A healthy gastrointestinal tract functions as a highly selective barrier, allowing the absorption of nutrients and metabolites while preventing gut bacteria and other xenobiotic compounds from entering host circulation and tissues. The intestinal epithelium and intestinal mucus provide a physical first line of defense against resident microbes, pathogens and xenotoxic compounds. Prior studies have indicated that the gut microbe Akkermansia muciniphila, a mucin-metabolizer, can stimulate intestinal mucin thickness to improve gut barrier integrity. Grape polyphenol (GP) extracts rich in B-type proanthocyanidin (PAC) compounds have been found to increase the relative abundance of A. muciniphila, suggesting that PACs alter the gut microbiota to support a healthy gut barrier. To further investigate the effect of GPs on the gut barrier and A. muciniphila, male C57BL/6 mice were fed a high-fat diet (HFD) or low-fat diet (LFD) with or without 1% GPs (HFD-GP, LFD-GP) for 12 weeks. Compared to the mice fed unsupplemented diets, GP-supplemented mice showed increased relative abundance of fecal and cecal A. muciniphila, a reduction in total bacteria, a diminished colon mucus layer and increased fecal mucus content. GP supplementation also reduced the presence of goblet cells regardless of dietary fat. Compared to the HFD group, ileal gene expression of lipopolysaccharide (LPS)-binding protein (Lbp), an acute-phase protein that promotes pro-inflammatory cytokine expression, was reduced in the HFD-GP group, suggesting reduced LPS in circulation. Despite depletion of the colonic mucus layer, markers of inflammation (Ifng, Il1b, Tnfa, and Nos2) were similar among the four groups, with the exception that ileal Il6 mRNA levels were lower in the LFD-GP group compared to the LFD group. Our findings suggest that the GP-induced increase in A. muciniphila promotes redistribution of the intestinal mucus layer to the intestinal lumen, and that the GP-induced decrease in total bacteria results in a less inflammatory intestinal milieu.
Citation: Esther Mezhibovsky, Yue Wu, Fiona G. Bawagan, Kevin M. Tveter, Samantha Szeto, Diana Roopchand. Impact of grape polyphenols on Akkermansia muciniphila and the gut barrier[J]. AIMS Microbiology, 2022, 8(4): 544-565. doi: 10.3934/microbiol.2022035
[1] | Andrey Muravnik . Wiener Tauberian theorem and half-space problems for parabolic and elliptic equations. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(4): 8174-8191. doi: 10.3934/math.2024397 |
[2] | Zhanwei Gou, Jincheng Shi . Blow-up phenomena and global existence for nonlinear parabolic problems under nonlinear boundary conditions. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(5): 11822-11836. doi: 10.3934/math.2023598 |
[3] | Apassara Suechoei, Parinya Sa Ngiamsunthorn . Extremal solutions of φ−Caputo fractional evolution equations involving integral kernels. AIMS Mathematics, 2021, 6(5): 4734-4757. doi: 10.3934/math.2021278 |
[4] | Hao-Yue Liu, Wei Zhang . Neumann gradient estimate for nonlinear heat equation under integral Ricci curvature bounds. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(2): 3881-3894. doi: 10.3934/math.2024191 |
[5] | Yanyan Cui, Chaojun Wang . Dirichlet and Neumann boundary value problems for bi-polyanalytic functions on the bicylinder. AIMS Mathematics, 2025, 10(3): 4792-4818. doi: 10.3934/math.2025220 |
[6] | Nataliya Gol’dman . Nonlinear boundary value problems for a parabolic equation with an unknown source function. AIMS Mathematics, 2019, 4(5): 1508-1522. doi: 10.3934/math.2019.5.1508 |
[7] | Yonghui Zou, Xin Xu, An Gao . Local well-posedness to the thermal boundary layer equations in Sobolev space. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(4): 9933-9964. doi: 10.3934/math.2023503 |
[8] | Hongmei Li . Convergence of smooth solutions to parabolic equations with an oblique derivative boundary condition. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(2): 2824-2853. doi: 10.3934/math.2024140 |
[9] | Heping Jiang . Complex dynamics induced by harvesting rate and delay in a diffusive Leslie-Gower predator-prey model. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(9): 20718-20730. doi: 10.3934/math.20231056 |
[10] | Fan Wan, Xiping Liu, Mei Jia . Ulam-Hyers stability for conformable fractional integro-differential impulsive equations with the antiperiodic boundary conditions. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(4): 6066-6083. doi: 10.3934/math.2022338 |
A healthy gastrointestinal tract functions as a highly selective barrier, allowing the absorption of nutrients and metabolites while preventing gut bacteria and other xenobiotic compounds from entering host circulation and tissues. The intestinal epithelium and intestinal mucus provide a physical first line of defense against resident microbes, pathogens and xenotoxic compounds. Prior studies have indicated that the gut microbe Akkermansia muciniphila, a mucin-metabolizer, can stimulate intestinal mucin thickness to improve gut barrier integrity. Grape polyphenol (GP) extracts rich in B-type proanthocyanidin (PAC) compounds have been found to increase the relative abundance of A. muciniphila, suggesting that PACs alter the gut microbiota to support a healthy gut barrier. To further investigate the effect of GPs on the gut barrier and A. muciniphila, male C57BL/6 mice were fed a high-fat diet (HFD) or low-fat diet (LFD) with or without 1% GPs (HFD-GP, LFD-GP) for 12 weeks. Compared to the mice fed unsupplemented diets, GP-supplemented mice showed increased relative abundance of fecal and cecal A. muciniphila, a reduction in total bacteria, a diminished colon mucus layer and increased fecal mucus content. GP supplementation also reduced the presence of goblet cells regardless of dietary fat. Compared to the HFD group, ileal gene expression of lipopolysaccharide (LPS)-binding protein (Lbp), an acute-phase protein that promotes pro-inflammatory cytokine expression, was reduced in the HFD-GP group, suggesting reduced LPS in circulation. Despite depletion of the colonic mucus layer, markers of inflammation (Ifng, Il1b, Tnfa, and Nos2) were similar among the four groups, with the exception that ileal Il6 mRNA levels were lower in the LFD-GP group compared to the LFD group. Our findings suggest that the GP-induced increase in A. muciniphila promotes redistribution of the intestinal mucus layer to the intestinal lumen, and that the GP-induced decrease in total bacteria results in a less inflammatory intestinal milieu.
In this paper, we study the existence, uniqueness, decay estimates, and the large-time behavior of the solutions for a class of the nonlinear strongly degenerate parabolic equations involving the linear inhomogeneous heat equation solution as a source term under Neumann boundary conditions with bounded Radon measure as initial data. This problem is described as follows:
{ut=Δψ(u)+h(t)f(x,t) in Q:=Ω×(0,T),∂ψ(u)∂η=g(u) on S:=∂Ω×(0,T),u(x,0)=u0(x) in Ω, | (P) |
where T>0, Ω⊂RN(N≥2) is an open bounded domain with smooth boundary ∂Ω, η is an unit outward normal vector. The initial value data u0 is a nonnegative bounded Radon measure on Ω. The functions ψ and g fulfill the following assumptions
{(i)ψ∈L∞(R+)∩C2(R+), ψ(0)=0, ψ′>0 in R+,(ii)ψ′,ψ″∈L∞(R+) and ψ′(s)→0ass→+∞,(iii)ψ(s)→γass→+∞,(iv)∣ψ″∣ψ′≤κinR∗+,for someκ∈R∗+, | (I) |
and
{(i)g∈L∞(R+)∩C1(R+), g′<0 in R+ and g>0 in R+,(ii)g′∈L∞(R+)andg(s)→0ass→+∞, | (A) |
where R+≡[0,+∞), R∗+≡(0,+∞) and γ∈R∗+. By ψ′ and ψ″ we denote the first and second derivatives of the function ψ. The assumption (I)-(iii) stem from (I)-(i), hence we extend the function ψ in [0,+∞] defining ψ(+∞)=γ.
