Abstract and Applied Analysis

Volume 2014 (2014), Article ID 208530, 7 pages

http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2014/208530

Research Article

On New -Valent Meromorphic Function Involving Certain Differential and Integral Operators

Aabed Mohammed¹ and Maslina Darus²

¹Basic Sciences Unit, Department of Mathematics, Sana’a Community College, Sana’a, Yemen

²School of Mathematical Sciences, Faculty of Science and Technology, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, 43600 Bangi, Selangor D. Ehsan, Malaysia

Received 21 August 2013; Revised 2 January 2014; Accepted 5 January 2014; Published 17 February 2014

Academic Editor: Marco Donatelli

Copyright © 2014 Aabed Mohammed and Maslina Darus. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Abstract.

We define new subclasses of meromorphic -valent functions by using certain differential operator. Combining the differential operator and certain integral operator, we introduce a general -valent meromorphic function. Then we prove the sufficient conditions for the function in order to be in the new subclasses.

1. Introduction

Let denote the class of meromorphic functions of the form

which are analytic and -valent in the punctured unit disc:

A function is said to be in the class of meromorphic -valent starlike of order if it satisfies the following inequality:

For , Saif and Kılıçman [1] introduced the linear operator , as follows:

and in general, for , we can write

It is easy to see that, for , we have

Meromorphically multivalent functions have been extensively studied by several authors; see, for example, Uralegaddi and Somanatha [2, 3], Liu and Srivastava [4, 5], Mogra [6, 7], Srivastava et al. [8], Aouf et al. [9, 10], Joshi and Srivastava [11], Owa et al. [12], and Kulkarni et al. [13].

Now, for , we define the following new subclasses.

Definition 1. Let a function be analytic in . Then is in the class if, and only if, satisfies

where ,   ,  ,   .

From (6), one can see that (7) is equivalent to

Remark 2. In Definition 1, if we set

(i) and , then we have [14, Definition 1.1];(ii) and , then we have , the class of meromorphic -valent starlike of order ;(iii) and , then we have [14, Definition 1.7].

Definition 3. Let a function be analytic in . Then is in the class if, and only if, satisfies

where ,  ,  ,  ,  .

Inequality (9) is equivalent to

Remark 4. In Definition 3, if we set

(i) and , then we have [14, Definition 1.3];(ii)for and , then we have [14, Definition 1.8].

Definition 5. Let a function be analytic in . Then is in the class , if, and only if, satisfies

where ,  ,  ,  .

Inequality (11) is equivalent to

Remark 6. In Definition 5, if we set

(i) and , then we have [14, Definition 1.5];(ii)for and , then we have [14, Definition 1.9].

Recently, Mohammed and Darus [15] introduced the following -valent meromorphic function:

where is the integral operator introduced and studied by the authors [15, 16] and defined by

where

For we obtain [17]. It is clear that

By using the differential operator given by (4), we introduce the following -valent meromorphic function.

Definition 7. Let ,    and ,  . One defines the -valent meromorphic function :,

where and is the differential operator given by (4).

Remark 8. If we set ,   and , then we have the -valent meromorphic function given by (13).

2. Main Results

To prove our main results, we need the following lemma.

Lemma 9. For the -valent meromorphic function given by (18), one has

Proof. From (18), we have

Differentiating (20) logarithmically and then by simple computation, we get

From (6), we obtain

Then using (22) on the right-hand side of (21), one gets

Multiplying (23) by yields that

or, equivalently, we can write that

which is the desired result.

Our first theorem is as follows.

Theorem 10. Let ,   ,   and ,  . Suppose that

If   , then the function defined by (18) is in the class , where

Proof. Since   , by (9), we have

By (19), we get

This is equivalent to

From (28) together with (30), we can get

Hence, we obtain , where .

Corollary 11. Let ,   ,  ,  , and ,  . Suppose that

If   , then the function , defined by (18), is in the class , where is defined as in (27).

Proof. In Theorem 10, we consider .

By Corollary 11, we easily get the following.

Corollary 12. Let ,   ,  ,  , and ,  . Suppose that

If   , then the function , defined by (18), is in the class .

Now, we prove a sufficient condition for the function defined by (18) to belong to the class .

Theorem 13. Let ,   ,   , and ,  . Suppose that

If   , then the function defined by (18) is in the class .

Proof. Since   , by (9), we have

On the other hand, from (19), we obtain the following:

Considering (10) with the above equality, we find

The proof is complete.

Corollary 14. Let ,   ,   , and . Suppose that

If   , then the function defined by (18) is in the class .

Proof. In Theorem 13, we consider that

Next, for the function defined by (18) to belong to the class , we have the following result.

Theorem 15. Let ,   , and . Suppose that

If , then the function .

Proof. Since , by (11), we have

Combining (12), (30), and the above inequality, we obtain

which is

and finally

Hence, by (12), we have .

Corollary 16. Let and . Suppose that

If , then the function defined by (18) is in the class .

Proof. In Theorem 15, we consider .

Finally, we end this paper by the following theorem and its consequence.

Theorem 17. Let ,   , and . Suppose that

If , then the function defined by (18) is in the class .

Proof. Since , by (11), we have

Considering this inequality and (30), we obtain

Hence, we have .

