
Citation: Jennifer K. Costanza, Robert C. Abt, Alexa J. McKerrow, Jaime A. Collazo. Linking state-and-transition simulation and timber supply models for forest biomass production scenarios[J]. AIMS Environmental Science, 2015, 2(2): 180-202. doi: 10.3934/environsci.2015.2.180
[1] | Peter Rashkov . Modeling repellent-based interventions for control of vector-borne diseases with constraints on extent and duration. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2022, 19(4): 4038-4061. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2022185 |
[2] | Felicia Maria G. Magpantay, Xingfu Zou . Wave fronts in neuronal fields with nonlocal post-synaptic axonal connections and delayed nonlocal feedback connections. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2010, 7(2): 421-442. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2010.7.421 |
[3] | Wing-Cheong Lo, Ching-Shan Chou, Kimberly K. Gokoffski, Frederic Y.-M. Wan, Arthur D. Lander, Anne L. Calof, Qing Nie . Feedback regulation in multistage cell lineages. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2009, 6(1): 59-82. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2009.6.59 |
[4] | Yuqian Mei, Debao Guan, Xinyu Tong, Qian Liu, Mingcheng Hu, Guangxin Chen, Caijuan Li . Association of cerebral infarction with vertebral arterial fenestration using non-Newtonian hemodynamic evaluation. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2022, 19(7): 7076-7090. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2022334 |
[5] | Yoon-gu Hwang, Hee-Dae Kwon, Jeehyun Lee . Feedback control problem of an SIR epidemic model based on the Hamilton-Jacobi-Bellman equation. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2020, 17(3): 2284-2301. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2020121 |
[6] | Yannick Lutz, Rosa Daschner, Lorena Krames, Axel Loewe, Giorgio Cattaneo, Stephan Meckel, Olaf Dössel . Modeling selective therapeutic hypothermia in case of acute ischemic stroke using a 1D hemodynamics model and a simplified brain geometry. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2020, 17(2): 1147-1167. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2020060 |
[7] | Xingjia Li, Jinan Gu, Zedong Huang, Chen Ji, Shixi Tang . Hierarchical multiloop MPC scheme for robot manipulators with nonlinear disturbance observer. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2022, 19(12): 12601-12616. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2022588 |
[8] | Sue Wang, Jing Li, Saleem Riaz, Haider Zaman, Pengfei Hao, Yiwen Luo, Alsharef Mohammad, Ahmad Aziz Al-Ahmadi, NasimUllah . Duplex PD inertial damping control paradigm for active power decoupling of grid-tied virtual synchronous generator. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2022, 19(12): 12031-12057. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2022560 |
[9] | Scott R. Pope, Laura M. Ellwein, Cheryl L. Zapata, Vera Novak, C. T. Kelley, Mette S. Olufsen . Estimation and identification of parameters in a lumped cerebrovascular model. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2009, 6(1): 93-115. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2009.6.93 |
[10] | Kala Agbo Bidi . Feedback stabilization and observer design for sterile insect technique models. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2024, 21(6): 6263-6288. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2024274 |
Cerebral autoregulation is an important option of the brain vascular system to provide a stable $ CBF $ under variations of $ MAP $ [1]. This ensures continuous oxygen supply to the brain tissue. Cerebral autoregulation is impaired in preterm infants, i.e., the dependence of $ CBF $ on $ MAP $ is almost linear, and the autoregulatory plateau usually exists for a very narrow range of $ MAP $ [2]. Additionally, the slope of the autoregulatory curve strongly depends on the arterial partial $ CO_2 $ level ($ pCO_2 $) [3]. Increased $ pCO_2 $ values (e.g. permissive hypercapnia), being often observed in ventilated infants, lead to progressively impaired autoregulation. Moreover, variations in intracranial/cerebral venous pressure ($ ICP $/$ CVP $) may cause additional fluctuations of $ CBF $. All this may be damaging for unstable cerebral blood vessels, especially for those of the germinal matrix ($ GM $) [4,5]. The germinal matrix, a highly vascularized site of origin for neuronal and glial cells, disappears by the 32nd week of gestation. Thus, the risk of rupture of unstable $ GM $-vessels is especially high in very preterm infants. Another risk concerns a raised $ CVP $, which can reduce the perfusion pressure defined as the difference between $ MAP $ and $ CVP $. This may result in a decrease of $ CBF $ with the threat of cerebral hypoperfusion [6,7].
Mathematical modeling of cerebral autoregulation is the topic of many publications, see e.g. [8,9,10,11,12,13,14]. A comprehensive survey on models of $ CBF $ autoregulation can be found in the monograph [15]. The purpose of the current paper is to model impaired cerebral autoregulation in premature newborns and to develop a feedback control that prevents large fluctuations of $ CBF $ caused by variations of $ MAP $, $ pCO_2 $, and $ ICP $/$ CVP $. Based on the polynomial autoregulation models proposed by the authors in [14,16], an extended model of impaired cerebral autoregulation, coupled to a model of cerebral blood vessel network from [17], is suggested. The new feature of this model, compared with [14] and [16], consists in accounting for the effect of $ pCO_2 $ and $ CVP $ on $ CBF $. According to the literature (cf. [3,18]), such an effect is very important in ventilated preterm infants. Moreover, a new heuristic feedback control maintaining $ CBF $ within a safety range in the presence of unpredictable variations in $ MAP $, $ pCO_2 $, and $ ICP $/$ CVP $ is constructed. Viability theory [19] and differential game approach [20] are used to prove the reliability of this control. It should be noted that the controller designed gives much better results compared with that proposed in [16].
The paper is organized as follows.
Section 2 describes a model of cerebral autoregulation assuming a polynomial dependence of vessel radii on the mean arterial blood pressure. The model is coupled with a hierarchical model of blood vessel network from [17] and adjusted to experimental data for preterm infants using a polynomial fitting.
In Section 3, the autoregulation model from Sect. 2 is modified by adding a mechanism of impaired autoregulation. Variations in $ MAP $, $ pCO_2 $, and $ CVP $ are considered as main factors influencing $ CBF $.