The typical example of the functions ψ and g are given
ψ(s)=γ[1−e1−(1+s)m]andg(s)=e1−(1+s)m. | (1.1) |
where 0<m≤1.
The function h satisfies the following hypothesis
h∈C1(R+)∩L1(R+),h(0)=0,h′>0inR+. | (J) |
The function f is a solution of the linear inhomogeneous heat equation under Neumann boundary conditions with measure data
{ft=Δf+μ in Q:=Ω×(0,T),∂f∂η=g(f) on S:=∂Ω×(0,T),f(x,0)=u0(x) in Ω, | (H) |
where μ is a nonnegative bounded Radon measure on Q and g fulfills the assumption (A).
Throughout this paper, we consider solutions of the problem (P) as maps from (0, T) to the cone of nonnegative finite Radon measure on Ω, which satisfy (P) in the following sense: For a suitable class of test functions ξ there holds
∫T0⟨ur(⋅,t),ξt(⋅,t)⟩Ωdt+∫T0h(t)⟨f(⋅,t),ξ(⋅,t)⟩Ωdt+⟨u0,ξ(⋅,0)⟩+ |
+∫T0⟨g(ur(⋅,t)),ξ⟩∂Ωdt=∫T0⟨∇ψ(ur)(⋅,t),∇ξ(⋅,t)⟩Ωdt | (1.2) |
(see Definition 2.1). Here the measure u(⋅,t) is defined for almost every t∈(0,T), ur∈L1(Q).
The type of the problem (P) has been intensively studied by many authors for instance (see [5,18,19,20,27,28,30]) few to mention. For the general form of the problem (P), we consider the following problem studied in [18],
{ut=div(∇ϕ(x,t,u)+h(x,t,u))+F(x,t,u) in ΩT,(∇ϕ(x,t,u)+h(x,t,u))⋅η=r(x,t,u) on ∑T,u(x,0)=u0 in (∂Ω∖∑)T∪¯Ω×{0}, | (A.1) |
where ΩT=Ω×(0,T), ∑T=∑×(0,T), (∂Ω∖∑)T=(∂Ω∖∑)×(0,T) with ∑ is a relative open subset of ∂Ω, ¯∑ and ∂Ω∖∑ are C2 surface with boundary which meet in C2 manifold dimension N−2 and 0≤u0∈L∞((∂Ω∖∑)T∪¯Ω×{0}). The author in [18], proved the local existence, uniqueness and the blow-up at the finite time of the degenerate parabolic equations (A.1). Furthermore, the existence and regularity of the solutions to the quasilinear parabolic systems under nonlinear boundary conditions is discussed in detail by the studies [28,29]
{ut+A(t,u)u=F(t,u) in Ω×(s,T),β(t,u)u=r(t,u) in ∂Ω×(s,T],u(s)=u0 on Ω, | (A.2) |
where s<t≤T and u0∈Wτ,p(Ω,RN)(τ∈[0,∞)) and the definition of the operators A(t,u)u and β(t,u)u are in [28]. Similarly, studies in [19,20] showed the existence and regularity of the degenerate parabolic equations with nonlinear boundary conditions and u0∈L2(Ω) as an initial datum. Thus, we point out that the difference between the previous works (A.1), (A.2) and our work is on the following points; firstly, the initial value u0∈M+(Ω) (the nonnegative bounded Radon measure on Ω), secondly, the assumptions of the functions ψ, g given by (I) and (A). Finally, the source term f is a solution to the linear inhomogeneous heat equation under Neumann boundary conditions with measure data.
Furthermore, the study of the degenerate parabolic problem with forcing term has been intensively investigated by many authors (see [31,32,33]). In particular, [31] deals with existence solutions in the sense distributions of the nonlinear inhomogeneous porous medium type equations
ut−divA(x,t,u,Du)=μinQ:=Ω×(0,T) | (A.3) |
where μ is a nonnegative Radon measure on Q with μ(Q)<∞ and μ|RN+1∖Q=0. In last decade, some authors studied the existence, uniqueness and qualitative properties of the Radon measure-valued solutions to the nonlinear parabolic equations under zero Dirichlet or zero Neumann boundary conditions with bounded Radon measure as initial data (e.g. [1,6,7,9,10,11,12,13,15,25] and references therein). Specially, [6] discuss the existence, uniqueness and the regularity of the Radon measure-valued solutions for a class of nonlinear degenerate parabolic equations
{ut=Δθ(u) in Q,θ(u)=0 on S,u0(x,0)=u0 on Ω, | (A.4) |
where u0∈M+(Ω) and the function θ fulfills the assumptions expressed in [6]. The difference between the abovementioned studies and the problem (P) is the presence of the nonzero-Neumann boundary conditions and the source term which is a solution of the linear inhomogeneous heat equations under Neumann boundary conditions with measure data.
In general, the study of the partial differential equations through numerical methods is investigated by several authors (e.g. [47,48,49,50]). In particular, there are some authors who deal with the computation of the measure-valued solutions of the incompressible or compressible Euler equations (see [47,48]). Mostly, the authors employ the numerical experiment corresponding to initial data of the partial differential equations and prove that the resulting approximation converge to a weak solution. For instance, in [50], the authors study numerical experiment to prove that the convergence of the solution to the nonlinear degenerate parabolic equations is measure-valued. Similarly, [49] employs the numerical method to show that the resulting approximation of a non-coercive elliptic equations with measure data converges to a weak solution. Hence, the numerical experiments represent the straightforward application of the theoretical study of the type of the problem (P).
To address the large-time behavior of the Radon measure-valued solutions of the problem (P), we construct the steady-state problem as a nonlinear strongly degenerate elliptic equations given as follows
{−Δψ(U)+U=u0 in Ω,∂ψ(U)∂η=g(U) on ∂Ω, | (E) |
where u0∈M+(Ω) and the function ψ and g satisfy the hypotheses (I) and (A) respectively.
We consider solutions of the problem (E) as maps from Ω to the cone of nonnegative bounded Radon measure on Ω which satisfies (E) in the following sense: For a suitable class of test function φ, there holds
∫Ω∇ψ(Ur)∇φdx+∫ΩUφdx=∫Ωφdu0(x)+∫∂Ωg(Ur)φdH(x) |
(see Definition 2.6), where Ur∈L1(Ω) denotes the density of the absolutely continuous part of U with respect to the Lebesgue measure.
The nonlinear elliptic equations under Neumann boundary conditions with absorption term and a source term has been intensively studied by several authors [26,34,38,39,40]. In these studies, the authors dealt with the existence, uniqueness and regularity of the solutions. Furthermore, in [34], the following problem is considered
{LU+B(U)=f2 in Ω,∂U∂η+C(U)=g2 on ∂Ω, | (A.5) |
where B(U)∈L1(Ω), C(U)∈L1(∂Ω), f2∈L1(Ω), g2∈L1(∂Ω) and the expression of the differential operator L in [34, Section 2]. The authors proved the existence, uniqueness and regularity of the solutions U∈W1,1(Ω) to the problem (A.5) (see [34, Section 4, Theorem 22 and Corollary 21). The difference between the previous studies mentioned above and (A.5) is that we study the nonlinear strongly degenerate elliptic equations and the solutions obtained are Radon measure-valued. However, the existence, uniqueness, and regularity of the Radon measure-valued solutions of the quasilinear degenerate elliptic equations under zero Dirichlet boundary conditions are discussed in detail [13] by considering the following problem
{−div(A(x,U)∇U)+U(x)=¯μ in Ω,U(x)=0 on ∂Ω, | (A.6) |
where ¯μ∈M(Ω) and A(x,U) satisfies the hypothesis in [13]. In this case, the difference between the problem (E) and (A.4) is a boundary conditions with the assumptions on ψ.
