Research article

Changes in soft coral Sarcophyton sp. abundance and cytotoxicity at volcanic CO2 seeps in Indonesia

  • This study presents the relationship between benthic cover of Sarcophyton sp. living on coral reefs and their cytotoxicity (an assumption of soft coral allelochemical levels) along acidification gradients caused by shallow water volcanic vent systems. Stations with moderate acidification (pH 7.87 ± 0.04), low acidification (pH 8.01 ± 0.04), and reference conditions (pH 8.2 ± 0.02) were selected near an Indonesian CO2 seep (Minahasa, Gunung Api Island, and Mahengetang Island). Cover of the dominant soft coral species (Sarcophyton sp.) was assessed and tissue samples were collected at each site. The cytotoxicity tissue extracts were analyzed using the 3-(4,5-dimethylthiazol-2-yl)-2,5-diphenyltetrazolinon bromide (MTT) method. Levels of cytotoxicity were strongly correlated with Sarcophyton sp. cover (p < 0.05; R2 = 0.60 at 30 ppm and 0.56 at 100 ppm), being highest at mean pH 8.01 where the soft corals were most abundant. This finding suggests that Sarcophyton sp. can be expected to survive ocean acidification near Indonesia in the coming decades. How the species might be adversely affected by further ocean acidification later in the century unless CO2 emissions are reduced remains a concern.

    Citation: Hedi Indra Januar, Neviaty Putri Zamani, Dedi Soedarma, Ekowati Chasanah. Changes in soft coral Sarcophyton sp. abundance and cytotoxicity at volcanic CO2 seeps in Indonesia[J]. AIMS Environmental Science, 2016, 3(2): 239-248. doi: 10.3934/environsci.2016.2.239

    Related Papers:

    [1] Edward J. Allen . Derivation and computation of discrete-delayand continuous-delay SDEs in mathematical biology. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2014, 11(3): 403-425. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2014.11.403
    [2] H. J. Alsakaji, F. A. Rihan, K. Udhayakumar, F. El Ktaibi . Stochastic tumor-immune interaction model with external treatments and time delays: An optimal control problem. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2023, 20(11): 19270-19299. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2023852
    [3] Yuanpei Xia, Weisong Zhou, Zhichun Yang . Global analysis and optimal harvesting for a hybrid stochastic phytoplankton-zooplankton-fish model with distributed delays. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2020, 17(5): 6149-6180. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2020326
    [4] Chaofeng Zhao, Zhibo Zhai, Qinghui Du . Optimal control of stochastic system with Fractional Brownian Motion. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2021, 18(5): 5625-5634. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2021284
    [5] An Ma, Shuting Lyu, Qimin Zhang . Stationary distribution and optimal control of a stochastic population model in a polluted environment. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2022, 19(11): 11260-11280. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2022525
    [6] Tingting Yu, Sanling Yuan . Dynamics of a stochastic turbidostat model with sampled and delayed measurements. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2023, 20(4): 6215-6236. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2023268
    [7] Sheng Wang, Lijuan Dong, Zeyan Yue . Optimal harvesting strategy for stochastic hybrid delay Lotka-Volterra systems with Lévy noise in a polluted environment. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2023, 20(4): 6084-6109. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2023263
    [8] Yan Wang, Tingting Zhao, Jun Liu . Viral dynamics of an HIV stochastic model with cell-to-cell infection, CTL immune response and distributed delays. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2019, 16(6): 7126-7154. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2019358
    [9] ZongWang, Qimin Zhang, Xining Li . Markovian switching for near-optimal control of a stochastic SIV epidemic model. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2019, 16(3): 1348-1375. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2019066
    [10] Zeyan Yue, Sheng Wang . Dynamics of a stochastic hybrid delay food chain model with jumps in an impulsive polluted environment. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2024, 21(1): 186-213. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2024009
  • This study presents the relationship between benthic cover of Sarcophyton sp. living on coral reefs and their cytotoxicity (an assumption of soft coral allelochemical levels) along acidification gradients caused by shallow water volcanic vent systems. Stations with moderate acidification (pH 7.87 ± 0.04), low acidification (pH 8.01 ± 0.04), and reference conditions (pH 8.2 ± 0.02) were selected near an Indonesian CO2 seep (Minahasa, Gunung Api Island, and Mahengetang Island). Cover of the dominant soft coral species (Sarcophyton sp.) was assessed and tissue samples were collected at each site. The cytotoxicity tissue extracts were analyzed using the 3-(4,5-dimethylthiazol-2-yl)-2,5-diphenyltetrazolinon bromide (MTT) method. Levels of cytotoxicity were strongly correlated with Sarcophyton sp. cover (p < 0.05; R2 = 0.60 at 30 ppm and 0.56 at 100 ppm), being highest at mean pH 8.01 where the soft corals were most abundant. This finding suggests that Sarcophyton sp. can be expected to survive ocean acidification near Indonesia in the coming decades. How the species might be adversely affected by further ocean acidification later in the century unless CO2 emissions are reduced remains a concern.


    The forward stochastic differential equation characterizes the dynamic changes of state processes with given initial state trajectories. A backward stochastic differential equation (BSDE) can be seen as an Itô stochastic differential equation in which the terminal rather than the initial condition is given. BSDE will admit a pair of adapted process under some conditions on the coefficient and the terminal value of the BSDE. A stochastic differential equation coupled with a BSDE that has both initial and terminal conditions are known as forward-backward stochastic differential equations. In contrast to the development of forward stochastic differential equations, the study of backward stochastic differential equations (BSDEs) have been started in the last three decades. Pardoux and Peng [1] first proposed BSDEs. Since then, BSDEs have been systematically studied due to their wide applications in social fields such as applied mathematics, engineering and finance [2,3,4,5,6,7]. A BSDE can be viewed as an Itô's stochastic differential equation, where the endpoints are given except for the initial conditions. It is worth pointing out that the solution of BSDE includes two processes, which is the essential difference from forward stochastic differential equation. Due to the wide-range of applications and the interesting properties and structure of BSDE, it is valuable to study the optimal control problem of such equations.

    There is a lot of research focused on stochastic optimal control problems. The stochastic optimal control for BSDE was studied by Dokuchaer and Zhou [8]. Subsequently, Lim and Zhou [9] solved the linear-quadratic control problem for BSDE, and two alternative expressions for optimal control are obtained. Huang et al. [10] obtained a stochastic maximum principle for partial information control problem of backward stochastic systems. Zhen et al. [11] discussed the optimal control for fully coupled forward-backward stochastic control systems. They obtained the necessary and sufficient stochastic maximum principles. [12] focused on nonzero sum differential games for BSDEs. They established necessary and sufficient conditions for Nash equilibrium points (see [13] and [14] for the game problems of BSDE). For the control problems of BSDEs, see also [15,16,17,18,19,20].