In Section 4, a heuristic feedback controller based on the discrepancy between ideal and impaired autoregulation is proposed. The control action can be interpreted as injection of medicaments causing, with some delay, the dilation or shrinkage of vessels. In Subsection 4.1, a conflict control problem with appropriate state constraints is introduced, and a state-based feedback controller is designed in Subsection 4.2. Subsection 4.3 outlines viability approach and describes a grid numerical method for constructing leadership kernels, i.e. maximal domains where the control can keep the dynamic system infinitely long for all unpredictable admissible disturbances. The idea of the proof of robustness of the heuristic controller is then explained in terms of leadership sets. In Subsection 4.4, a modified grid algorithm for the treatment of not quickly changing disturbances is given.
Section 5 describes results of numerical simulations. It is shown that the controller introduced in Section 4 is able to correct the impaired autoregulation, i.e. the controller is robust against all unpredictable admissible not quick changes of $ MAP $, $ pCO_2 $, and $ CVP $.
In this Section, a model of cerebral autoregulation for preterm infants, originally introduced in [14], is recalled and extended to account for effects of carbon dioxide vasoreactivity.
A hierarchical model of cerebrovascular network proposed in [17] is used to compute $ CBF $. It is supposed that $ 9 $ arterial, one capillary, and $ 9 $ venous compartments are sequentially connected. In the case of Poiseuille flow of a Newtonian liquid, $ CBF $ can be evaluated using Kirchhoff's law as follows (see [21] for details):
$ CBF=(pa−pv)(19∑i=18μℓiπmir4i)−1. $
|
(2.1) |
Here, $ p_a = MAP $ is the mean arterial pressure, $ p_v = CVP $ is the cerebral venous pressure, $ \ell_i $ and $ r_i $ are the length and radius of vessels of the $ i $th compartment, respectively, and $ \mu $ is the dynamic viscosity of blood.
To describe the process of autoregulation, assume that the vascular radius $ r_i $ depends on the arterial pressure $ p_a $ as follows:
$ r_i = r^*_i \big[(p^*_a-p_v)/(p_a-p_v)\big]^{1/4}, $ |
where $ p_a^* $ is a baseline value of $ p_a $, and $ r^*_i $ is a reference value of $ r_i $ corresponding to $ p_a^* $. It is easy to see that such a choice stabilizes $ CBF $ because $ r_i $ appears as the fourth power in formula (2.1) for $ CBF $.
To fit this model to experimental data on cerebral autoregulation in preterm infants (see [3,22,23,24], the following modification is introduced (see also [14]):
$ ri=r∗i[(p∗a−pv)/(pa−pv)]1/4P(pa,a1,a2,a3), $
|
(2.2) |
$ P(pa,a1,a2,a3)=1+a1(pa−p∗a)+a2(pa−p∗a)2+a3(pa−p∗a)3. $
|
(2.3) |
Therefore,
$ CBF(pa,pv,a1,a2,a3)=(pa−pv)kage(19∑i=18μℓiπmir4i)−1, $
|
(2.4) |
where $ r_i $ are given by formulas (2.2) and (2.3), and $ k_{age} $ is a scale factor to adjust $ CBF $ to the age of infants. The values $ p^*_a = 35$ [mmHg] and $ k_{age} = 0.08 $ correspond to hemodynamic system of premature infants of 31-34 weeks' gestational age, the brain weight of $ 260 $ g and the $ CBF $ of $ 15.5 $ mL/$ 100 $ g/min (cf. [22,24]). The value of $ p_v $ is set to be equal to 5 [mmHg] in the fitting procedure. The values of $ \ell_i $, $ m_i $, and $ r^*_i $, $ i = 1, ..., 19 $, are taken from [17].
The coefficients $ a_1, a_2 $, and $ a_3 $ are fitted through the minimization of the residual
$ R(a1,a2,a3)=5∑k=1[CBF(pka,pv,a1,a2,a3)−CBFk]2, $
|
(2.5) |
where the pairs $ \big(p^k_a\; {\rm[mmHg]}, CBF^k\; {\rm[mL/s]}), k = 1, ...5, $ are chosen according to experimental data from [22,24] as follows:
$ (\kappa\cdot 20,0.24);\; (\kappa\cdot 30,0.67);\; (\kappa\cdot 34,0.67);\; (\kappa\cdot 38,0.67);\; (\kappa\cdot 50,2). $ |
Here $ \kappa = 133.322 $ Pa/mmHg is the conversion factor from mmHg to Pa.
Note that the polynomial (2.3) of degree $ 3 $ and the five data points are sufficient to approximate the autoregulation plateau experimentally found in [22].
The values of the minimizers of (2.5) read
$ a_1 = \hbox{8.384e-7}\ \mbox{Pa$^{-1}$},\quad a_2 = \hbox{5.718e-9}\ \mbox{Pa$^{-2}$},\quad a_3 = \hbox{3.518e-11}\ \mbox{Pa$^{-3}$}. $ |
Although the coefficients $ a_i $ are very small, the last three summands in (2.3) are not too small because the pressure is measured in pascals.
To account for dilation/constriction of blood vessels caused by the change of carbon dioxide partial pressure in arterial blood, the following dependence of the reference radii $ r_i^*, i = 1, ..., 19, $ on the partial $ CO_2 $ pressure, $ pCO_2 $, is adopted from [17]:
$ r∗i=r∗i(pCO2)=r0i⋅(1+ci⋅(pCO2−pCO02)), $
|
(2.6) |
where $ c_i $ is the $ pCO_2 $ reactivity coefficient, $ pCO_2^0 $ a baseline value of the partial $ CO_2 $ pressure, and $ r_i^0 $ the baseline vessel radius.
In this section, the autoregulation model from Sect. 2 is modified to describe autoregulation defects in preterm infants. Namely, it will be supposed that the horizontal plateau observed in Figure 1 may be distorted due to the change in $ pCO_2 $ and $ CVP $, which also extends the model of impaired cerebral autoregulation introduced by the authors in [16]. Making the substitutions
$ p_a \leftarrow x_1,\quad pCO_2\leftarrow x_2,\quad a_1 \leftarrow \phi(x_2)\, a_1,\quad r^\ast_i \leftarrow (1+x_3)\, r^\ast_i,\quad p_v \leftarrow x_4, $ |
in formulas (2.2)-(2.4) and (2.6) yields a function
$ q(x1,x2,x3,x4)=kage(x1−x4)(∑19i=18μℓiπmir4i(x1,x2,x3,x4))−1,ri(x1,x2,x3,x4)=(1+x3)r0i(1+ci(x2−pCO02))×[(p∗a−x4)/(x1−x4)]1/4(ϕ(x2)a1(x1−p∗a)+a2(x1−p∗a)2+a3(x1−p∗a)3) $
|
describing the disturbed autoregulation. Here; $ x_1 $ denotes the mean arterial pressure, $ p_a $; $ x_2 $ denotes the partial $ CO_2 $ pressure, $ pCO_2 $; the multiplier $ \phi(x_2) $ changes the slope of the plateau observed in Figure 1; the variable $ x_3 $ modifies the vascular volume to restore the horizontal autoregulation plateau; and $ x_4 $ stands for the venous pressure.