In this paper, we study a class of nonlinear parabolic problems involving a forcing term and initial data is a nonnegative Radon measure. In the recent years, there are different papers that investigate these kind of problems in the setting in which the solution is a Radon measure for positive time. This type of study was done for parabolic and hyperbolic equations. One of the main tool is to search a solution by an approximation of the initial data and then try to pass to the limit in a very weak topology. The innovative part of this work is mainly the study of the large time behavior of the solutions. In my opinion, it is essential to highlight that the explicit examples of equations study in this work have not already been dealt with in literature and the novelties of the techniques that they introduced in the work. Finally, the study of the asymptotic behavior is a novelty.
The main difficulty to study the problem (P) is due to the presence of the forcing term which depends on the property solutions of the inhomogeneous heat equation (H).
The main motivation of this study comes from the desire to deal with parabolic equations in which the forcing term can be either Radon measure or Lp(Q)(1≤p<∞) functions. Whence, the idea to consider the linear inhomogeneous heat equation solution with measure data as a forcing term.
To deal with the existence and the uniqueness of the weak solutions to the problem (P), we use the definition of the Radon measure-valued solutions of the parabolic equations and the natural approximation method. In particular, to show the uniqueness of the problem (P), we will distinguish two cases for the forcing term f, either the function is in L2((0,T),H1(Ω)) or the Radon measure on Q. Notice that when the linear inhomogeneous heat equation (H) does not admit an unique solution, the problem (P) has no unique solution as well.
Furthermore, we prove the necessary and sufficient condition between measure data and capacity in order to deal with the existence of the weak solutions to the problem (P).
To establish the decay estimates of the Radon measure-valued solutions to the problem (P), we construct the suitable function and we use it as a test function in the approximation of the problem (P). Then we easily infer the decay estimates after the use of some measure properties.
To address the large-time behavior of the Radon measure-valued solutions of the problem (P), we first show that the problem (E) has a Radon measure-valued solutions in Ω.
To the best of our knowledge no existing result of decay estimates and large-time behavior of Radon measure-valued solutions obtained as limit of the approximation of the problem (P) are known in the literature. Hence, this interesting case will be discussed in this paper. This paper is organized as follows: In the next section, we state the main results, while in Section 3, we present important preliminaries. In Section 4, we study the existence and uniqueness of the heat equation (H). Finally, we prove the main results in the Sections 5-8.
To study the weak solution of the problem (P), we refer to the following definition.
Definition 2.1. For any u0∈M+(Ω) and μ∈M+(Q), a measure u is called a weak solution of problem (P), if u∈M+(Q) such that
(i) u∈L∞((0,T),M+(Ω)),
(ii) ψ(ur)∈L2((0,T),H1(Ω)),
(iii) g(ur)∈L1(S),
(iv) for every ξ∈C1((0,T),C1(Ω)), ξ(⋅,T)=0 in Ω, u satisfies the identity
∫T0⟨u(⋅,t),ξt(⋅,t)⟩Ωdt+∫T0h(t)⟨f(⋅,t),ξ(⋅,t)⟩Ωdt+⟨u0,ξ(⋅,0)⟩Ω+ |
+∫T0⟨g(ur(⋅,t)),ξ⟩∂Ωdt=∫T0⟨∇ψ(ur),∇ξ⟩Ωdxdt | (2.1) |
where ur is the nonnegative density of the absolutely continuous part of Radon-measure with respect to the Lebesgue measure such that ur∈L∞((0,T),L1(Ω)) and the function f is the solution of the problem (H).
Throughout this paper, we assume that Ω is a strong C1,1 open subset of RN. Also, we assume that there exists a finite open cover (Bj) such that the set Ω∩Bj epigraph of a C1,1 function ζ:RN−1→R that is
Ω∩Bj={x∈Bj/xN>ζ(¯x)}and∂Ω∩Bj={x∈Bj/xN=ζ(¯x)} |
where x=(¯x,xN), the local coordinates with ¯x=(x1,x2,…,xN−1). We denote ϑ={¯x,x∈Ω∩Bj}⊆RN−1, the projection of Ω∩Bj onto the (N−1) first components, and ϑς={¯x,x∈supp(ς)∩Ω}.
If a function ϕ is defined on S, we denote ϕS the function defined on (Bj∩Q)×[0,T] by ξS(x,t)=ξ(¯x,ζ(¯x),t). Notice that the restriction of ξS to [0,T)×ϑ.
The next definition of the trace is corresponding to the problem (P) adapts to the context of [36, Theorem 2.1].
Definition 2.2 Let F∈[L2(Q)]N+1 be such that divF is a bounded Radon measure on Q. Then there exists a linear functional Tη on W12,2(S)∩C(S) which represents the normal traces F⋅ν on S in the sense that the following Gauss-green formula holds:
(i) For all ξ∈C∞c(¯Q),
⟨Tν,ξ⟩=∫QξdivF+∫Q∇ξ⋅F |
where ⟨Tν,ξ⟩ depends only on ξS.
(ii) If (Bj,ς,f) is an above subsequence localization near boundary, then for all ξ∈C∞c([0,T)ׯΩ) there holds
⟨Tν,ξ⟩=−lims→01s{∫Ts∫ϑ∫ζ(¯x)+sζ(¯x)F⋅(−∇ζ(¯x)10)ξσdxNd¯xdt}−lims→01s∫s0∫ΩF⋅(001)ξσdxdt | (2.2) |
where the divergence of the fields,
F(x,t)=(u(x,t)∇ψ(ur(x,t))) |
is a bounded Radon measure on Q.
The following result states the existence of the trace of the boundary condition to the problem (P).
Lemma 2.1 Let Ω is a strong C1,1 open subset of RN. Then there exists an unique trace Tη:W1,1(Ω)→L1(∂Ω) such that
⟨Tη,ξ⟩=∫Sg(ur)ξdH(x)dt | (2.3) |
where the function g(ur)∈L1(S) and ξ∈C∞c([0,T)ׯΩ).
To prove the uniqueness of the solution to the problem (P), we define the notion very weak solution of the problem (P) as follows.
Definition 2.3. For any μ∈M+(Q) and u0∈M+d,2(Ω), a measure u is called a very weak solution to problem (P) if u∈L∞((0,T),M+(Ω)) such that
∫T0⟨u(⋅,t),ξt(⋅,t)⟩Ωdt+∫Qψ(ur)Δξdxdt+∫Qh(t)f(x,t)ξdxdt+∫Sg(u)ξdHdt+⟨u0,ξ(0)⟩Ω=0 | (2.4) |
for every ξ∈C2,1(¯Q), which vanishes on ∂Ω×[0,T], for t=T.
To prove the uniqueness of the problem (P) when f lies in M+(Q), we consider the following every weak solution gives below:
Definition 2.4 Let u0∈M+d,2(Ω) and μ∈M+(Q) such that
u0=f0−divG0,f0∈L1(Ω)andG0∈[L2(Ω)]N. |
A function u is called a very weak solutions obtained as limit of approximation, if
un∗⇀uinM+(Q) | (2.5) |
where {un}⊆L∞(Q)∩L2((0,T),H1(Ω)) is the sequences of weak solutions to problem (Pn) satisfies
{u0n=f0n−F0n∈C∞c(Ω),F0n→divG0in(H1(Ω))∗,f0n→f0inL1(Ω). | (2.6) |
We denote (H1(Ω))∗ the dual space of H1(Ω) and the embedding H1(Ω)⊂L2(Ω)⊂(H1(Ω))∗ holds.