    In the above problems, the BSDEs depend only on the value of the current time. Control systems with time-delay have existed for several decades, which are widely applied in financial areas. For example, investment portfolio management, pricing, hedging problems and automobile traffic model [21,22,23]. It will be more realistic for an investor to better strategize his investment when considering a delay factor. [24] introduced the time-advanced stochastic differential equations. [25] extended for the first time the applicability of the optimal homotopy asymptotic method to find the algorithm of approximate analytic solution of delay differential equations. However, the control system contained only discrete delay. [26] generalized the results to partial information. Apart from the discrete delays, it is more reasonable and practical to include moving average delays, which indicate that the current situation depends on a past period of history in the form of an integral. As an example of an optimal consumption problem, at time $ t $, let $ x(t) $ and $ u(t) $ be wealth and consumption, respectively. It is reasonable to assume that the incremental wealth is a combination of the present value $ x(t) $ plus some sliding average of previous value $ \int_{-\delta}^0 e^{\lambda s}x(t+s)ds $ and negative consumption amount $ u(t) $. Therefore, it is meaningful to incorporate moving-average delays, which indicates that the current situation of the system depends on a past period of history in integral form. Moreover, in [27], the authors introduced another delay, the noisy memory or Browinan delay, which is an Itô's integral over a past time periods. Indeed, noisy memories arise naturally in economics and finance, e.g., in modeling stochastic volatility (see, e.g., [28]). [29] obtained necessary and sufficient conditions for mean-field BSDEs with noisy memory over an infinite time span using Malliavin calculus technique. They also applied the theoretical results to pension fund problem. Zhang [31] established the sufficient maximum principle for optimal control problems with three delays and introduced a unified adjoint equation.

    In this paper, we consider a BSDE with three delays: The discrete delay, the moving-average delay and the noisy memory. Our work differs from the above in several ways.

    $ 1) $ Compared with [24] and [29], three kinds of delays are incorporated in the optimal control problem: the discrete delay and the moving-average delay and noisy memory, resulting in two kinds of adjoint equations, which will increase the difficulty of analyzing the maximum condition. Thus, our optimal control system can describe more stochastic delay phenomena and cover more backward stochastic delay optimization control problems.

    $ 2) $ We give one kind of a 2-dimensional time-advanced stochastic differential equation as our adjoint equation in a straightforward form. More importantly, we show that the two kinds of adjoint equations are equivalent. It is also emphasized that only the solution $ P_1(t) $ of $ (3.2) $ is needed in the theory of the sufficient maximum principle, while $ P_2(t) $ is an auxiliary process.

    $ 3) $ As we know from [30], the four-step scheme is used to investigate the adapted solutions for forward-backward stochastic differential equations. Unfortunately, we study the optimal control problem for the state governed by BSDE with delay, that is to say, the state is past-dependence, so the system is not Markovian, and we cannot derive a certain system to get the explicit solution of the state $ Y $ and $ Z $. In order to obtain the effect of delay, we divide the interval according to the delay, and then continue to subdivide each subinterval to get the numerical solution using Euler method or improved Euler method.

    This paper is organized as follows. Section 2 presents the problem statement and some preliminaries. In Section 3, we introduce two kinds of adjoint equations, obtain the sufficient maximum principle in Section 4. In Section 5, we apply the theoretical results to linear-quadratic systems and derive explicit expressions for the optimal control. In addition, we study an optimal consumption problem. Finally, we conclude the paper with concluding remarks.

    Assume that $ T $ is a finite time horizon, $ \lambda $ is a constant, and $ \delta $ is a positive constant time delay such that $ \delta < T $. Let $ (\Omega, \mathcal{F}, (\mathcal{F}_t)_{0\leq t\leq T}, P) $ be a complete filtered probability space on which one-dimensional standard Brownian motion is defined. Moveover, it is also assumed that $ \{\mathcal{F}_t\}_{0\leq t\leq T} $ is a natural filtration generated by $ W(t) $ and $ \mathcal{F}_T = \mathcal{F} $. Let $ \mathbb{E}[\cdot] $ be the expectation under $ P $. Denote $ \mathbb{E}^t[\cdot] = \mathbb{E}[\cdot|\mathcal{F}_t] $ for each $ t\in[0, T] $.

    Throughout this paper, we denote by $ L^2(\mathcal{F}_t; \mathbb{R}) $ the space of $ \mathbb{R} $-valued $ \mathcal{F}_t $-measurable random variables $ \eta $ satisfying $ \mathbb{E}|\eta|^2 < +\infty $, by $ L^2_{\mathcal{F}}(r, s;\mathbb{R}) $ the space of $ \mathbb{R} $-valued $ \mathcal{F}_t $-adapted process $ \psi(\cdot) $ satisfying $ \mathbb{E}\int_r^s|\psi(t)|^2dt < +\infty $. Let $ \phi(\cdot):[-\delta, 0]\rightarrow \mathbb{R} $ be given deterministic functions such that $ \sup_{-\delta\leq t\leq0}|\phi(t)|^2 < +\infty $. Let $ U $ be a nonempty convex control subset of $ \mathbb{R} $. We introduce the admissible control set $ \mathcal{U} = \{u(\cdot)\in L^2_{\mathcal{F}}(0, T;\mathbb{R})|u(t)\in U, t\in[0, T]\} $.

    Consider the following BSDE with delay:

    $ {dy(t)=f(t,y(t),z(t),u(t))dtz(t)dW(t),y(T)=ξ,y(t)=ϕ(t),t[δ,0),
    $
    (2.1)

    where $ \textbf{y}(t): = (y(t), y_1(t), y_2(t), y_3(t)) $, $ y_1(t): = \int_{t-\delta}^te^{\lambda(s-t)}y(s)ds $, $ y_2(t): = \int_{t-\delta}^ty(s)dW(s) $ and $ y_3(t): = y(t-\delta) $. $ y_1(t), y_2(t), y_3(t) $ are called the moving-average delayed state, the noisy memory process and the discrete delayed state, respectively. Here $ f:\Omega\times \mathbb{R}\times \mathbb{R}\times \mathbb{R}\times \mathbb{R}\times \mathbb{R}\times \mathbb{R}\rightarrow \mathbb{R} $ is a given continuous function in $ (t, y, y_1, y_2, y_3, z, u) $, $ \xi\in L^2(\mathcal{F}_T, \mathbb{R}) $, $ \phi(t) $ is a deterministic function.

    The following assumption will be inforce.