The dependence $ {\phi} = \phi(x_2) $ is reconstructed from the experimental data for preterm infants (see [3] where the slope $ s(pCO_2) $ of the curve presenting $ CBF $ velocity versus $ pCO_2 $ is measured). The function $ \phi $ is found numerically from the relation
$ \frac{CBF(\overline{p_a},p_v^*,\phi(x_2)a_1,a_2,a_3)-CBF(\underline{p_{a}},p_v^*,\phi(x_2)a_1,a_2,a_3)}{\overline{p_a}-\underline{p_{a}}} = {\mathcal S}\cdot s(x_2), $ |
where $ \underline{p_{a}} $ and $ \overline{p_a} $ are the starting and finishing values of the arterial blood pressure for the autoregulation plateau, $ p_v^* = 5 $ mmHg is the same value used in the fitting procedure for the coefficients $ a_1 $, $ a_2 $, $ a_3 $, and $ {\mathcal S} $ is the estimate of the mean cross-section area of the blood vessels. The graph of $ \phi $ is shown in Figure 2. Obviously, the relation $ \phi(pCO_2^0) = 1 $ holds.
Note that the function $ q(x_1, pCO_2^0, 0, p_v^*) $ represents the normal autoregulation response shown in Figure 1. Therefore, the function
$ ω(x1,x2,x3,x4):=q(x1,x2,x3,x4)−q(x1,pCO02,0,p∗v) $
|
(3.1) |
can be considered as the measure of the violation of autoregulation. This discrepancy will be used below to define a state constraint in the forthcoming conflict control system.
In this section, a conflict control model governing the variables $ x_1, x_2, x_3, x_4 $ and accounting for different state constraints will be stated. Moreover, a feedback control based on the discrepancy between the current and nominal $ CBF $ will be designed.
Consider now the following conflict control problem (differential game [20]):
$ ˙x1=−k1(x1−v1),˙x2=−k2/ϕ′(x2)(ϕ(x2)−v2),˙x3=−k3(x3−u),˙x4=−k4(x4−v3) $
|
(4.1) |
where $ u $ is the control variable of the first player, which can be interpreted as input of a medicament that dilates or constricts blood vessels with some time delay defined by the coefficient $ k_3 $. The disturbance variables $ v_1 $, $ v_2 $, and $ v_3 $ are at the disposal of the second player. They have effect on the arterial pressure, $ x_1 $, the partial $ CO_2 $ pressure, $ x_2 $, and the venous pressure, $ x_4 $, respectively. The coefficients $ k_1 $, $ k_3 $, and $ k_4 $ define the corresponding time delays. It should be noted that the second equation is equivalent to the following: $ \dot{\chi}_2 = -k_2 (\chi_2-v_2) $ with $ \chi_2 = \phi(x_2) $. Thus, the model (4.1) uses the physical variable $ x_2: = pCO_2 $ instead of the abstract parameter $ \chi_2 $ utilized (up to notation) in the model presented in [16].
The state variables are assumed to be constrained as follows:
$ x1∈[28,42]mmHg,x2∈[35,60]mmHg,x3∈[−0.2,0.2],x4∈[0,10]mmHg. $
|
(4.2) |
The disturbances and control are constrained as follows:
$ v1∈[28,42]mmHg,v2∈[30,55]mmHg,u∈[−0.2,0.2],v3∈[0,10]mmHg. $
|
(4.3) |
The right-hand side values of the constraints in (4.2) and (4.3) are chosen based on clinical measurements presented in [23,25,26]. The bounds on control inputs are set to enable the control to compensate large deviations of $ CBF $ from the autoregulation plateau within 10 minutes.
It should be stressed that equations (4.1) represent the so called PT1 filters, where the coefficients $ k_1 $, $ k_2 $, $ k_3 $, and $ k_4 $ define the time constants, reaction times to input changes. It is assumed that time in system (4.1) is measured in minutes, and the coefficients are chosen as follows:
$ k_1 = 0.01\; \text{min}^{-1},\ \ k_2 = 0.01\; \text{min}^{-1},\ \ k_3 = 0.1\; \text{min}^{-1},\ \ k_4 = 0.01\; \text{min}^{-1}. $ |
So, we suppose that the reaction time to changes of the arterial pressure, partial carbon dioxide pressure, and cerebral venous pressure is about 100 minutes, which is consistent with our clinical observations. Moreover, the response to the medication occurs in about 10 minutes after injection.
The dynamical system (4.1)–(4.3) will be considered as an antagonistic differential game with two opposite players. The objective of the first player is to ensure the constraints (4.2) and the following constraint:
$ |ω(x1(t),x2(t),x3(t),x4(t))|≤ω0,t∈[0,∞), $
|
(4.4) |
where $ \omega_0 = 2\; \text{mL/min} $ is the admissible deviation from the perfect autoregulation performance.
Note that the highly nonlinear state constraint (4.4) is the central part of the model, since it reflects the deviation of computed $ CBF $ from the reference value, whereas equations (4.1) only restrict the rate of change of model variables in time. Obviously, the constraints (4.2) and (4.4) should hold for all disturbances $ v_1(\cdot) $, $ v_2(\cdot) $, and $ v_3(\cdot) $ satisfying the bounds (4.3). It is easy to prove that the state constraints (4.2) hold whenever the bounds (4.3) hold. Thus, the control $ u $ should not spend much trouble on keeping these state constraints. The second player strives to violate the constraint (4.4).
It is easy to check that the following relation holds:
$ q(x1,x2,x3,x4)=(1+x3)4⋅q(x1,x2,0,x4) $
|
(4.5) |
According to the relation (4.5) and the definition (3.1), it is sufficient to set
$ x3=(q(x1,pCO02,0,p∗v)q(x1,x2,0,x4))14−1 $
|
(4.6) |
to provide $ \omega = 0 $.
