Figure 9

A computer simulation of the system of Eqs. (4)–(6) with \(c_{1}=0.2~\mathrm{day}^{-1}\), \(c_{2}=0.95~\mathrm{day}^{-1}\), \(c_{3}=0.239~\mathrm{day} ^{-1}\), \(c_{4}=0.85~\mathrm{day}^{-1}\), \(c_{5}=0.1~\mathrm{day}^{-1}\), \(k_{1}=67\), \(k_{2}=0.5\), \(k_{3}=0.7\), \(h_{1}=0.024\), \(h_{2}=0.063\), \(e_{1}=0.001~\mathrm{day} ^{-1}\), \(e_{2}=0.06~\mathrm{day}^{-1}\), \(e_{3}=0.4~\mathrm{day}^{-1}\), \(\gamma _{1}=0.001~\mathrm{day}^{-1}\), \(\gamma _{2}=0.03~\mathrm{day}^{-1}\), \(\epsilon =0.1\) and \(\delta =0.9\) where \(x(0)=0.1\), \(y(0)=0.1\) and \(z(0)=0.1\), for which all conditions in Theorem 4 are satisfied. The solution trajectory tends towards a stable equilibrium point as theoretically predicted