    $ (H1) $ $ f $ is continuously differentiable in $ (y, y_1, y_2, y_3, z, u) $. Moreover, the partial derivatives $ f_y, f_{y_1}, f_{y_2}, f_{y_3}, f_z, f_u $ of $ f $ are uniformly bounded.

    We give the corresponding functional

    $ J(u(t))=E{T0l(t,y(t),z(t),u(t))dt+g(y(0))},
    $
    (2.2)

    where $ l $ and $ g $ satisfy the following condition:

    $ (H2) $ The functions $ l $ and $ g $ are differentiable in $ (y, y_1, y_2, y_3, z, u) $ and $ y $, respectively, and all the derivatives are bounded.

    The following is a stochastic optimal control problem.

    Problem (BSO) Find an admissible control that maximizes $ J(u(\cdot)) $ over $ u\in\mathcal{U} $.

    Any admissible control that solves Problem (BSO) is called an optimal control. Assume that $ \bar{u}(\cdot)\in\mathcal{U} $ is an admissible control. For convenience, we use the following notations throughout the paper. $ f(t, \bar{u}) = f(t, \bar{\textbf{y}}, z, \bar{u}) $, $ f(t, u) = f(t, \textbf{y}, z, u) $, $ l(t, \bar{u}) = f(t, \textbf{y}, z, \bar{u}) $, $ l(t, u) = l(t, \textbf{y}, z, u) $, and for $ k = y, y_1, y_2, y_3, z, u $, we use $ f_k(t) = \frac{\partial f}{\partial k}(\bar{y}, \bar{y}_1, \bar{y}_2, \bar{y}_3, \bar{z}, \bar{u}) $ and for $ j = y, z, u $, we use $ l_j(t) = \frac{\partial l}{\partial j}(\bar{y}, \bar{z}, \bar{u}) $.

    Remark 2.1. In contrast to [29], the present optimal control problem can also include moving-average delay and noisy memory. Thus, the model can cover more stochastic phenomena and stochastic optimization problems.

    The adjoint equation plays a key role in the theory of maximum principle. In this section, we introduce some adjoint equations. Then, we decompose the two-dimensional adjoint equation (3.1) into two one-dimensional systems of equations and give the equivalent adjoint equation $ (3.6) $, which is called a unified one since it connects the two kinds of adjoint equations (3.2), (3.3) and (3.6).

    A general reference to Malliavin derivative $ D_t $ for Lévy processes is the book (Di Nunno et al. [32]). See also Nualart [33] and Di Nunno et al. [34].

    For all $ F\in L^2(\mathcal{F}_T, P) $, we have $ D_tF\in (\mathbb{S})^* $ and $ (t, \omega)\mapsto E[D_tF|\mathcal{F}_t] $ belongs to $ L^2(\mathcal{F}_T, \lambda\times P) $, where $ (\mathbb{S})^*\supseteq L^2(P) $ denotes the Hida space of stochastic distributions and $ \lambda $ denotes the Lebesgue measure on $ [0, T] $. Moreover, the following generalized Clark-Ocone theorem holds:

    $ F=E[F]+T0E[DtF|Ft]dW(t).
    $

    As also noted in Dahl et al. [27], we can also apply the Clark-Ocone theorem to show that:

    Proposition 3.1. (The generalized duality formula). Let $ F\in L^2(\mathcal{F}_T, P) $ and let $ \varphi(t)\in L^2(\lambda\times P) $ be adapted. Then

    $ E[FT0φ(t)dB(t)]=E[T0E[DtF|Ft]φ(t)dt].
    $

    Proof. By Clark-Ocone theorem and the Itô isometry we have

    $ E[FT0φ(t)dB(t)]=E[(E[F]+T0E[DtF|Ft]dW(t))(T0φ(t)dW(t))]=E[(T0E[DtF|Ft]dW(t))(T0φ(t)dW(t))]=E[T0E[DtF|Ft]φ(t)dt].
    $

    In this section, we will give two adjoint equations and prove that they are equivalent.

    The adjoint equations for Problem (BSO) is given by

    $ {dP(t)={A1(t)P(t)+Et[A2(s)P(s)]|s=t+δχ[0,Tδ](t)+Ett+δtDt(B1(s)P(s))ds+˜b1(t)}dt+(B2(t)P(t)+˜b2(t))dW(t),P(0)=ζ,P(t)=0,t(T,T+δ],
    $
    (3.1)

    where

    $ A1(t)=(fy(t)1fy1(t)λ),A2(s)=(fy3(s)eλδ00),B1(s)=(fy2(s)000),
    $
    $ B2(t)=(fz(t)000),˜b1(t)=(ly(t)0),˜b2(t)=(lz(t)q2(t)),ζ=(gy(ˉy(0))0).
    $

    Here and in what follows, $ \chi $ denotes the indicator function.

    In this section, we decompose the two-dimensional adjoint equation $ (3.1) $ into two one-dimensional systems of equations.

    Define the solution $ P(\cdot) $ of the adjoint equation (3.1) by

    $ P(t)=(P1(t)P2(t)).
    $

    Then by (3.1), it is easy to check that

    $ {dP1(t)={fy(t)P1(t)+Et[fy3(t+δ)P1(t+δ)]χ[0,Tδ](t)ly(t)+t+δtE[Dtfy2(s)P1(s)|Ft]ds+P2(t)eλδEt[P2(t+δ)]χ[0,Tδ](t)}dt+{fz(t)P1(t)lz(t))}dW(t)P1(0)=gy(ˉy(0)),
    $
    (3.2)
    $ {dP2(t)={fy1(t)P1(t)+λP2(t)}dtq2(t)dW(t)P2(0)=0,
    $
    (3.3)

    Remark 3.2. Note that, (3.2) and (3.3) is a system of coupled equations, where $ P_1(\cdot) $ depends on $ P_2(\cdot) $. We will show that $ P_1(\cdot) $ satisfies an independent time-advanced BSDE involving Malliavin derivatives (see $ (3.6) $).

    Note that, it is difficult to derive the adjoint equations $ P_1(\cdot) $ and $ P_2(\cdot) $ by focusing on the coupled equations $ (3.2) $ and $ (3.3) $. We will give the equivalent adjoint equation to show that $ P_1(\cdot) $ satisfies an independent time-advanced BSDE involving Malliavin derivatives (see $ (3.6) $). We call it a unified one since it connects the two kinds of adjoint equations (3.2), (3.3) and $ (3.6) $.