Assume now that the control $ u $ is chosen at a time instant $ t $ and at a state $ \big\{x_1 = x_1(t), \ x_2 = x_2(t), \ x_3 = x_3(t), \ x_4 = x_4(t)\big\} $ as follows:
$ u=(q(x1,pCO02,0,p∗v)q(x1,x2,0,x4))14−1. $
|
(4.7) |
Due to the third equation of (4.1), it should be expected that the variable $ x_3(t) $ will follow the control $ u(t) $ because the coefficient $ k_3 $ is essentially larger than $ k_1, k_2 $, and $ k_4 $. Thus, the relation (4.6) will be approximately fulfilled, which will provide the condition $ \omega\approx 0 $.
Taking into account the relation (4.5) and using the notation $ x = (x_1, x_2, x_3, x_4) $, we can rewrite (4.7) as follows:
$ u(x)=(q(x1,pCO02,0,p∗v)q(x1,x2,x3,x4))14(1+x3)−1. $
|
(4.8) |
Here, $ q(x_1, x_2, x_3, x_4) $ represents the current $ CBF $ that can physically be measured, and $ q(x_1, pCO_2^0, 0, p_v^*) $ is the reference $ CBF $ at arterial pressure $ x_1 $, which is supposed to be known. The variable $ x_3 $ depends on the amount of medicine injected, and, therefore, the current value of $ x_3 $ can be easily computed.
Note that the control (4.8) compensates the deviation of $ CBF $ from its reference value not perfectly because of a time delay caused by the dynamics of the third equation of (4.1). This will be seen below from simulations with a discrete control scheme. To improve the quality of the control (4.8), it is reasonable to permit an oversteering that is proportional to the discrepancy $ \omega(x_1, x_2, x_3, x_4) $ with the experimentally obtained coefficient of 0.9. Thus, we arrive at a modified control
$ u^*(x) = \Big(\frac{q(x_1,pCO_2^0,0,p_v^*)- 0.9\cdot\omega(x_1,x_2,x_3,x_4)}{q(x_1,x_2,x_3,x_4)}\Big)^{\frac{1}{4}}(1+x_3) - 1. $ |
The role of the oversteering will be clearly seen in simulations based on discrete-time control scheme with large time sampling intervals. Finally, the following feedback control is suggested:
$ ˜u(x)={−μ,u∗(x)<−μ,μ,u∗(x)>μ,u∗,u∗(x)∈[−μ,μ], μ=0.2. $
|
(4.9) |
Thus, to compute the control (intake of medicine), the current $ CBF $ and the arterial blood pressure are measured, the reference $ CBF $ value for the actual arterial pressure is calculated by the formula, and the accumulated value of injected medicine is evaluated. We will see that the control (4.9) is able to better track the reference $ CBF $ curve, i.e., provide smaller values of the discrepancy $ \omega $. Moreover, using a relaxed algorithm for computing leadership sets, we will prove that $ \tilde{u} $ guarantees keeping trajectories within the state constraint (4.2) for all admissible disturbances with not quick variations. For consistency, a base algorithm for constructing leadership kernels will be sketched in the next section.
The notion of viability kernel (see [19]) is used for control problems, whereas, in the case of differential games, the notions of leadership and discriminating kernels are conventionally utilized.
Leadership kernel is the maximal subset of the state constraint where the system trajectories can remain arbitrary long if the first player utilizes an appropriate pure feedback control, and the second player generates any admissible disturbances (see [27,28]). In contrast, the notion of discriminating kernel corresponds to the case where the first player can exactly measure current actions of the second one to use the so-called counter feedback strategies (see[20]). Obviously, this case is not realistic.
In this section, viability approach and a numerical method developed in [21,29] for constructing leadership kernels will be briefly outlined. Note that in our case leadership and discriminating kernels coincide, because Isaacs' saddle point condition holds for dynamic system (4.1).
Remember that $ x = (x_1, x_2, x_3, x_4) $ is the state vector and denote by $ f(x, u, v), \ v = (v_1, v_2, v_3), $ the right-hand side of system (4.1). Let $ P $ and $ Q $ be compact sets defining the bounds (4.3) on the control and disturbances, respectively.
The results of this subsection hold for arbitrary dimension $ n $ of the state space and rather general function $ f $ (see e.g. [29]), which is reflected in the description below.
Let $ u\to v(u) $ be a Borel measurable function with values in $ Q $. Consider the differential inclusion
$ ˙x∈Fv(⋅)(x)=¯co{f:f(x,u,v(u)),u∈P}. $
|
(4.10) |
Definition 4.1 (leadership property). A set $ K \subset R^n $ has leadership property if for any $ x_* \in K $ and any Borel measurable function $ v(\cdot) $ with values in $ Q $ there exists a solution $ x(\cdot) $ of (4.10) such that $ x(0) = x_* $ and $ x(t) \in K $ for all $ t \geq 0. $
Definition 4.2 (leadership kernel). For a given compact set $ G \subset R^n $ denote by $ Lead(G) $ the largest subset of $ G $ with the leadership property. This subset is called the leadership kernel of $ G $.
Let
$ G_{\lambda} = \{x \in R^n, \ g(x) \leq \lambda \} $ |
be a family of state constraints. In the simulations below, $ g(x) = \max_ig_i(x) $ is set, where $ g_1(x) = |x_1-35|-7 $, $ g_2(x) = |x_2-47.5|-12.5 $, $ g_3(x) = |x_3|-0.2 $, $ g_4(x) = |x_4-5|-5, $ and $ g_5(x) = |\omega(x)| - \omega_0. $ The first four functions account for the state constraints (4.2) and the last one is responsible for the constraint (4.4). Therefore, $ G_{\lambda} $ is equivalent to the constraints (4.2) and (4.4) if $ \lambda = 0 $.
It is required to construct a function $ V $, such that
$ Lead(Gλ)={x∈Rn, V(x)≤λ}. $
|
(4.11) |
Denote by $ \delta > 0 $ the time step length. Let $ h: = (h_1, ..., h_n) $ be the space grid steps with $ |h| = \max\limits_{1\leq i \leq n}h_i $. For any continuous function $ \mathcal{V}: R^n \rightarrow R $ introduce the following upwind operator:
$ \Pi ({\cal V};\delta ,h)(x) = {\cal V}(x) + \delta \mathop {\min }\limits_{u \in P} \mathop {\max }\limits_{v \in Q} \sum\limits_{i = 1}^n {(p_i^{right}f_i^ + + p_i^{left}f_i^{^ - })} , $ |
where $ f_i $ are the components of $ f $, and
$ a+=max{a,0},a−=min{a,0},prighti=[V(x1,...,xi+hi,...,xn)−V(x1,...,xi,...,xn)]/hi,plefti=[V(x1,...,xi,...,xn)−V(x1,...,xi−hi,...,xn)]/hi. $
|
Note that $ p_i^{right} $ and $ p_i^{left} $ are typical finite differences in Godunov-like methods for hyperbolic problems. The operator $ \Pi $ will be applied to grid functions to return grid functions.