Definition 2.5 Let u0∈M+d,2(Ω) and μ∈M+d,2(Q) such that
u0=f0−divG0,f0∈L1(Ω)andG0∈[L2(Ω)]N. |
μ=f1−divG+φt,f1∈L1(Q),G∈[L2(Q)]Nandφ∈L2((0,T),H1(Ω)). |
A measure f is called a very weak solutions obtained as limit of approximation, if
fn∗⇀finM+(Q) | (2.7) |
where {un} and {fn}⊆L∞(Q)∩L2((0,T),H1(Ω)) are the sequences of weak solutions to problem (Pn) and (Hn) respectively satisfy
{μn=f1n−Fn+gnt∈C∞c(Q),u0n=f0n−F0n∈C∞c(Ω),f1n→f1inL1(Q),Fn→divGinL2((0,T),(H1(Ω))∗),φn→φinL2((0,T),H1(Ω)),F0n→divG0in(H1(Ω))∗,f0n→f0inL1(Ω). | (2.8) |
Then, the function u is very weak solutions of the problem (P) obtained as limit of approximation if the function f is a very weak solutions of the problem (H) obtained as limit of approximation.
Notice that
un∗⇀uinM+(Q),μn∗⇀μinM+(Q)andu0n∗⇀u0inM+(Ω). |
M+d,2(Ω) denotes the set of nonnegative measures on Ω which are diffuse with respect to the Newtonian capacity and the definition of the diffuse measure with respect to the parabolic capacity M+d,2(Q) will be recalled in the Section 3.
Before dealing with the existence of the problem (P), we first prove the existence and uniqueness of the solutions to the problem (H) given by the following result.
Theorem 2.1. Assume that u0∈M+(Ω) and μ∈M+(Q) hold.
(i) Then, there exists a nonnegative Radon measure-valued solution to the problem (H) in the space L∞((0,T),M+(Ω)) such that
f(x,t)=∫ΩGN(x−y,t)du0(y)+∫t0∫ΩGN(x−y,t−σ)dμ(y,σ)+∫t0∫∂ΩGN(x−y,t−σ)g(f(y,σ))dH(y)dσ | (2.9) |
for almost every t∈(0,T). Furthermore, the Radon measure-valued solution f satisfies the following estimate
∥f(⋅,t)∥M+(Ω)≤eCt(∥μ∥M+(Q)+∥u0∥M+(Ω)) | (2.10) |
for any C=C(T) a positive constant.
(ii) Suppose that u0∈M+d,2(Ω), μ∈M+d,2(Q) and g(f)=¯K almost everywhere on S (¯K is a positive constant) are satisfied. Then, the nonnegative weak Radon measure-valued solution to the problem (H) obtained as limit of the approximation is unique in L∞((0,T),M+(Ω)).
We denote by GN(x−y,t−s) as the Green function of the heat equation under homogeneous Neumann boundary conditions. By [4], the Green function satisfies the following properties
GN(x−y,t−s)≥0,x,y∈Ω,0≤s<t<T, | (2.11) |
∫ΩGN(x−y,t−s)dx=1,y∈Ω,0≤s<t<T. | (2.12) |
There exist two positive constants τ1 and τ2 such that
|GN(x−y,t−s)−1∣Ω∣|≤τ1e−τ2(t−s),x,y∈Ω,1+s<t. | (2.13) |
limt→s∫ΩGN(x−y,t−s)ϕ(y)dy=ϕ(x) | (2.14) |
for any ϕ∈Cc(Ω) and ∣Ω∣ is a Lebesgue measure of the set Ω.
Remark 2.1 (i) For any test function ξ∈C1((0,T),C1(Ω)) such that ξ(⋅,T)=0 in Ω and ∂ξ∂η=0 on S, the inner product ⟨f(⋅,t),ξ(⋅,t)⟩Ω in (2.1) is given by the following expression
⟨f(⋅,t),ξ(⋅,t)⟩Ω=∫Ω∫ΩG(x−y,t)ξ(y,0)du0(y)dx+ |
+∫Ω∫t0∫ΩGN(x−y,t−σ)(fξσ−2∇f∇ξ−fΔξ)dydσdx+ |
+∫Ω∫t0∫ΩGN(x−y,t−σ)ξ(y,σ)dμ(y,σ)dx+ |
+∫Ω∫t0∫∂ΩGN(x−y,t−σ)ξ(y,σ)g(f(y,σ))dH(y)dσdx | (2.15) |
where ξσ is a first derivative order of ξ with respect σ.
(ii) By the regularity properties of the Green function GN(x−y,t−σ) in [42], the solution of the problem (H) given by (2.9), f∈L2((0,T),H1(Ω)).
(iii) By virtue of the assumptions (J), (2.11) and (2.12), the term h(t)f(x,t) is well-defined at t=0. Indeed, the function t↦∫ΩGN(x−y,t−σ)h(σ)dμ(y,σ), t↦∫∂ΩGN(x−y,t−σ)h(σ)g(f(y,σ))dH(y) and t↦∫ΩGN(x−y,t−σ)f(y,σ)h′(σ)dy are continuous in R+. Then there holds
limt→0+h(t)f(x,t)=limt→0+∫t0∫ΩGN(x−y,t−σ)f(y,σ)h′(σ)dydσ+ |
+limt→0+∫t0∫∂ΩGN(x−y,t−σ)h(σ)g(f)dH(y)dσ+limt→0+∫t0∫ΩGN(x−y,t−σ)h(σ)dμ(y,σ)=0. |
Hence we extend the function h(t)f(x,t) in [0, T] defining h(0)f(x,0)=0. Furthermore, the presence of the function h is to well-defined the forcing term of the nonlinear parabolic problem (P).
In order to study the existence and uniqueness of the solutions to the problem (P), we give the necessary and sufficient condition on the measures μ and u0 for the existence of the weak solutions to the problem (P) with respect to the parabolic and Newtonian capacity respectively. This result is given by the following theorem.
Theorem 2.2. Suppose that the hypotheses (I), (A), μ∈M+(Q) and u0∈M+(Ω) hold. For any function h satisfying (J), there exists t∈(0,T) such that ∫t0h(σ)dσ=1 and u is a weak solution to the problem (P). Then μ and u0 are absolutely continuous measures with respect to the parabolic capacity.
Notice that Newtonian and parabolic capacity are equivalent, then μ and u0 are absolutely continuous measures with respect to C2-capacity as well.
In the next theorem, we present the result of the existence Radon measure-valued solutions to the problem (P).
Theorem 2.3 Suppose that the assumptions (I), (J), (A) μ∈M+(Q) and u0∈M+(Ω) are satisfied. Then there exists a weak solution u to problem (P) obtained as a limiting point of the sequence {un} of solutions to problems (Pn) such that for every t∈(0,T)∖H∗, there holds
∥u(⋅,t)∥M+(Ω)≤C(∥μ∥M+(Q)+∥u0∥M+(Ω)). | (2.16) |
The result of the uniqueness of the problem (P) is given by the following theorem:
Theorem 2.4 Assume that the hypotheses (I), (J) and (A), μ∈M+d,2(Q) and u0∈M+d,2(Ω) hold. Then there exists a unique very weak solution obtained as the limit of approximation u of the problem (P), if g(ur)=L almost everywhere in S, whenever L is a positive constant.
To establish the decay estimate of the solution to the problem (P), we recall two particular problems of the problem (P). Now we consider the following problem.
{vt=Δϑ(v) in Q,∂ϑ(v)∂η=g1(v) on S,v(x,0)=u0 in Ω, | (P0) |
The functions ψ and g satisfy the assumption (I) and (A) respectively and have the same properties with the functions ϑ and g1 given as follows
ϑ(s)=γ[1−1(1+s)m](m>0)andg1(s)=1(1+s)m | (2.17) |
where m>0 and s>0. Therefore, by Theorem 2.3, the problem (P0) possesses a solution in the space L∞((0,T),M+(Ω)), such that
∥v(⋅,t)∥M+(Ω)≤C∥u0∥M+(Ω) |
for almost every t∈(0,T).