    Lemma 3.3. Under $ (H1) $, it holds that

    $ P2(t)eλδEt[P2(t+δ)]χ[0,Tδ](t)=(t+δ)(Tδ)tEt[eλ(ts)(ly1(s)P1(s)fy1(s))]ds.
    $
    (3.4)

    Proof. Given $ (3.3) $, applying Itô's formula to $ e^{-\lambda s}P_2(s), 0\leq s\leq t $ yields

    $ P2(t)=t0Et[eλ(ts)(ly1(s)P1(s)fy1(s))]ds.
    $
    (3.5)

    Set $ \Sigma(t) = P_2(t)-e^{-\lambda \delta}\mathbb{E}^t[P_2(t+\delta)]\chi_{[0, T-\delta]}(t) $. Then by $ (3.5) $, we have

    $ Σ(t)=t0Et[eλ(ts)(ly1(s)P1(s)fy1(s))]ds+t+δ0Et[eλ(ts)(ly1(s)P1(s)fy1(s))]dsχ[0,Tδ](t).
    $

    (i) We first consider the case: $ t+\delta < T-\delta $, $ \Sigma(t) = \int_t^{t+\delta}\mathbb{E}^t[e^{\lambda(t-s)}(l_{y_1}(s)-P_1(s)f_{y_1}(s))]ds $.

    (ii) Otherwise, $ \Sigma(t) = \int_t^{T-\delta}\mathbb{E}^t[e^{\lambda(t-s)}(l_{y_1}(s)-P_1(s)f_{y_1}(s))]ds $.

    Therefore, we have $ \Sigma(t) = \int_t^{(t+\delta)\wedge {(T-\delta)}}\mathbb{E}^t[e^{\lambda(t-s)}(l_{y_1}(s)-P_1(s)f_{y_1}(s))]ds $.

    Thus, the proof is complete.

    Substituting $ (3.4) $ into $ (3.2) $, we get the following equivalent adjoint equation

    $ {dP1(t)={fy(t)P1(t)+Et[fy3(t+δ)P1(t+δ)]χ[0,Tδ](t)ly(t)+t+δtE[Dtfy2(s)P1(s)|Ft]ds+(t+δ)(Tδ)tEt[eλ(ts)(ly1(s)P1(s)fy1(s))]ds}dt+{fz(t)P1(t)lz(t))}dW(t)P1(0)=gy(ˉy(0)).
    $
    (3.6)

    Remark 3.4. Three types of delays of the state are incorporated in Problem (BSO). Let us consider some special cases.

    (a) If the moving-average delayed state $ y_1(\cdot) $ vanishes, then it holds that $ P_2(t) = 0 $, $ (3.6) $ degenerates to

    $ {dP1(t)={fy(t)P1(t)+Et[fy3(t+δ)P1(t+δ)]χ[0,Tδ](t)ly(t)+t+δtE[Dtfy2(s)P1(s)|Ft]ds}dt+{fz(t)P1(t)lz(t))}dW(t)P1(0)=gy(ˉy(0)).
    $

    This is the case studied in [35] without mean-field term and on finite time horizon.

    $ (b) $ If the noisy memory $ y_2(\cdot) $ vanishes, then $ (3.6) $ degenerates to

    $ {dP1(t)={fy(t)P1(t)+Et[fy3(t+δ)P1(t+δ)]χ[0,Tδ](t)ly(t)+(t+δ)(Tδ)tEt[eλ(ts)(ly1(s)P1(s)fy1(s))]ds}dt+{fz(t)P1(t)lz(t))}dW(t)P1(0)=gy(ˉy(0)).
    $

    This is the case studied in [36] without mean-field term and on finite time horizon. Note that, in [36], the discrete delay is not considered.

    $ (c) $ If the discrete state $ y_3(\cdot) $ vanishes, then $ (3.6) $ degenerates to

    $ {dP1(t)={fy(t)P1(t)ly(t)+t+δtE[Dtfy2(s)P1(s)|Ft]ds+(t+δ)(Tδ)tEt[eλ(ts)(ly1(s)P1(s)fy1(s))]ds}dt+{fz(t)P1(t)lz(t))}dW(t)P1(0)=gy(ˉy(0)).
    $

    This case has not been studied before.

    $ (d) $ If both $ y_1(\cdot) $ and $ y_2(\cdot) $ vanish, then $ (3.6) $ degenerates to

    $ {dP1(t)={fy(t)P1(t)+Et[fy3(t+δ)P1(t+δ)]χ[0,Tδ](t)ly(t)}dt+{fz(t)P1(t)lz(t))}dW(t)P1(0)=gy(ˉy(0)).
    $

    This is the case studied in [37] with full information.

    Define the Hamiltonian function $ H $ by

    $ H(t,y,y1,y2,y3,z,u,P1,P2)=l(t,y,z,u)f(t,y,y1,y2,y3,z,u)P1(yλy1eλδy3)P2.
    $

    In this section, we form sufficient condition of optimality based on some concavity assumptions on $ H $ and $ g $.

    The following assumption will also be needed.

    $ (H3) $ The functions $ H(t, y, y_1, y_2, y_3, z, u, P_1, P_2) $ and $ g(y) $ are concave with respect to the corresponding variables, for $ t\in[0, T] $ and given $ P_1, P_2 $.

    For simplicity, we use $ (y(t), u(t)) $ and $ (\bar{y}(t), \bar{u}(t)) $ to denote the state trajectories of system $ (2.1) $ correspongding to $ u(t) $ and $ \bar{u}(t) $. We denote by $ \bar{H}(t) = H(t, \bar{y}, \bar{y}_1, \bar{y}_2, \bar{y}_3, \bar{z}, \bar{u}, P_1, P_2) $, $ H(t) = H(t, y, y_1, y_2, y_3, z, u, P_1, P_2) $ and the similar definitions for $ \bar{f}(t) $ and $ f(t) $. We give the sufficient maximum principle now.

    Theorem 4.1. Let $ (H1)-(H3) $ hold. If an admissible control $ \bar{u}(\cdot) $ satisfies the following condition:

    $ (ˉuu)Hu(t)0,
    $

    then $ \bar{u}(\cdot) $ is an optimal control.