Denote $ \mathcal{V}^h(x_{i_1}, ..., x_{i_n}) = \mathcal{V}(i_1h_1, ..., i_nh_n) $, $ g^h(x_{i_1}, ..., x_{i_n}) = g(i_1h_1, ..., i_nh_n) $ being the restrictions of $ \mathcal{V} $ and $ g $ to the grid. Let a sequence $ \{\delta_\ell\} $ is chosen, such that $ \delta_\ell \rightarrow 0 $, $ \sum_{\ell = 0}^{\infty}\delta_\ell = \infty $.
Consider the following grid scheme:
$ Vhℓ+1=max{Π(Vhℓ;δ,h),gh}, Vh0=gh,ℓ=0,1,…. $
|
(4.12) |
It can be proven that $ {\mathcal V}^h_\ell $ monotonically point-wise converges to a grid function $ V^{\delta, h} $, and this function approximates the function $ V $ defining leadership kernels according to formula (4.11) if $ \delta $ and $ h $ are sufficiently small.
Proposition 1 (see [30] for the proof). Let $ |{\mathcal F}_v(x)| \leq B $ for all $ x \in R^n $ and $ \delta_{\ell}/|h| \leq 1/(B\sqrt{n}) $ for all $ \ell. $ Then $ {\mathcal{V}}_{\ell}^h \nearrow {V}^h $ as $ \ell \rightarrow \infty $.
Note that in the case $ n = 4 $ the relation $ \delta/|h|\leq (2 B)^{-1} $ should hold. Other secondary stability conditions can be found in [31,21].
The estimate $ |{\mathcal{V}}^h - V| \leq C \sqrt{|h|} $ is expected (cf. [31,21]), and therefore $ {\mathcal{V}}_{\ell}^h $ approximates $ V $ if $ \ell $ is large and $ |h| $ is small. The stopping criterion in the computation is $ \sup\limits_{\substack{\hbox{ grid}}}|{\mathcal{V}}_{\ell+1}^h - {\mathcal{V}}_{\ell}^h| \leq \varepsilon $.
To be sure that the control (4.9) works well for all unpredictable admissible disturbances that change not quickly, the following technique can be applied. First, extend the system (4.1) by adding three PT1 filters for $ v_1, v_2 $, and $ v_3 $ with the same time constant $ k = 0.1 $ min$ ^{-1} $, which will restrict the rate of change of the disturbances. Thus, the extension of (4.1) looks as follows:
$ {{\dot{v}}_{i}}=-k({{v}_{i}}-{{\bar{v}}_{i}}),\ \ \ i=1,2,3, $ | (4.13) |
where $ \bar{v}_i, i = 1, 2, 3$ , are new disturbances constrained in the same way as the old ones, cf. (4.3).
Second, put $ \tilde{u} $ into the extended system (4.1) and compute a leadership set of the state constraints (4.2), (4.4) according to a method described below. If this leadership set is nonempty, the heuristic rule (4.9) is appropriate to work against all unpredictable admissible disturbances that change not quickly. Note, that the leadership set will be computed in the four-dimensional space of the variables $ x_1, x_2, x_3, x_4 $. The variables $ v_1, v_2 $, and $ v_3 $ are not considered as new states, but as accumulated optimal values of the new artificial controls.
Let $ w_i, i = 1, 2, 3$, be given grid functions. Consider now the following operator:
$ ˜Π(V;δ,h,w1,w2,w3)(x)=V(x)+δmax(ˉv1,ˉv2,ˉv3)4∑i=1(prighti˜f+i+plefti˜f−i), $
|
(4.14) |
where
$ ˜f1(x,ˉv1)=−k1(x1−v1),˜f2(x,ˉv2)=−k2/ϕ′(x2)(ϕ(x2)−v2),˜f3(x)=−k3(x3−u),˜f4(x,ˉv3)=−k4(x4−v3) $
|
with the substitution
$ v1=w1(x)−kδ(w1(x)−ˉv1), $
|
(4.15) |
$ v2=w2(x)−kδ(w2(x)−ˉv2), $
|
(4.16) |
$ v3=w3(x)−kδ(w3(x)−ˉv3),u=˜u(x). $
|
(4.17) |
The recurrent computation scheme (4.12) transforms now into the following one:
$ Vh0(x)=gh(x),w01(x)=w02(x)=w03(x)=0, $
|
(4.18) |
$ Vhℓ+1(x)=max{˜Π(Vhℓ;δ,h,wℓ1,wℓ2,wℓ3)(x),gh(x)}, $
|
(4.19) |
$ wℓ+1i(x)=wℓi(x)+kδ(wℓi(x)−ˉvℓ,maxi(x)),i=1,2,3. $
|
(4.20) |
Here, $ \bar{v}^{\ell, \;{ {max}}}_i(x), \;\; i = 1, 2, 3$ , are the maximizes, over $ \bar v_i, \;\; i = 1, 2, 3$ , when computing the term
$ \tilde\Pi\big({\mathcal V}^h_\ell;\delta,h,w^\ell_1,w^\ell_2,w^\ell_3\big)(x) $ |
according to formula (4.14).
Note that the relations (4.15)–(4.17) represent, at each node $ x $, a time-step approximation of equations (4.13) with initial conditions $ w_i(x), i = 1, 2, 3 $. These initial conditions are obtained from the previous time step as solutions of (4.13) with some optimal values of $ \bar v_i, i = 1, 2, 3 $. Therefore, $ w^{\ell}_i(x), i = 1, 2, 3, $ accumulate, according to equation (4.13), values of $ \bar v_i, i = 1, 2, 3, $ that are optimal at the grid point $ x $, see (4.20). Taking into account that first player's control is a prescribed function, the relation (4.20) expresses the dynamic programming optimality principle. It should be noted that the starting functions $ w_i^0(x), i = 1, 2, 3, $ can be chosen arbitrary, under the constraints (4.3) with $ v_i $ being replaced by $ w^0_i(x) $ for $ i = 1, 2, 3 $.