Similarly, we consider the following problem
{wt=Δψ(w)+h(t)f(x,t) in Q,∂ψ(w)∂η=g(w) on S,w(x,0)=0 in Ω, | (P1) |
By Theorem 2.3, the problem (P1) admits a solution in L∞((0,T),M+(Ω)), such that
∥w(⋅,t)∥M+(Ω)≤C∥μ∥M+(Ω) |
for almost every t∈(0,T).
Now we state the decay estimates in the next theorem:
Theorem 2.5 Suppose that (I), (J), (A), μ∈M+(Q) and u0∈M+(Ω) are satisfied. The measure u is the weak solution to the problem (P). According to Theorem 2.3, v is the weak solution to the problem (P0) and w is the weak solution to the problem (P1). Then for every t∈(0,T)∖H∗ with ∣H∗∣=0, there holds
∥u(⋅,t)−v(⋅,t)∥M+(Ω)≤C(T−t)α(∥μ∥M+(Q)+∥u0∥M+(Ω)), | (2.18) |
∥u(⋅,t)−w(⋅,t)∥M+(Ω)≤C∥u0∥M+(Ω)(T−t)α, | (2.19) |
and
∥u(⋅,t)∥M+(Ω)≤Ctα(∥u0∥M+(Ω)+∥μ∥M+(Q)) | (2.20) |
for any positive constant C and α>1.
To deal with the large-time behavior of the Radon measure-valued solutions to the problem (P), we first extend (0,T) to (0,+∞), then we assume that the hypothesis
lim supt→+∞∥u(⋅,t)∥M+(Ω)≤C | (2.21) |
where C is a positive constant.
To analyze the large-time behavior of the Radon measure-valued solutions, we first study the existence of the Radon measure-valued solutions corresponding to the steady state problem (E) by considering the following definition.
Definition 2.6 Assume that the hypotheses (I), (A) and u0∈M+(Ω) are satisfied. A measure U is a solution of the problem (E), if U∈M+(Ω) such that
(i) ψ(Ur)∈W1,1(Ω),
(ii) g(Ur)∈L1(∂Ω),
(iii) for every φ∈C1(Ω), the following assertion
∫Ω∇ψ(Ur(x))∇φ(x)dx+∫ΩU(x)φ(x)dx=∫Ωφ(x)du0(x)+∫∂Ωg(U(x))φ(x)dH(x) | (2.22) |
holds true.
The existence result of the problem (E) is given by the following theorem:
Theorem 2.6 Suppose that the hypotheses (I), (A) and u0∈M+(Ω) are satisfied. Then there exists a weak solution U∈M+(Ω) of the problem (E) obtained as a limiting point of the sequence {Un} of solutions to the approximation problem (En) such that
∥U∥M+(Ω)≤C∥u0∥M+(Ω) | (2.23) |
where C>0 is a constant.
The result of the large-time behavior of the Radon measure-valued solutions of the problem (P) is given by the following theorem
Theorem 2.7. Suppose that the assumption (I), (A), (J), u0∈M+(Ω) and μ∈M+(Q). U is a Radon measure-valued solutions of the steady-state problem (E) in sense of Theorem 2.6 and u is a Radon measure-valued solutions in the sense of Theorem 2.3 such that (2.21) holds. Then there holds
u(⋅,t)→UinM+(Ω)ast→∞ | (2.24) |
In the following section, we define the truncation function for k>0 and s∈R,
Tk(s)=min{∣s∣,k}sign(s). |
To prove the main results from the previous section, we need to recall the preliminaries about capacity and measure collected in [9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16]. Likewise, we recall some important notations as follows:
For any Borel set E⊂Ω, the C2-capacity of E in Ω is defined as
C2(E)=inf{∫Ω(∣u∣2+∣∇u∣2)dx/u∈ZEΩ} |
where ZEΩ denotes the set of u which belongs to H1(Ω) such that 0≤u≤1 almost everywhere in Ω, and u=1 almost everywhere in a neighborhood E.
Let W={u∈L2((0,T),H1(Ω))andut∈L2((0,T),(H1(Ω))∗)} endowed with its natural norm ∥u∥W=∥u∥L2((0,T),H1(Ω))+∥ut∥L2((0,T),(H1(Ω))∗) a Banach space. For any open set U⊂Q, we define the parabolic capacity as
Cap(U)=inf{∥u∥W/u∈VUQ} |
where VUQ denotes the set of u belongs to W such that 0≤u≤1 almost everywhere in Q, and u=1 almost everywhere in a neighborhood U.
Let M(B) be the space of bounded Radon measures on B, and M+(B)⊂M(B) the cone of nonnegative bounded Radon measures on B. For any μ∈M(B) a bounded Radon measure on B, we set
∥μ∥M(Ω):=∣μ∣(B) |
where ∣μ∣ stands for the total variation of μ.
The duality map ⟨⋅,⋅⟩B between the space M(B) and Cc(B) is defined by
⟨μ,φ⟩B=∫Bφdμ. |
M+s(B) denotes the set of nonnegative measures singular with respect to the Lebesgue measure, namely
M+s(B):={μ∈M+(Ω)/∃ a Borel setF⊆Bsuch that∣F∣=0,μ=μ⌞B} |
we will consider either ∣.∣ the Lebesgue measure on RN or RN+1. Similarly, M+ac(B) the set of nonnegative measures absolutely continuous with respect to the Lebesgue measure, namely
M+ac(B):={μ∈M+(Ω)/μ(F)=0, for every Borel setF⊆Bsuch that∣F∣=0} |
Let M+c,2(B) be the set of nonnegative measures on B which are concentrated with respect to the Newtonian capacity
M+c,2(B):={μ∈M+(B)/∃ a Borel setF⊆B,such thatμ=μ⌞FandC(F)=0} |
M+d,2(B) denotes the set of nonnegative measures on B which are diffuse with respect to the Newtonian capacity
M+d,2(B):={μ∈M+(B)/μ(F)=0, for every Borel setF⊆Bsuch thatC(F)=0}. |
It is known that a measure ¯μd,2∈M+d,2(Ω) (resp. μd,2∈M+d,2(Q)) if there exist f0∈L1(Ω) and G0∈[L2(B)]N (resp. if μd,2∈M+d,2(Q), there exist f∈L1(Q), g∈L2((0,T),H1(Ω)) and G∈[L2(Q)]N) such that
¯μd,2=f0−divG0inD′(Ω)(resp.μd,2=f−divG+gtinD′(Q)). | (3.1) |
For any λ∈M+(B), if there exists a unique couple λd,2∈M+d,2(B), λc,2∈M+c,2(B) such that
λ=λd,2+λc,2. | (3.2) |
On the other hand, there exists a unique couple λac∈M+ac(B),λs∈M+s(B) such that
λ=λac+λs | (3.3) |
where either B=Ω, C(F)=C2(E) or B=Q, C(F)=Cap(U).