    Proof. We write $ J(\bar{u}(\cdot))-J(u(\cdot)) = I_1+I_2 $ with

    $ I1=ET0{l(t,ˉy(t),ˉz(t),ˉu(t))l(t,y(t),z(t),u(t))}dt,
    $
    (4.1)
    $ I2=E[g(ˉy(0))g(y(0))].
    $

    Since $ g $ is concave on $ y $, we have

    $ I2E[gy(ˉy(0))(ˉy(0)y(0))].
    $
    (4.2)

    Applying Itô's formula to $ P_1(t)(\bar{y}(t)-y(t)) $ and taking expectation, we get

    $ E(gy(ˉy(0))(ˉy(0)y(0))=ET0{(ˉy(t)y(t))(fy(t)P1(t)+Et[fy3(t+δ)P1(t+δ)]χ[0,Tδ](t)ly(t)+t+δtE[Dtfy2(s)P1(s)|Ft]ds+P2(t)eλδEt[P2(t+δ)]χ[0,Tδ](t))}dt+ET0{P1(t)((f(t,ˉy(t),ˉz(t),ˉu(t))f(t,y(t),z(t),u(t))))}dt+ET0{(ˉz(t)z(t))(fz(t)P1(t)lz(t))}dt.
    $
    (4.3)

    By the definition $ H $, it holds that

    $ I1=ET0{ˉH(t)H(t)+(ˉf(t)f(t))P1(t)(ˉy(t)y(t)λ(ˉy1(t)y1(t))eλδ(ˉy3(t)y3(t)))P2(t)}dt.
    $
    (4.4)

    Noting that

    $ dy1(t)=[y(t)λy1(t)eλδy3(t)],t[0,T].
    $

    Using Itô's formula to $ P_2(t)(\bar{y}_1(t)-y_1(t)) $ and integrating from 0 to $ T $, and noticing $ P_2(0) = 0 $ and $ \bar{y}_1(T)-y_1(T) = 0 $, we get

    $ EP2(T)(ˉy1(T)y1(T))]E[P2(0)(ˉy1(0)y1(0))]=ET0{ly1(t)+P1(t)fy1(t)+λP2(t))(ˉy1(t)y1(t)}dt+ET0{P2(t)(ˉy(t)y(t)λ(ˉy1(t)y1(t))eλδ(ˉy3(t)y3(t)))}dt=0.
    $
    (4.5)

    Inserting $ (4.5) $ into $ (4.4) $, we have

    $ I1=ET0{ˉH(t)H(t)+(ˉf(t)f(t))P1(t)+(ly1(t)+P1(t)fy1(t)+λP2(t))(ˉy1(t)y1(t))}dt.
    $
    (4.6)

    Since $ H $ is concave, and from $ (4.2) $, $ (4.3) $ and $ (4.6) $, we can obtain

    $ J(ˉu)J(u)ET0{fy3(t)(ˉy3(t)y3(t))P1(t)+Et[fy3(t+δ)P1(t+δ)]χ[0,Tδ](t)(ˉy(t)y(t))}dt+ET0{eλδEt[P2(t+δ)]χ[0,Tδ](t)(ˉy(t)y(t))+eλδ(ˉy3(t)y3(t))P2(t)}dt+ET0{fy2(t)(ˉy2(t)y2(t))P1(t)+t+δtE[Dtfy2(s)P1(s)|Ft]ds(ˉy(t)y(t))+lu(t)(ˉu(t)u(t))fu(t)(ˉu(t)u(t))P1(t)}dt=J1+J2+J3+J5.
    $

    Based on the definition of $ y_3 $ and through transformation of variables, we have

    $ ET0fy3(t)(ˉy3(t)y3(t))P1(t)dt=ET0fy3(t)(ˉy(tδ)y(tδ))P1(t)dt=ETδδfy3(t+δ)(ˉy(t)y(t))P1(t+δ)dt.
    $

    On the other hand,

    $ ET0Et[fy3(t+δ)P1(t+δ)]χ[0,Tδ](t)(ˉy(t)y(t))dt=ET+δδfy3(t)(ˉy(tδ)y(tδ))P1(t)dt.
    $

    Therefore,

    $ J1=ET0fy3(t)(ˉy(tδ)y(tδ))P1(t)dt+ET+δδfy3(t)(ˉy(tδ)y(tδ))P1(t)dt=Eδ0fy3(t)(ˉy(tδ)y(tδ))P1(t)dtETδfy3(t)(ˉy(tδ)y(tδ))P1(t)dt+ET+δδfy3(t)(ˉy(tδ)y(tδ))P1(t)dt=Eδ0fy3(t)(ˉy(tδ)y(tδ))P1(t)dt+ET+δTfy3(t)(ˉy(tδ)y(tδ))P1(t)dt.
    $

    By $ (2.1) $, we have $ \bar{y}(t-\delta)-y(t-\delta) = 0 $ when $ t\in[0, \delta) $. So $ \int_0^\delta f_{y_3}(t)(\bar{y}(t-\delta)-y(t-\delta))P_1(t)dt $ = 0. By $ (3.1) $, $ P_1(t) = 0, \; \; t\in(T, T+\delta] $, we get $ \mathbb{E}\int_T^{T+\delta}f_{y_3}(t)(\bar{y}(t-\delta)-y(t-\delta))P_1(t)dt $. Then, we obtain $ J_1 = 0 $.

    $ J3=ET0{fy2(t)(ˉy2(t)y2(t))P1(t)+t+δtE[Dtfy2(s)P1(s)|Ft]ds(ˉy(t)y(t))}dt.
    $

    Using Fubini's theorem and the definition of $ y_2 $, as well as the duality formula for Malliavin derivatives, we get

    $ ET0fy2(t)(ˉy2(t)y2(t))P1(t)dt=ET0fy2(t)(ttδˉy(s)y(s)dW(s))P1(t)dt=T0E[ttδE[Ds(fy2(t)P1(t))|Fs](ˉy(s)y(s))ds]dt=ET0s+δsE[Ds(fy2(t)P1(t))|Fs](ˉy(s)y(s))dtds.
    $

    So, $ J_3 = 0 $. In the similar ways, we can show that $ J_2 = 0 $. This implies

    $ J(ˉu)J(u)T0E[Hu(t)(ˉu(t)u(t))]dt0.
    $

    From this, it can be seen that $ \bar{u}(t) $ is an optimal control. We conclude.

    In this section, applying the results obtained in the previous section, we derive an explicit optimal control of the linear-quadratic optimal control with delayed BSDE.

    We give the following linear BSDE:

    $ {dy(t)={a(t)y(t)+b(t)y3(t)+c(t)y1(t)+d(t)y2(t)+e(t)u(t)}dtz(t)dW(t),y(T)=ξ,y(t)=φ(t),t[δ,0)
    $

    and the performance functional

    $ J(u(t))=12E[T0a0(t)y2(t)+b0(t)z2(t)+r(t)u2(t)]dt12E[y2(0)],
    $

    where $ a(t), b(t), c(t), d(t), e(t) $ are deterministic functions, with $ y_1(t): = \int_{t-\delta}^te^{\lambda(s-t)}y(s)ds $, $ y_2(t): = \int_{t-\delta}^ty(s)dW(s) $ and $ y_3(t): = y(t-\delta) $.