It can be proven that the modified grid scheme (4.18)–(4.20) is monotone and a similar convergence result as in Proposition 1 can be established. Moreover, the limiting function does not increase on the trajectories of the system (4.1), (4.13), with $ u = \tilde{u}(x) $, for all admissible controls $ \bar{v}_i(t), i = 1, 2, 3 $. Therefore, level sets of the limiting function are leadership sets.
Here, simulation results for system (4.1) will be presented, and the robustness of the above proposed heuristic feedback controller (4.9) against not quickly changing admissible disturbances $ v_1, v_2, v_3 $ will be checked.
First, the ability of the control $ \tilde{u} $ against open-loop disturbances, such as e.g. those shown in Figure 3, is tested. Here, the behavior of the mean arterial pressure is as follows: It increases from 28 mmHg to 42 mmHg during first 16 hours, remains constant (equals 42 mmHg) during further 17 hours, linearly decreases to 28 mmHg during 1.5 days, then remains constant (equals 28 mmHg) during 2 days, and finally increases to 42 mmHg during 10 hours. The $ pCO_2 $ value changes periodically every 30 hours, taking values between 30 and 55 mmHg. For the cerebral venous pressure, a sinusoidal change with the amplitude of 5 mmHg and the periodicity of approximately 31 hours is set. The control (4.9) is applied continuously. Note that the chosen disturbances obey the constraints (4.3) and simulate apparent clinical conditions.
In Figure 4, the resulting autoregulation curve (red) computed with the control (4.9) and above described disturbances is shown. Additionally, the reference autoregulation response curve (green) is plotted. Note that the graphs are plotted parametrically, i.e., $ x = x_1(t) $, $ y = q\big(x_1(t), x_2(t), x_3(t), x_4(t)\big) $ and $ x = x_1(t) $, $ y = q\big(x_1(t), pCO_2^0, 0, p_v^*\big) $, respectively. The time development of the feedback control (4.9) is presented in Figure 5 in green color. In red color, the time development of the variable $ x_3 $ is shown. One can see a good closeness of $ x_3(t) $ and $ u(t) $ in the case of continuous-time control scheme.
A discrete-time control scheme with 2 hours time sampling is tested. This means that the feedback control is computed every 2 hours according to the rule (4.9) and is kept constant in between. It can be interpreted as a regular intake of a medicine like e.g. indomethacin [32] for lowering $ CBF $. The resulting autoregulation curve for such a discrete feedback control and disturbances shown in Figure 3 is presented in Figure 6. One can see that, even in this less favorable case, deflections of $ CBF $ do not exceed 2 mL/min, which is visualized with the help of a strip around the undisturbed autoregulation curve. The time development of the discrete feedback control with oversteering (green line) is depicted in Figure 7. Simultaneously the time development of the variable $ x_3 $ (red line) is shown there. It is seen that these lines remain close to each other, as it was in the case of continuous-time control scheme. It should be noted that the control without oversteering term is not able to sufficiently push the trajectory to the reference curve because of a time delay caused by the dynamics of the third equation of (4.1), which produces an unsatisfying result (see Figure 8).
Note that the oscillations of the CBF curve around the autoregulation plateau, observable in Figures 6 and 8, are caused by the discrete-time control scheme with large sampling interval of 2 hours. During the sampling time, the disturbance pushes the $ CBF $ curve away from the autoregulation plateau, and the controller should bring the trajectory back to the plateau level. Apparently, it might be possible to modify the control in order to smooth the cusps, which, however, will not decrease the amplitude of the oscillations. Moreover, these oscillations are not dangerous because they lie in admissible physiological range (5% of the $ CBF $ plateau value).
To prove that the proposed feedback control is powerful against all "slow" admissible disturbances constrained similar to (4.3), this control is inserted into the extended system (4.1) and (4.13), and the leadership kernel of the state constraints (4.2), (4.4) is computed as described in Subsection 4.4. Note that the nonlinearity both of the system (4.1) and of the state constraint (4.4) as well as the relatively high dimension of the state vector (four) make the computation of the leadership kernel to be a complex problem.
The computation was performed on the SuperMUC system at the Leibniz Supercomputing Centre of the Bavarian Academy of Sciences and Humanities. The problem was parallelized between 25 compute nodes with 16 cores per node. A grid of $ 100\times 100\times 100 \times 100 $ cells was used, and about $ 10^4 $ steps of the algorithm (4.18)–(4.20) were performed. The runtime was about 1 hour.
The result of the computation is presented in Figure 9. The section of the leadership set at $ x_4 = p_v^* $ is shown. The vertical axis measures the discrepancy $ \omega $. The non-emptiness of the computed leadership kernel means that the control (4.9) is able to keep trajectories within the state constraints (4.2) and (4.4) for all admissible disturbances with not quick variations.
The scientific awareness about possible controlling of impaired cerebral autoregulation in preterm infants is still far from satisfactory. To the best of our knowledge, there are no mathematical models available to control impaired cerebral autoregulation in preterm infants. Adequate mathematical modeling can help to improve understanding of cerebral circulation in premature brain and assess the influence of the most important factors like $ MAP $, $ pCO_2 $, and $ CVP $ on the cerebral blood flow.
In the current paper, impaired cerebral autoregulation in preterm infants has been mathematically modeled. Feedback control that can be interpreted as a medication strategy preventing large deviations of $ CBF $ from some physiological (reference) autoregulation curve has been developed. The slope of the autoregulation plateau due to hypercapnia is reconstructed from the experimental data for preterm infants in [3]. The ranges of change for mean arterial pressure, partial $ CO_2 $ pressure, and cerebral venous pressure are consistent with clinical measurements in [26], however, because of the lack of measurements, the time-evolutions of these variables used in our simulations are heuristic curves that satisfy the chosen constraints.
The model developed can be a reasonable starting point to improve understanding of autoregulation in preterm infants. Apparently, such a modeling may support refining clinical therapies and monitoring strategies. Viability theory is applied to prove that the proposed control works well against all admissible disturbances of arterial, venous, and partial $ CO_2 $ pressure. Moreover, satisfactory result is obtained in the case of discrete-time control scheme with time sampling of 2 hours. The advantage of the controller is its simple usage based on only two measurements, $ CBF $ and $ MAP $, at each sampling time instant. However, it would be interesting to improve the controller, for example, to avoid oversteering, by using nonlinear automatic control techniques such as output regulation or disturbance rejection.