By L∞((0,T),M+(Ω)), the set of nonnegative Radon measures u∈M+(¯Q) such that for every t∈(0,T), there exists a measure u(⋅,t)∈M+(Ω) such that
(i) for every ξ∈C(¯Q) the map
t↦⟨u(⋅,t),ξ(⋅,t)⟩Ωis Lebesgue measurable |
and
⟨u(⋅,t),ξ(⋅,t)⟩Ω=∫T0⟨u(⋅,t),ξ(⋅,t)⟩Ωdt |
(ii) there exists a constant C>0 such that
esssupt∈(0,T)∥u(⋅,t)∥M+(Ω)≤C |
with the norm denotes
∥u∥L∞((0,T),M+(Ω))=esssupt∈(0,T)∥u(⋅,t)∥M+(Ω). | (3.4) |
In the literature, many authors dealt with the existence, uniqueness, blow-up at finite and infinite time, decay estimates, stability properties and asymptotic behavior of the solutions to the heat equation under Neumann boundary conditions with a source term and initial data, such as (see [2,3,4,5,42,43] and references therein). Moreover, most of the authors employed the maximum principle theorem through the monotonicity technique and semi-group method to show the existence, blow-up, stability properties and asymptotic behavior of these solutions. Meanwhile, in this section we prove the existence and uniqueness of the linear inhomogeneous heat equation (H) by using the fundamental solution of the heat equation (see [2,3,4,42]). Also, we use the definition of the Radon measure-valued solutions in [9] and some properties of the Radon measure provided in [24,44]. Moreover, we consider for every n∈N, the approximation of problem (H) such that
{fnt=Δfn+μn in Q,∂fn∂η=g(fn) on S,fn(x,0)=u0n(x) in Ω, | (Hn) |
Since u0∈M+(Ω), the approximation of the Radon measure u0 is given by [9, Lemma 4.1] such that {u0n}⊆C∞c(Ω) satisfies the following assumptions
{u0n∗⇀u0inM+Ω),u0n→u0ra.e inΩ,∥u0n∥L1(Ω)≤∥u0∥M+(Ω). | (4.1) |
Moreover μ∈M+(Q), the approximation of the Radon measure μ is given by [15] such that {μn}⊆C∞c(Q) fulfills the following hypotheses
{μn∗⇀μinM+(Q),μn→μra.e inQ,∥μn∥L1(Q)≤∥μ∥M+(Q), | (4.2) |
for every n∈N. By [21,22,43], the approximation problem (Hn) has a unique solution fn in C1((0,T),L2(Ω))∩L2((0,T),H1(Ω))∩L∞(Q).
In the next proposition, we establish the relationship between the approximation solution fn and any test function in (Pn).
Proposition 4.1. Suppose that ξ∈C1c(Q) such that ∂ξ∂η=0 on S, the test function in (Hn) and fn the approximation solution of the problem (Hn). Then, the following expression holds
fn(x,t)ξ(x,t)=∫ΩGN(x−y,t)ξ(y,0)u0n(y)dy+∫t0∫ΩGN(x−y,t−σ){fnξσ−2∇fn∇ξ−fnΔξ}dydσ+ |
+∫t0∫ΩGN(x−y,t−σ)ξ(y,σ)μn(y,σ)dydσ+∫t0∫∂ΩGN(x−y,t−σ)ξ(y,σ)g(f(y,σ))dH(y)dσ | (4.3) |
where ξσ is first-order derivative order of ξ with respect to σ.
Remark 4.2. Assume that the test function ξ=ρ∈C2c(Ω), then we obtain
fn(x,t)ρ(x)=∫ΩGN(x−y,t)ρ(y)u0n(y)dy−∫t0∫ΩGN(x−y,t−σ){2∇fn∇ρ+fnΔρ}dydσ+ |
+∫t0∫ΩGN(x−y,t−σ)ρ(y)μn(y,σ)dydσ+∫t0∫ΩGN(x−y,t−σ)ρ(y)g(f(y,σ))dH(y)dσ. | (4.4) |
On the other hand, we suppose that the test function ξ=θ(t)∈C1(0,T) then (4.3) reads
fn(x,t)θ(t)=∫ΩGN(x−y,t)θ(0)u0n(y)dy+∫t0∫ΩGN(x−y,t−σ)fn(y,σ)θ′(σ)dydσ+ |
+∫t0∫ΩGN(x−y,t−σ)θ(σ)μn(y,σ)dydσ+∫t0∫ΩGN(x−y,t−σ)θ(σ)g(f(y,σ))dH(y)dσ. | (4.5) |
Proof of Proposition 4.1. Assume that ξ∈C1((0,T),C2c(Ω)) such that ∂ξ∂η=0 on S, a test function in (Hn), then the following equation
{(fnξ)t=Δ(fnξ)+fnξt−2∇fn∇ξ−fnΔξ+μnξ in Ω×(0,T),∂(fnξ)∂η=g(fn)ξ on ∂Ω×(0,T),fn(x,0)ξ(x,0)=u0nξ(x,0) in Ω, | (Hξ) |
is well-defined. By [35, Chapter 20, Section 20.2], the problem (Hξ) admits a unique solution fnξ expressed in (4.3).
Proof of Theorem 2.1 (i) We argue this proof into two steps:
Step 1. We show that {fn(⋅,t)} is a Cauchy sequence in L1(Ω) a.e in (0,T). To attain this, we use the expression (4.3) to prove the Cauchy sequence. Indeed, for any m,n∈N there holds
fn(x,t)−fm(x,t)=∫ΩGN(x−y,t)[u0n(y)−u0m(y)]dy+ |
+∫t0∫ΩGN(x−ξ,t−σ)[μn(ξ,σ)−μm(y,σ))]dyds+ |
+∫t0∫∂ΩGN(x−y,t−σ)[g(fn(ξ,σ))−g(fm(ξ,s))]dH(y)ds. | (4.6) |
From the assumption (2.12), the Eq (4.6) yields
∫Ω∣fn(x,t)−fm(x,t)∣dx≤∫Ω∣u0n(y)−u0m(y)∣dy+∫t0∫Ω∣μn(y)−μm(y)∣dydσ |
+∫t0∫∂ΩGN(x−ξ,t−s)dH(ξ)(∫Ω∣g(fn(x,s))−g(fm(x,s))∣dx)ds. | (4.7) |
Furthermore, by using the mean value theorem, we find that there exists a function θ(x,s) which is continuous in ¯QT1 such that α1<θ(x,s)<α2, g(fn(x,s))−g(fm(x,s))=g′(θ(x,s))(fn(x,s)−fm(x,s)), where g′(θ(x,s))∈L∞(R+)(see assumption (I)-(i)) and 0<α1<α2 are constants, therefore we obtain
∫Ω∣fn(x,t)−fm(x,t)∣dx≤∫Ω∣u0n(y)−u0m(y)∣dy+∫T0∫Ω∣μn(y)−μm(y)∣dy+ |
+C(T1)∫t0∫Ω∣fn(x,σ)−fm(x,σ)∣dxdσ, | (4.8) |
whenever C(T1)=sup(ξ,σ)∈¯QT1∫∂ΩGN(x−ξ,T1)g′(θ(x,s))dH(ξ)>0. By the property (2.13) of the Green function GN(x−ξ,t−σ) of the heat equation with nonhomogeneous Neumann boundary and the fact that g′(θ(x,s))∈L∞(R+), then C(T1) is a constant depending on T1. From the Gronwall's inquality, the inequality (4.8) yields
∫Ω∣fn(x,t)−fm(x,t)∣dx≤C(T,T1)∫Ω∣u0n(y)−u0m(y)∣dy+ |
+C(T,T1)∫Ω∣μn(y,σ)−μm(y,σ)∣dydσ | (4.9) |
for a.e 0≤t<T1<T and C(T,T1)=1+C(T1)TeC(T1)T>0 a constant.
Since the sequences {u0n} and {u0m} are satisfying the assumption (4.1) and {μn} and {μm} are verifying the assumption (4.2), then by passing to the limit as n and m go to infinity, there holds
limn,m→+∞∫Ω∣fn(x,t)−fm(x,t)∣dx≤C(T,T1)lim supn→+∞∫Ω∣u0n(y)−u0r(y)∣dy+ |
+C(T,T1)lim supm→+∞∫Ω∣u0m(y)−u0r(y)∣dy+ |
+C(T,T1)lim supn→+∞∫Ω∣μn(y,σ)−μr(y,σ)∣dydσ+ |
+C(T,T1)lim supm→+∞∫Ω∣μm(y,σ)−μr(y,σ)∣dydσ≤0. | (4.10) |
Hence the sequence {fn(⋅,t)} is Cauchy in L1(Ω) for almost every t∈(0,T).