    We give the following assumption:

    $ (H4) $ $ a_0(t) $ and $ b_0(t) $ are non-negative bounded deterministic functions. Moreover, $ r(t), r^{-1}(t) $ are deterministic positive bounded functions.

    The Hamiltonian function is

    $ H(t,y,y1,y2,y3,z,u,P1,P2)=12(a0(t)y2(t)+b0(t)z2(t)+r(t)u2(t))(a(t)y(t)+b(t)y3(t)+c(t)y1(t)+d(t)y2(t)+e(t)u(t))P1(t)(y(t)λy1(t)eλδy3(t))P2(t)
    $

    and the adjoint equation satisfies

    $ {dP(t)={A1(t)P(t)+Et[A2(s)P(s)]|s=t+δχ[0,Tδ](t)+Ett+δtDt(B1(s)P(s))dt+˜b1(t)}dt+(B2(t)P(t)+˜b2(t))dW(t),P(0)=ζ,
    $

    where

    $ A1(t)=(a(t)1c(t)λ),A2(s)=(b(s)eλδ00),B1(s)=(d(s)000),
    $
    $ B2(t)=(0000),˜b1(t)=(a0(t)0),˜b2(t)=(b0(t)q2(t)),ζ=(E[y(0)]0).
    $

    Our objective is to maximize the performance functional over $ \mathcal{U} $.

    According to Theorem 4.1, we can derive the following result.

    Theorem 5.1. Under $ (H4) $, if the admissible control $ \bar{u}(t) $ satisfies

    $ ˉu(t)=r1(t)e(t)P1(t),
    $
    (5.1)

    then it is an optimal control.

    Proof. Let $ \bar{u}(t) $ be a control given by $ (5.1) $, $ \bar{y}(t) $ and $ \bar{z}(t) $ be the corresponding state equation. By $ (5.1) $, $ (\bar{y}(t), \bar{z}(t), \bar{u}(t)) $ satisfies the optimality condition in Theorem 4.1, which means $ \mathbb{E}[H_u(t)(\bar{u}(t)-u(t))]\geq0 $. From $ (H4) $, it is easy to check that all other conditions in Theorem 5.1 are satisfied, so $ \bar{u} $ is optimal.

    We consider a financial market with two investment possibilities. One is a risk-free asset with price $ S_0(t) $ and the other is a risky asset with price $ S_1(t) $. They satisfies:

    $ {dS0(t)=μ(t)S0(t)dt,S0(0)=0,
    $

    where $ \mu(t) $ is a bonded deterministic function.

    $ {dS1(t)=S1(t)(b(t)dt+σ(t)dW(t)),S1(0)=0,
    $
    (5.2)

    where $ b(t), \sigma(t) $ are bounded deterministic functions.

    Suppose someone invests in bonds and stocks. They want to achieve their wealth goal $ \xi $ at time $ T $. Moreover, the investor wants to maximize his utility function $ J $.

    We denote by $ \pi(t) $ the proportion of fund that the investor invests in the stock. $ c(t) $ is the instantaneous consumption rate of investor. In real life, usually there are different levels of consumption. For simplicity, there is only one level. For example, $ c(t)\in\mathbb{U} = [0, a_1] $, that is we only consider the ultra-low consumption. Here $ a_1 $ is a constant such that $ a_1 > (\frac{\mathbb{E}[e^{\gamma t}P_1(t)]}{L})^{-\frac{1}{R}} $. $ y(t) $ is the wealth process of the investor at time $ t $ and $ k(y(t)-y(t-\delta)-\int_{t-\delta}^ty(s)dW(s))-\int_{t-\delta}^te^{\lambda(s-t)}y(s)ds $ is the surplus premium.

    We propose a wealth process with delay, which is caused by the instantaneous capital inflow or outflow from the investor's current wealth.

    Now the investor's wealth process is governed by the following BSDE:

    $ {dy(t)=[(μk)y(t)+ky(tδ)+kttδy(s)dW(s)+k1ttδeλ(st)y(s)dsc(t)+λz(t)]dtz(t)dW(t),y(T)=ξ,y(t)=0,t[δ,0).
    $
    (5.3)

    We give the corresponding cost functional:

    $ J(c(t))=E{T0Leγt(c(t))1R1RdtMy(0)},
    $
    (5.4)

    where $ L > 0, K > 0, M > 0, \gamma > 0 $, and $ 0 < R < 1 $.

    Here is the Hamiltonian function

    $ H(t,y,y1,y2,y3,z,c,P1,P2)=Leγt(c(t))1R1R((μk)y(t)+ky3(t)+ky2(t)+k1y1(t)c(t)+λz(t))P1(t)(y(t)λy1(t)eλδy2(t))P2(t),
    $

    where $ y_1(t): = \int_{t-\delta}^te^{\lambda(s-t)}y(s)ds $, $ y_2(t): = \int_{t-\delta}^ty(s)dW(s) $ and $ y_3(t): = y(t-\delta) $.

    The corresponding adjoint equation satisfies the following:

    $ {dP(t)={A1(t)P(t)+Et[A2(s)P(s)]|s=t+δχ[0,Tδ](t)+Ett+δtDt(B1(s)P(s))ds+˜b1(t)dt}+(B2(t)P(t)+˜b2(t))dW(t),P(0)=ζ,
    $

    where

    $ A1(t)=(μk1k1λ),A2(s)=(keλδ00),B1(s)=(k000),
    $
    $ B2(t)=(λ000),˜b1(t)=(00),˜b2(t)=(0q2(t)),ζ=(M0).
    $

    Proposition 5.2. Suppose that $ (5.2) $, $ (5.3) $ and the adjoint process $ P(t) $ satisfy the conditions in Theorem 4.1. Then the optimal consumption $ c(t) $ is given by $ (\frac{\mathbb{E}[e^{\gamma t}P_1(t)]}{L})^{-\frac{1}{R}} $.

    Finally, let's look at a numerical example. Take $ \delta_1 = 0.1, \delta_2 = 0.15, \delta_3 = 0.2, \delta_4 = 0.23, \delta_5 = 0.26 $, $ \lambda = 0.4, \mu = 0.6, k = 0, k_1 = 1, \gamma = 0.3, M = 1, R = 0.5, T = 3 $ and $ L = 3 $.

    In order to obtain the effect of delay, we can divide the time horizon according to the delay, and then continue to subdivide each subinterval to get the numerical solution using the Euler method or improved Euler method. The corresponding parameter values are: $ \delta_1 = 0.1, \delta_2 = 0.15, \delta_3 = 0.2, \delta_4 = 0.23, \delta_5 = 0.26 $. Figure 1 plots the solution $ P_1(t) $ for different time delays. We observe that the solution is very sensitive to $ \delta $, i.e., the smaller $ \delta $ is, the larger $ P_1(t) $ is.

