1–2):95–107.
Goyal SP, Goswami P, Silverman H: Subordination and superordination results for a class of analytic multivalent functions. International Journal of Mathematics and Mathematical Sciences 2008, 2008:-12.
Shanmugam TN, Ravichandran V, Sivasubramanian S: Differential sandwich theorems for some subclasses of analytic functions. The Australian Journal of Mathematical Analysis and Applications 2006,3(1, article 8):-11.
Shanmugam TN, Sivasubramanian S, Frasin BA, Kavitha S: On sandwich theorems for certain subclasses of analytic functions involving Carlson-Shaffer operator. Journal of the Korean Mathematical Society 2008,45(3):611–620. 10.4134/JKMS.2008.45.3.611
Shanmugam TN, Sivasubramanian S, Owa S: On sandwich results for some subclasses of analytic functions involving certain linear operator. Integral Transforms and Special Functions. In press Integral Transforms and Special Functions. In press
Shanmugam TN, Sivasubramanian S, Silverman H: On sandwich theorems for some classes of analytic functions. International Journal of Mathematics and Mathematical Sciences 2006, 2006:-13.
Shanmugam TN, Sivasubramanian S, Srivastava HM: Differential sandwich theorems for certain subclasses of analytic functions involving multiplier transformations. Integral Transforms and Special Functions 2006,17(12):889–899. 10.1080/10652460600926915
Wang Z-G, Aghalary R, Darus M, Ibrahim RW: Some properties of certain multivalent analytic functions involving the Cho-Kwon-Srivastava operator. Mathematical and Computer Modelling 2009,49(9–10):1969–1984. 10.1016/j.mcm.2008.11.003
Wang Z-G, Xiang R-G, Darus M: A family of integral operators preserving subordination and superordination. Bulletin of the Malaysian Mathematical Sciences Society. In press Bulletin of the Malaysian Mathematical Sciences Society. In press
Acknowledgments
The present investigation was supported by the Scientific Research Fund of Hunan Provincial Education Department under Grant 08C118 of China. The authors would like to thank Professor R. M. Ali for sending several valuable papers to them.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 International License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
About this article
Cite this article
Wang, ZG., Liu, ZH. & Sun, Y. Some Subclasses of Meromorphic Functions Associated with a Family of Integral Operators. J Inequal Appl 2009, 931230 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1155/2009/931230
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1155/2009/931230
Keywords
- Analytic Function
- Similar Argument
- Integral Operator
- Unit Disk
- Open Unit