It is worth to mention that the described viability approach and numerical method can be used in various applications to assess the quality of controls. Future work will be focused on coupling of the control-based models of cerebral autoregulation with models of cerebral vascular systems accounting for peculiarities of the immature brain (see e.g. [33]).
The authors gratefully acknowledge financial support of the Klaus Tschira Foundation, W{ü}rth Foundation, and Buhl-Strohmaier-Foundation. The last author appreciates the Markus Würth Professorship at the Technical University of Munich. Computer resources have been provided by the Gauss Centre for Supercomputing/Leibniz Supercomputing Centre under grant: pr74lu.
The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest regarding the publication of this article.
[1] |
Sedjo RA, Sohngen B (2013) Wood as a Major Feedstock for Biofuel Production in the United States: Impacts on Forests and International Trade. J Sustain For 32: 195-211. doi: 10.1080/10549811.2011.652049
![]() |
[2] |
Goh CS, Junginger M, Cocchi M, et al. (2013) Wood pellet market and trade: a global perspective. Biofuels Bioprod Bioref 7: 24-42. doi: 10.1002/bbb.1366
![]() |
[3] |
Immerzeel DJ, Verweij PA, van der Hilst F, et al. (2014) Biodiversity impacts of bioenergy crop production: A state-of-the-art review. GCB Bioenergy 6: 183-209. doi: 10.1111/gcbb.12067
![]() |
[4] |
McDonald RI, Fargione J, Kiesecker J, et al. (2009) Energy sprawl or energy efficiency: Climate policy impacts on natural habitat for the United States of America. PLoS One 4: e6802. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0006802
![]() |
[5] |
Stoms DM, Davis FW, Jenner MW, et al. (2012) Modeling wildlife and other trade-offs with biofuel crop production. GCB Bioenergy 4: 330-341. doi: 10.1111/j.1757-1707.2011.01130.x
![]() |
[6] | Dale VH, Kline KL, Wiens J, et al. (2010) Biofuels: Implications for Land Use and Biodiversity. The Ecological Society of America Biofuels and Sustainability Reports. Available from: http://www.esa.org/biofuelsreports/files/ESA%20Biofuels%20Report_VH%20Dale%20et%20al.pdf. |
[7] |
Wiens J, Fargione J, Hill J (2011) Biofuels and biodiversity. Ecol Appl 21: 1085-1095. doi: 10.1890/09-0673.1
![]() |
[8] | Daystar J (2014) Environmental Impacts of Cellulosic Biofuels Made in the South East: Implications of Impact Assessment Methods and Study Assumptions. North Carolina State University: 264 pages. |
[9] | Wear D, Abt R, Alavalapati J, et al. (2010) The South's Outlook for Sustainable Forest Bioenergy and Biofuels Production. The Pinchot Institute Report. Available from: http://www.pinchot.org/uploads/download?fileId=512. |
[10] |
Fletcher RJ, Robertson BA, Evans J, et al. (2011) Biodiversity conservation in the era of biofuels: risks and opportunities. Front Ecol Environ 9: 161-168. doi: 10.1890/090091
![]() |
[11] |
Riffell S, Verschuyl J, Miller D, et al. (2011) Biofuel harvests, coarse woody debris, and biodiversity – A meta-analysis. For Ecol Manage 261: 878-887. doi: 10.1016/j.foreco.2010.12.021
![]() |
[12] | Dale VH, Lowrance R, Mulholland P, et al. (2010) Bioenergy Sustainability at the Regional Scale. Ecol Soc 15: 23. |
[13] | Wear DN, Huggett R, Li R, et al. (2013) Forecasts of Forest Conditions in U.S. Regions under Future Scenarios: A Technical Document Supporting the Forest Service 2010 RPA Assessment. Gen Tech Rep SRS-170. |
[14] | Lubowski RN, Plantinga AJ, Stavins RN (2008) What Drives Land-Use Change in the United States? A National Analysis of Landowner Decisions. Land Econ 84: 529-550. |
[15] | Daniel CJ, Frid L (2012) Predicting Landscape Vegetation Dynamics Using State-and-Transition Simulation Models. Proc First Landsc State-and-Transition Simul Model Conf June 14-16 2011: 5-22. |
[16] | Bestelmeyer BT, Herrick JE, Brown JR, et al. (2004) Land management in the American southwest: a state-and-transition approach to ecosystem complexity. Environ Manage 34: 38-51. |
[17] |
Costanza JK, Hulcr J, Koch FH, et al. (2012) Simulating the effects of the southern pine beetle on regional dynamics 60 years into the future. Ecol Modell 244: 93-103. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2012.06.037
![]() |
[18] | Wilson T, Costanza J, Smith J, et al. (2014) Second State-and-Transition Simulation Modeling Conference. Bull Ecol Soc Am 96: 174-175. |
[19] |
Halofsky J, Halofsky J, Burscu T, et al. (2014) Dry forest resilience varies under simulated climate-management scenarios in a central Oregon, USA landscape. Ecol Appl 24: 1908-1925. doi: 10.1890/13-1653.1
![]() |
[20] |
Provencher L, Forbis TA, Frid L, et al. (2007) Comparing alternative management strategies of fire, grazing, and weed control using spatial modeling. Ecol Modell 209: 249-263. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2007.06.030
![]() |
[21] | Abt R, Cubbage F, Abt K (2009) Projecting southern timber supply for multiple products by subregion. For Prod J 59: 7-16. |
[22] | Abt KL, Abt RC, Galik CS, et al. (2014) Effect of Policies on Pellet Production and Forests in the U.S. South: A Technical Document Supporting the Forest Service Update of the 2010 RPA Assessment. Gen Tech Rep GTR-SRS-202. |
[23] | U.S. Geological Survey National Gap Analysis Program (2013) Protected Areas Database-US (PAD-US), Version 1.3. Available from: http://gapanalysis.usgs.gov/padus/. |
[24] |
Terando A, Costanza JK, Belyea C, et al. (2014) The southern megalopolis: using the past to predict the future of urban sprawl in the Southeast U.S. PLoS One 9: e102261. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0102261