    Figure 1.  The solution $ P_1(t) $ with different time delays.

    Figure 2 shows the optimal consumption $ c(t) $ for different time delays. We find that the smaller $ \delta $ is, the lower the consumption rate is. Furthermore, it can be seen from Figure 2 that no matter what value $ \delta $, the optimal consumption strategy is close to almost the same number. This is because, for convenience, we consider only one level of consumption: Ultra-low consumption.

    Figure 2.  The optimal consumption $ c(t) $ with different time-delays.

    For a more comprehensive analysis of the factors affecting the optimal control, we will show how the terminal condition $ y(T) = \xi $ affects the optimal control result. Here $ k = k_1 = 0, \mu = 1 $. The state process satisfies the following BSDE

    $ {dy(t)=(y(t)c(t)+z(t))dtz(t)dW(t),y(T)=ξ.
    $

    The cost function is given by

    $ J(c(t))=E{T0Leγt(c(t))1R1Rdty2(0)}.
    $

    and the adjoint equation $ (3.2) $ is reduced to the following form

    $ {dP1(t)=P1(t)dt,P1(0)=2ˉy(0).
    $

    By Proposition 5.2, the optimal consumption $ c(t) $ is given by $ (\frac{\mathbb{E}[e^{\gamma t}P_1(t)]}{L})^{-\frac{1}{R}} $.

    The following is the numerical result. Figure 3 plots the optimal consumption $ c(t) $ with different terminal conditions. The parameter values used in the calculations are: $ \gamma = 0.3, $ $ R = 0.5, $ $ T = 3 $, $ L = 3 $, $ \xi_1 = 1, $ $ \xi_2 = 3, $ $ \xi_3 = 5 $. We observe that the smaller terminal condition will lead to a smaller consumption.

    Figure 3.  The optimal consumption $ c(t) $ with different terminal conditions.

    Motivated by some interesting financial and economic phenomena, we study the optimal control problem for BSDE with three delays. Some new-type adjoint equations are introduced for the first time in the literature. More especially, we obtain a sufficient condition for BSDE with three delays. The major features of this work include the introduction of a unified adjoint equation as well as the new type of the adjoint equations. The theoretical results established here are applied to solve a linear-quadratic optimal control problem and a financial problem. Then, a linear-quadratic optimal control and an optimal investment strategy are derived, respectively. There are several interesting issues that deserve further study.

    One could consider more complicated optimal control problems, such as problems with mean-field term and partial information rather than full information.

    On the one hand, the mean-field stochastic differential equation (SDE) was introduced to study physical systems with a large number of interacting particles. The mean-field models have many applications in economics and finance. Stochastic maximum principle for the optimal control system of mean-field type has become a popular topic. When considering mean-field terms, some new mean-field stochastic differential equations will be introduced as the adjoint equations and the maximum principle is generalized to the mean-field framework.

    On the other hand, in general, controllers can get only partial information in most cases. For example, we consider a cash flow process for an insurance firm, where due to the discreteness of account information, it is impossible for the firm to fully observe the cash flow. Unlike the system with full information, we will give a noisy process $ Y $ for partially observed optimal control problem. In addition, an extra adjoint equation will be introduced to obtain stochastic maximum principle, which does not appear in the full information case. The optimal control will contain the filtering of adjoint process which will increase the difficulty of analyzing the maximum condition and improve the skills of pure mathematical calculation. We plan to discuss these problems in the future.

    The author declares she has not used Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools in the creation of this article.

    Heping Ma is partially supported by National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No. 11801154). Hui Jian is partially supported by Jiangxi Provincial Natural Science Foundation (Grant No. 20212BAB211006) and National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No. 11761032). Thanks the anonymous reviewers and editors for their valuable comments and suggestions which led to the improvement of the original manuscript.

    The authors declare there is no conflict of interest.