Corollary 18. Let and . Suppose that

If , then the function defined by (18) is in the class .

Proof. In Theorem 17, we consider that .

For other work that we can look at regarding differential and integral operators, see [14, 18–24].

Conflict of Interests

The authors declare that there is no conflict of interests regarding the publication of this paper.

Acknowledgment

The work here is fully supported by UKM′s Grants: AP-2013-009 and DIP-2013-001.

References

A. Saif and A. Kılıçman, “On certain subclasses of meromorphically -valent functions associated by the linear operator ,” Journal of Inequalities and Applications, vol. 2011, Article ID 401913, 16 pages, 2011.

B. A. Uralegaddi and C. Somanatha, “New criteria for meromorphic starlike univalent functions,” Bulletin of the Australian Mathematical Society, vol. 43, no. 1, pp. 137–140, 1991.

B. A. Uralegaddi and C. Somanatha, “Certain classes of meromorphic multivalent functions,” Tamkang Journal of Mathematics, vol. 23, no. 3, pp. 223–231, 1992.

J.-L. Liu and H. M. Srivastava, “A linear operator and associated families of meromorphically multivalent functions,” Journal of Mathematical Analysis and Applications, vol. 259, no. 2, pp. 566–581, 2001.

J.-L. Liu and H. M. Srivastava, “Some convolution conditions for starlikeness and convexity of meromorphically multivalent functions,” Applied Mathematics Letters, vol. 16, no. 1, pp. 13–16, 2003.

M. L. Mogra, “Meromorphic multivalent functions with positive coefficients. I,” Mathematica Japonica, vol. 35, no. 1, pp. 1–11, 1990.

M. L. Mogra, “Meromorphic multivalent functions with positive coefficients. II,” Mathematica Japonica, vol. 35, no. 6, pp. 1089–1098, 1990.

H. M. Srivastava, H. M. Hossen, and M. K. Aouf, “A unified presentation of some classes of meromorphically multivalent functions,” Computers & Mathematics with Applications, vol. 38, no. 11-12, pp. 63–70, 1999.

M. K. Aouf and H. M. Hossen, “New criteria for meromorphic -valent starlike functions,” Tsukuba Journal of Mathematics, vol. 17, no. 2, pp. 481–486, 1993.

M. K. Aouf and H. M. Srivastava, “A new criterion for meromorphically p-valent convex functions of order alpha,” Mathematical Sciences Research Hot-Line, vol. 1, no. 8, pp. 7–12, 1997.

S. B. Joshi and H. M. Srivastava, “A certain family of meromorphically multivalent functions,” Computers & Mathematics with Applications, vol. 38, no. 3-4, pp. 201–211, 1999.

S. Owa, H. E. Darwish, and M. K. Aouf, “Meromorphic multivalent functions with positive and fixed second coefficients,” Mathematica Japonica, vol. 46, no. 2, pp. 231–236, 1997.

S. R. Kulkarni, U. H. Naik, and H. M. Srivastava, “A certain class of meromorphically -valent quasi-convex functions,” Panamerican Mathematical Journal, vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 57–64, 1998.

A. Mohammed and M. Darus, “Integral operators on new families of meromorphic functions of complex order,” Journal of Inequalities and Applications, vol. 2011, article 121, 12 pages, 2011.

A. Mohammed and M. Darus, “The order of starlikeness of new -valent meromorphic functions,” International Journal of Mathematical Analysis, vol. 6, no. 25-28, pp. 1329–1340, 2012.

A. Mohammed and M. Darus, “Some properties of certain integral operators on new subclasses of analytic functions with complex order,” Journal of Applied Mathematics, vol. 2012, Article ID 161436, 9 pages, 2012.

A. Mohammed and M. Darus, “A new integral operator for meromorphic functions,” Acta Universitatis Apulensis, no. 24, pp. 231–238, 2010.

A. Mohammed and M. Darus, “New properties for certain integral operators,” International Journal of Mathematical Analysis, vol. 4, no. 42, pp. 2101–2109, 2010.

A. Mohammed and M. Darus, “Starlikeness properties of a new integral operator for meromorphic functions,” Journal of Applied Mathematics, vol. 2011, Article ID 804150, 8 pages, 2011.

B. A. Frasin, “On an integral operator of meromorphic functions,” Matematichki Vesnik, vol. 64, no. 2, pp. 167–172, 2012.

N. Breaz, D. Breaz, and M. Darus, “Convexity properties for some general integral operators on uniformly analytic functions classes,” Computers & Mathematics with Applications, vol. 60, no. 12, pp. 3105–3107, 2010.

S. Bulut, “Some properties for an integral operator defined by Al-Oboudi differential operator,” Journal of Inequalities in Pure and Applied Mathematics, vol. 9, no. 4, article 115, 5 pages, 2008.

S. Bulut, “A new general integral operator defined by Al-Oboudi differential operator,” Journal of Inequalities and Applications, vol. 2009, Article ID 158408, 13 pages, 2009.

P. Goswami and S. Bulut, “Starlikeness of general integral operator for meromorphic multivalent functions,” Journal of Complex Analysis, vol. 2013, Article ID 690584, 4 pages, 2013.