Step 2. We show that fn(⋅,t)∗⇀f(⋅,t) in M+(Ω) a.e in (0,T).
Since the function fn(x,t) is a solution of the approximation problem (Hn) and μn(x)≥0 in Q, u0n(x)≥0 in Ω, g>0 in R+, then we apply the maximum principal theorem in [22,43] and then the solution of the approximation problem (Hn) is nonnegative in ¯Q. Likewise, we assume that ξ(x,t)≡1, then we obtain
fn(x,t)=∫ΩGN(x−y,t−σ)u0n(y)dy+∫t0∫ΩGN(x−y,t−σ)μn(y,σ)dydσ+ |
+∫t0∫∂ΩGN(x−y,t−σ)g(f(y,σ))dH(y)dσ. | (4.11) |
By the assumptions (A), (2.12), (2.13), (4.1) and (4.2), we infer that
∫Ωfn(x,t)dx≤∥u0∥M+(Ω)+∥μ∥M+(Q)+C∫t0∫Ωfn(x,σ)dxdσ. | (4.12) |
By Gronwall's inequality, we deduce that
∥fn(⋅,t)∥L1(Ω)≤eCt(∥u0∥M+(Ω)+∥μ∥M+(Q)), | (4.13) |
for almost every t∈(0,T).
By Step 1, the sequence {fn(⋅,t)} is Cauchy in L1(Ω), then we infer that fn(⋅,t)→f(⋅,t) a.e in (0,T). Hereby we argue as in [9, Proposition 5.3], one proves that f(⋅,t)∈M+(Ω) and the following convergence
fn(⋅,t)∗⇀f(⋅,t)inM+(Ω) | (4.14) |
for almost every t∈(0,T) holds.
From [44, Chapter 5, Section 5.2.1, Theorem 1], the estimate (4.13) yields
∥f(⋅,t)∥M+(Ω)≤lim infn→+∞∫Ωfn(⋅,t)dx≤eCt(∥u0∥M+(Ω)+∥μ∥M+(Q)). |
The estimate (2.10) is achieved.
(ii) Now we show the uniqueness solutions to the problem (H).
To attain this, we consider f1 and f2 two every weak solutions of the problem (H) in sense of Definition 2.5 with initial data u01 and u02 respectively.
Let {f1n},{f2n}⊆L∞(Q)∩L2((0,T),H1(Ω)) be two weak solutions given by the proof (i) of Theorem 2.1. Assume that {u01n},{u02n}{μ1n},{μ2n} are approximating Radon measures in sense of Definition 2.4 and f1n, f2n in (4.11) hold. Since we have assumed that g(f)=¯K almost everywhere in S, thus g(f1n)=g(f2n)=¯K on S. For any ξ∈C1c(Q) such that ∂ξ∂η=0 on S, there holds
∫T0[f1n(y,t)−f2n(y,t)]ξ(y,t)dt=∫Q[f1n(x,t)−f2n(x,t)]δy(x)ξ(x,t)dxdt |
=∫T0∫ΩGN(0,t)(u01n(y)−u02n(y))ξ(y,t)dydt+ |
+∫T0∫t0∫ΩGN(0,t−σ)(μ1n(y,σ)−μ2n(y,σ))ξ(y,t)dydσ=:I1+I2. | (4.15) |
Let us evaluate the limit of I1 and I2 when n→∞. To attain this, we begin with the expression I1:
I1=[∫Ω(u01n(y)−u01n(y))ξ(y,t)dy][∫T0GN(0,t)dt]. |
Taking ξ(y,t)=ρ(y)˜h(t) with ρ∈C2(Ω) such that ∂ρ∂η=0 on ∂Ω and ˜h∈Cc(0,T), then we have
I1=∫T0˜h(t)GN(0,t)dt∫Ω(u01n(y)−u02n(y))ρ(y)dy |
=∫T0˜h(t)G(0,t)dt[∫Ω(f01n(y)−f02n(y))ρ(y)dy−∫Ω(F01n(y)−F02n(y))ρ(y)dy]. |
Passing to the limit when n→∞, there holds
limn→∞I1=0. | (4.16) |
Now we consider the expression I2,
I2=[∫T0∫Ω(μ1n(y,t)−μ2n(y,t))ξ(y,t)dydt][∫t0G(0,t−σ)dσ]. |
According to Definition 2.4, it is worth observing that
I2=[∫t0G(0,t−σ)dσ][∫Q(f11n(y,t)−f12n(y,t))ξ(y,t)dydt]− |
−[∫t0G(0,t−σ)dσ][∫Q(F1n(y,t)−F2n(y,t))ξ(y,t)dydt]+ |
+[∫t0G(0,t−σ)dσ][∫Q(φ1n(y,t)−φ2n(y,t))ξt(y,t)dydt]+ |
+[∫t0G(0,t−σ)dσ][∫Ω(φ1n(y,0)−φ2n(y,0))ξ(y,0)dy]. |
We pass to the limit when n goes to infinity, therefore
limn→∞I2=0. | (4.17) |
By (4.16), (4.17) and Dominated Convergence theorem, we obtain
∫Q(f1(x,t)−f2(x,t))ξ(x,t)dxdt=0, | (4.18) |
which leads to
f1n∗⇀f1M+(Q)andf2n∗⇀f2M+(Q). |
Hence f1=f2 holds.
Remark 4.1 (i) Since f∈M+(Q), then it is worthy observing that fn in (4.11) is a sequence of the approximation Radon measure f satisfying the following properties
{fn∗⇀finM+(Q),fn→fa.e inQ,∥fn∥L1(Q)≤C(∥u0∥M+(Ω)+∥μ∥M+(Q)),fis given in(2.9), | (4.19) |
for every n∈N and C>0 is a constant.
(ii) By (2.11)-(2.13) and the assumption (A), we deduce from the compactness theorem in [23] the approximation problem (Hn) possesses a weak solution f in L2((0,T),H1(Ω)) such that the properties
{fn=Tn(f),fn→fa.e inQ,∣fn∣≤∣f∣, | (4.20) |
hold true.