    [1] Evenhuis C, Lenton A, Cantin NE, et al. (2015) Modelling coral calcification accounting for the impacts of coral bleaching and ocean acidification. Biogeosci 12: 2607-2630.
    [2] Guinottea JM, Fabry VJ (2008) Ocean Acidification and Its Potential Effects on Marine Ecosystems. Ann NY Acad Sci 1134: 320-342. doi: 10.1196/annals.1439.013
    [3] Cyronak T, Schulz KG, Jokiel PL (2015) The Omega myth: what really drives lower calcification rates in an acidifying ocean. ICES J Mar Sci 73: 558-562.
    [4] Suwa R, Nakamura M, Morita M, et al. (2010) Effects of acidified seawater on early life stages of scleractinian corals (Genus Acropora). Fish Sci 76: 93-99. doi: 10.1007/s12562-009-0189-7
    [5] Hii YS, Ambok Bolong AM, Yang TT, et al. (2009) Effect of elevated carbon dioxide on two Scleractinian corals: Porites cylindrica (Dana, 1846) and Galaxea fascicularis (Linnaeus, 1767). J Mar Biol 2009: 215196.
    [6] Kerrison P, Hall-Spencer JM, Suggett DJ, et al. (2011) Assessment of pH variability at a coastal CO2 vent for ocean acidification studies. Estuar Coast Shelf Sci 94: 129-137. doi: 10.1016/j.ecss.2011.05.025
    [7] Hall-Spencer JM, Rodolfo-Metalpa R, Martin S, et al. (2008) Volcanic carbon dioxide vents show ecosystem effects of ocean acidification. Nature 454: 96-99. doi: 10.1038/nature07051
    [8] Cigliano M, Gambi MC, Rodolfo-Metalpa R, et al. (2010) Effects of ocean acidification on invertebrate settlement at volcanic CO2 vents. Mar Biol 157: 2489-2502. doi: 10.1007/s00227-010-1513-6
    [9] Johnson VR, Brownlee C, Rickaby REM, et al. (2013) Responses of marine benthic microalgae to elevated CO2. Mar Biol 160: 1813-1824.
    [10] Inoue S, Kayanne H, Yamamoto S, et al. (2013) Spatial community shift from hard to soft corals in acidified water. Nat Clim Chang 3: 683-687. doi: 10.1038/nclimate1855
    [11] Gabay Y, Benayahu Y, Fine M (2013) Does elevated pCO2 affect reef octocorals? Ecol Evol 3: 465-473. doi: 10.1002/ece3.351
    [12] Gabay Y, Fine M, Barkay Z (2014) Octocoral Tissue Provides Protection from Declining Oceanic pH. PloS ONE 9: e91553. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0091553
    [13] Michalek-Wagner K, Bourne DJ, Bowden BF (2001) The effects of different strains of zooxanthellae on the secondary-metabolite chemistry and development of the soft-coral host Lobophytum compactum. Mar Biol 138: 753-760. doi: 10.1007/s002270000505
    [14] Changyun W, Haiyan L, Changlun S, et al. (2008) Chemical defensive substances of soft corals and gorgonians. Acta Ecol Sin 28: 2320-2328. doi: 10.1016/S1872-2032(08)60048-7
    [15] Sotka E, Forbey J, Horn M, et al. (2009) The emerging role of pharmacology in understanding consumer-prey interactions in marine and freshwater systems. Integr Comp Biol 49: 291-313. doi: 10.1093/icb/icp049
    [16] Lages BG, Fleury BG, Ferreira CE, et al. (2006) Chemical defense of an exotic coral as invasion strategy. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 328: 127-135.
    [17] Kahng SE, Grigg RW (2005) Impact of an alien octocoral, Carijoa riisei, on black corals in Hawaii. Coral Reefs 24: 556-562. doi: 10.1007/s00338-005-0026-0
    [18] Aceret TL, Sammarco PW, Coll JC (1995) Toxic effects of alcyonacean diterpenes on scleractinian corals. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 188: 63-78.
    [19] Sammarco PW, Coll JC, Barre SL (1995). Competitive strategies of soft coral (Coelenterata : Octocorallia), II, variable defensive responses and susceptibility to scleractinian corals. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 91: 199-215.
    [20] Sammarco PW, Coll JC (1990) Lack of predictability in terpenoid function - multiple roles and integration with related adaptations in soft corals. J Chem Ecol 16: 273-289. doi: 10.1007/BF01021284
    [21] Yang B, Liu J, Wang J, et al. (2015) Cytotoxic Cembrane Diterpenoids. InHandbook of Anticancer Drugs from Marine Origin. Springer International Publishing, 649-672.
    [22] Liu X, Zhang J, Liu Q, et al. (2015) Bioactive Cembranoids from the South China Sea Soft Coral Sarcophyton elegans. Molecules 20: 13324-13335. doi: 10.3390/molecules200713324
    [23] Rocha J, Peixe L, Gomes N, et al. (2011) Cnidarians as a source of new marine bioactive compounds—An overview of the last decade and future steps for bioprospecting. Mar Drugs 9: 1860-1886. doi: 10.3390/md9101860
    [24] Fabricius KE, Langdon C, Uthicke S, et al. (2011) Losers and winners in coral reefs acclimatized to elevated carbon dioxide concentrations. Nat Clim Chang 1: 165-169. doi: 10.1038/nclimate1122
    [25] Pierrot DE, Lewis E, Wallace DWR (2006) MS Exel Program Developed for CO2 System Calculations. ORNL/CDIAC-105a. Oak Ridge, Tennessee, USA: Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Centre, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, US Department of Energy.
    [26] Fabricius KE, Alderslade P (2001) Soft corals and sea fans: a comprehensive guide to the tropical shallow water genera of the central west Pacific, the Indian Ocean and the Red Sea. Australian Institute of Marine Science, 264.
    [27] Zachary I (2003) Determination of cell number, in: Cell proliferation and apoptosis. D. Hughes and H Mehmet (eds), Bios Scientific Publishers, 13-35.
    [28] Kohler KE, Gill SM (2006) Coral Point Count with Excel extensions (CPCe): A visual basic program for the determination of coral and substrate coverage using random point coral methodology,”. Comput Geosci 32: 1259-1269. doi: 10.1016/j.cageo.2005.11.009
    [29] Hammer O, Harper DAT, Ryan PD (2001) Past: Paleontological Statistics Software package for education and data analysis. Palaeontol Electron 4: 9.
    [30] Anthony KR, Kline DI, Diaz-Pulido G (2008) Acidification causes bleaching and productivity loss in coral reef builders. P Natl Acad Sci USA 105: 17442-17446. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0804478105
    [31] Crook ED, Potts D, Rebolledo-Vieyra M (2012) Calcifying coral abundance near low-pH springs: implications for future ocean acidification. Coral Reefs 31: 239-245. doi: 10.1007/s00338-011-0839-y
    [32] Edmunds PJ (2011) Zooplanktivory ameliorates the effects of ocean acidification on the reef coral Porites sp. Limnol Oceanogr 56: 2402-2410. doi: 10.4319/lo.2011.56.6.2402
    [33] Doney SC, Fabry VJ, Feely RA, et al. (2009) Ocean acidification: the other CO2 problem. Ann Rev Mar Sci 1: 169-192. doi: 10.1146/annurev.marine.010908.163834
    [34] Sammarco PJ, Coll JC (1992) Chemical adaptations in the Octocorallia: evolutionary considerations. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 88: 93-93.
    [35] Luter HM, Duckworth AR (2010) Influence of size and spatial competition on the bioactivity of coral reef sponges. Biochem Syst Ecol 38: 146-153.
    [36] Januar HI, Marraskuranto E, Patantis G, et al. (2012) LC-MS Metabolomic Analysis of Environmental Stressors Impacts to the Metabolites Diversity in Nephthea sp.. Chron Young Sci 2: 57-62.
    [37] Januar HI, Pratitis A, Bramandito A (2015) Will the increasing of anthropogenic pressures reduce the biopotential value of sponges? Scientifica 2015: 734385.
    [38] Januar HI, Chasanah E, Tapiolas DM, et al. (2015) Influence of anthropogenic pressures on the bioactivity potential of sponges and soft corals in the coral reef environment. Squallen Bull Mar Fish Postharvest Biotech 10: 51-59.
    [39] Arnold T, Mealey C, Leahey H, et al. (2012) Ocean Acidification and the Loss of Phenolic Substances in Marine Plants. PLoS ONE 7: e35107.
    [40] Suggett DJ, Hall-Spencer J, Rodofo-Metalpa R, et al. (2012) Sea anemones may thrive in a high CO2 world. Global Chang Biol 18: 3015-3025. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2486.2012.02767.x
  • Reader Comments
  • © 2016 the Author(s), licensee AIMS Press. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)
通讯作者: 陈斌, bchen63@163.com
  • 1. 

    沈阳化工大学材料科学与工程学院 沈阳 110142

  1. 本站搜索
  2. 百度学术搜索
  3. 万方数据库搜索
  4. CNKI搜索

Metrics

Article views(5876) PDF downloads(1222) Cited by(7)

Figures and Tables

Figures(3)  /  Tables(2)

/

DownLoad:  Full-Size Img  PowerPoint
Return
Return

Catalog