![]() |
[25] |
Noss RF, Platt WJ, Sorrie BA, et al. (2015) How global biodiversity hotspots may go unrecognized: lessons from the North American Coastal Plain. Richardson D, ed. Divers Distrib 21: 236-244. doi: 10.1111/ddi.12278
![]() |
[26] | Southeast Gap Analysis Project (SEGAP) (2008) Southeast GAP regional land cover [digital data]. Available from: http://www.basic.ncsu.edu/segap/. |
[27] | Burke S, Hall BR, Shahbazi G, et al. (2007) North Carolina's Strategic Plan for Biofuels Leadership. Available from: http://www.ces.ncsu.edu/fletcher/mcilab/publications/NC_Strategic_Plan_for_Biofuels_Leadership.pdf. |
[28] | Forisk Consulting LLC (2014) Wood bioenergy US database 2013. Available by subscription. |
[29] |
Lal P, Alavalapati JRR, Marinescu M, et al. (2011) Developing Sustainability Indicators for Woody Biomass Harvesting in the United States. J Sustain For 30: 736-755. doi: 10.1080/10549811.2011.571581
![]() |
[30] | Evans A, Perschel R, Kittler B, et al. (2010) Revised assessment of biomass harvesting and retention guidelines. For Guild, St Fe, NM, USA: 33. |
[31] | Janowiak MK, Webster CR (2010) Promoting Ecological Sustainability in Woody Biomass Harvesting. J For 108: 16-23. |
[32] | Apex Resource Management Solutions (2014) ST-Sim state-and-transition simulation model software. Available from: http//www.apexrms.com/stsm. |
[33] |
Rollins MG (2009) LANDFIRE: a nationally consistent vegetation, wildland fire, and fuel assessment. Int J Wildl Fire 18: 235-249. doi: 10.1071/WF08088
![]() |
[34] | Comer P, Faber-Langendoen D, Evans R, et al. (2003) Ecological Systems of the United States: A Working Classification of U.S. Terrestrial Systems. Arlington, VA, USA. NatureServe, 82 pages. |
[35] |
Costanza JK, Terando AJ, McKerrow AJ, et al. (2015) Modeling climate change, urbanization, and fire effects on Pinus palustris ecosystems of the southeastern U.S. J Environ Manage 151: 186-199. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2014.12.032
![]() |
[36] | LANDFIRE (2014) LANDFIRE 2008 (version 1.1.0) Succession Class (S-Class) Layer. U.S. Department of Interior, Geological Survey. Available from: Http://landfire.cr.usgs.gov/viewer. |
[37] | Multi-Resolution Land Characteristics Consortium (MRLC) (2011) National Land Cover Database, USFS Tree Canopy Cartographic, 2014. Available from: http://www.mrlc.gov/nlcd11_data.php. |
[38] | Mackie R, Mason J, Curcio G (2007) LANDFIRE biophysical setting model for Southern Piedmont Dry Oak(-Pine) Forest. Available from: http://www.landfire.gov/national_veg_models_op2.php. |
[39] | USDA Forest Service (2012) Forest Inventory and Analysis Data. Available from: http://apps.fs.fed.us/fiadb-downloads/datamart.html. |
[40] | Young T, Wang Y, Guess F, et al. (2015) Understanding the Characteristics of Non-industrial Private Forest Landowners Who Harvest Trees. Small-scale For 1-13. |
[41] |
Hardie I, Parks P, Gottleib P, et al. (2000) Responsiveness of Rural and Urban Land Uses to Land Rent Determinants in the U.S. South. Land Econ 76: 659. doi: 10.2307/3146958
![]() |
[42] | USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service (2000) 1997 National Resources Inventory Data, Revised December 2000. |
[43] |
Dale VH, Kline KL, Wright LL, et al. (2011) Interactions among bioenergy feedstock choices, landscape dynamics, and land use. Ecol Appl 21: 1039-1054. doi: 10.1890/09-0501.1
![]() |
[44] | Evans JM, Fletcher RJ, Alavalapati JRR, et al. (2013) Forestry Bioenergy in the Southeast United States: Implications for Wildlife Habitat and Biodiversity. Availbale from: http://www.nwf.org/News-and-Magazines/Media-Center/Reports/Archive/2013/12-05-13-Forestry-Bioenergy-in-the-Southeast.aspx. |
[45] |
Owens AK, Moseley KR, McCay TS, et al. (2008) Amphibian and reptile community response to coarse woody debris manipulations in upland loblolly pine (Pinus taeda) forests. For Ecol Manage 256: 2078-2083. doi: 10.1016/j.foreco.2008.07.030
![]() |
[46] |
Otto CR V, Kroll AJ, McKenny HC (2013) Amphibian response to downed wood retention in managed forests: A prospectus for future biomass harvest in North America. For Ecol Manage 304: 275-285. doi: 10.1016/j.foreco.2013.04.023
![]() |
[47] |
Davis JC, Castleberry SB, Kilgo JC (2010) Influence of coarse woody debris on herpetofaunal communities in upland pine stands of the southeastern Coastal Plain. For Ecol Manage 259: 1111-1117. doi: 10.1016/j.foreco.2009.12.024
![]() |
[48] | Wood P, Sheehan J, Keyser P, et al. (2013) Cerulean Warbler: Management Guidelines for Enhancing Breeding Habitat in Appalachian Hardwood Forests. American Bird Conservancy. The Plains, VA, USA. 28 Pages. |
[49] |
Perry RW, Thill RE (2013) Long-term responses of disturbance-associated birds after different timber harvests. For Ecol Manage 307: 274-283. doi: 10.1016/j.foreco.2013.07.026
![]() |
[50] | Wilson MD, Watts BD (2000) Breeding bird communities in pine plantations on the coastal plain of North Carolina. Chat 64: 1-14. |
[51] | Peet RK, Allard DJ (1993) Longleaf Pine Vegetation of the Southern Atlantic an Eastern Gulf Coast Regions: A Preliminary Classification. In: Hermann SM, ed. Proceedings of the Tall Timbers Fire Ecology Conference, No. 18, The Longleaf Pine Ecosystem: Ecology, Restoration and Management. Tallahassee, FL, USA: Tall Timbers Research Station.; 1993: 45-81. |
1. | Elisabeth M.W. Kooi, Anne E. Richter, Cerebral Autoregulation in Sick Infants, 2020, 47, 00955108, 449, 10.1016/j.clp.2020.05.003 | |
2. | Stephen A. Back, Joseph J. Volpe, 2025, 9780443105135, 523, 10.1016/B978-0-443-10513-5.00019-X |