Proof of Lemma 2.1. To prove this result, we use Definition 2.2 and we recall the Gauss-green formula given by the functional
⟨Tν,ξ⟩=∫QξdivF+∫Q∇ξ⋅F | (5.1) |
Since there exists a linear continuous functional Tν on W12,2(S)∩C(S) which stands for F⋅ν, then we define a notion of the normal trace of the flux ∇ψ(ur)⋅ν such that
⟨Tη,ξ⟩=⟨Tν,ξ⟩+∫Ωξ(x,0)du0(x)+∫Qh(t)f(x,t)ξdxdt. | (5.2) |
The definition make sense because of the definition of the weak solution when we assume that the value of the initial data
lims→01s∫s0∫Ωu(x,t)ξ(x,t)dxdt=∫Ωξ(x,0)du0 | (5.3) |
holds, for any s−tsχ(0,s)(t)ϕ as a test function in (2.1). In particular ⟨Tν,ξσ⟩ depends only on ξS and from (2.2), we infer the formula
⟨Tν,ξ⟩=−lims→01s∫Ts∫ϑ∫ζ(¯x)+sζ(¯x)∇ψ(ur)(−∇ζ(¯x)1)ξςdxNd¯xdt | (5.4) |
for any ξ∈C∞c([0,T)ׯΩ). We denote {vδ} a boundary-layer sequence of C2(Ω)∩C(¯Ω) such that
limδ→0+vδ=1a.e in Ω,0≤vδ≤1,vδ=0on∂Ω. | (5.5) |
For more properties concerning the boundary-layer sequence {vδ} (see [37, Lemma 5.5 and Lemma 5.7]). If ξ∈(H1(Ω))N, then
limδ→0+∫Ωςξ∇vδ=−limδ→0+∫Ωdiv(ςξ)vδ=−∫Ωdiv(ςξ)=−∫∂Ωςξ⋅ηdH(x) | (5.6) |
The previous statement (5.6) explains that for any function-valued F:Ω→RN, then −F⋅∇vδ approaches the normal trace F⋅η. Let ξ∈C∞c([0,T)ׯΩ) and ξ=ξ(1−vδ) on S, it implies that ⟨Tν,ξς⟩=⟨Tν,ςξ(1−vδ)⟩. By Definition 2.2 and the equation (5.2), the Gauss-Green formula yields
⟨Tη,ςξ⟩=⟨Tν,ςξ(1−vδ)⟩+∫Ωξ(x,0)ς(1−vδ)du0+∫Qh(t)f(x,t)ξ(x,t)ς(1−vδ)dxdt |
=∫Qξς(1−vδ)divF+∫Q∇(ξς(1−vδ))⋅F+∫Ωξ(x,0)ς(1−vδ)du0+ |
+∫Qh(t)f(x,t)ξ(x,t)ς(1−vδ)dxdt. |
Since 0≤vδ≤1 and vδ→1 a.e in Ω as δ→0+, then Dominated Convergence Theorem ensures that
limδ→0+∫Qξς(1−vδ)divF=0and⟨Tη,ξς⟩=−limδ→0+∫Q∇ξ(ur)∇vδξςdxdt | (5.7) |
On the other hand, we consider ξς(1−vδ) as a test function in the problem (P) then the following expression holds
−∫Ωϕ(x,0)ς(1−vδ)du0+∫Ωu(x,T)ξ(x,T)ς(1−vδ)dx−∫Qu(x,t)ξt(x,t)ς(1−vδ)dxdt |
=−∫Q∇ψ(ur)∇(ξς)(1−vδ)dxdt+∫Q∇ψ(ur)∇vδξςdxdt+∫Sg(ur)ξςdH(x)dt+. |
+∫Qh(t)f(x,t)ξ(x,t)ς(1−vδ)dxdt. |
Since 0≤vδ≤1 and vδ→1 a.e in Ω as δ→0+, then Dominated Convergence Theorem yields
∫Sg(ur)ξςdH(x)dt=−limδ→0+∫Q∇ψ(ur)∇vδξςdxdt. | (5.8) |
By combining the assertions (5.7) with (5.8), the statement (2.3) is satisfied.
Proof of Theorem 2.2. Assume that for any compact set K=K0×[0,T]⊂Ω×(0,T)⊂RN×R+ (resp. for any compact set K0⊂Ω⊂RN) such that μ−(K)=0 (resp. u−0(K0)=0) and Cap(K)=0 (resp. C2(K0)=0). To show that μ and u0 are absolutely continuous measures with respect to the parabolic capacity, it is enough to prove that μ+(K)=0 (resp. u+0(K0)=0). To this purpose Cap(K)=0 (resp. C2(K0)=0), there exists a sequence {φn(t)}⊂C∞c(RN×R+) (resp. {φn(0)}⊂C∞c(RN)) such that 0≤φn(t)≤1 in Q (resp. 0≤φn(0)≤1 in Ω), φn(t)≡1 in K (resp. φn(0)≡1 in K0) and φn(t)→0 in W as n→∞ (resp. φn(0)→0 in H1(Ω) as n→∞). In particular ∥Δφn(t)∥L1(Q)→0 as n→∞.
Let us consider the nonnegative function φn(t)∈C∞c(RN×R+) such that φn(T)=0 in Ω and ∂φn(t)∂η=0 in S as a test function in the problem (P), then there holds
∫Ωφn(0)du0+∫Quφnt(t)dxdt=−∫Qψ(ur)Δφn(t)dxdt−∫Qh(t)f(x,t)φn(t)dxdt− |
−∫Sg(ur)φn(t)dH(x)dt. | (5.9) |
By (4.3)(Probably n is large enough), the following statement holds
∫Qf(x,t)h(t)φn(t)dxdt=∫Q∫t0∫ΩGN(x−y,t−σ)f(y,σ)(h(σ)φn(σ))σdydσdxdt |
−∫Q∫t0∫ΩGN(x−y,t−σ)[2∇f∇(h(σ)φn(σ))+fΔ(h(σ)φn(σ))]dydσdxdt+ |
+∫Q∫t0∫ΩGN(x−y,t−σ)h(σ)φn(σ)dμ(y,σ)dxdt+ |
+∫Q∫t0∫∂ΩGN(x−y,t−σ)h(σ)φn(σ)g(f(y,σ))dH(y)dσdxdt. | (5.10) |
Combining the Eq (5.9) with (5.10), we obtain
∫Q∫Ω∫t0GN(x−y,t−σ)h(σ)φn(σ)dμ(y,σ)dxdt+∫Ωφn(0)du0= |
=∫Q∫t0∫Ωh(σ)GN(x−y,t−σ)[2∇f∇φn(σ)+fΔφn(σ)]dydσdxdt− |
−∫Q∫t0∫ΩGN(x−y,t−σ)f(y,σ)(h(σ)φn(σ))σdydσdxdt− |
−∫Q∫t0∫∂ΩGN(x−y,t−σ)h(σ)φn(σ)g(f(y,σ))dH(y)dσdxdt− |
−∫Sφn(t)g(ur)dH(x)dt−∫Qψ(ur)Δφn(t)dxdt−∫Quφnt(t)dxdt. | (5.11) |
By (2.14), f∈L2((0,T),H1(Ω)) (see Remark 4.1-(ii)) and letting σ→t, ∫t0h(σ)dσ=1 and dropping down the nonnegative terms on the left hand-side of the previous equation. Therefore (5.11) yields
∫Qφn(t)dμ(x,t)+∫Ωφn(0)du0(x)≤∥u∥L2((0,T),H1(Ω))∥φn(t)∥W+ |
C(γ)∫Q∣Δφn(t)∣dxdt+∥f∥L2((0,T),H1(Ω))∥φn(t)∥W. | (5.12) |
Since the following assertions are valid, then
μ+(K)≤∫Qφn(t)dμ(x,t)+∫Qφn(t)dμ−(x,t) | (5.13) |
where μ+(K)=μ(K)+μ−(K) and
u+0(K0)≤∫Ωφn(0)du0(x)+∫Ωφn(0)du−0(x) | (5.14) |
with u+0(K0)=u0(K0)+u−0(K0). In view of (5.13) and (5.14), the inequality (5.12) reads as
μ+(K)+u+0(K0)≤∥u∥L2((0,T),H1(Ω))∥φn(t)∥W+C(γ)∫Q∣Δφn(t)∣dxdt+ |
+∥f∥L2((0,T),H1(Ω))∥φn(t)∥W+∫Qφn(t)dμ−(x,t)+∫Ωφn(0)du−0(x). | (5.15) |
Since μ−(K)=0 (resp. u−0(K0)=0), then for any ϵ>0 one has
∫Qφn(t)dμ−(x,t)<ϵ2(resp.∫Ωφn(0)du−0(x)<ϵ2). | (5.16) |
Then, the limit in (5.16) as n→∞, the following holds μ+(K)+u+0(K0)≤ϵ. Therefore, μ+(K)=0 for any compact set K⊂Q (resp. u+0(K0)=0 for any compact set K0⊂Ω).
To prove the existence and decay estimates of the solutions, we consider the following problem
{unt=Δψn(un)+h(t)fn(x,t) in Q,∂ψn(un)∂η=g(un) on S,un(x,0)=u0n in Ω, | (Pn) |
where the sequence {u0n}⊆C∞c(Ω) satisfies the assumption (4.1) and the sequence {fn}⊆C∞c(¯Q) fulfills the hypothesis (4.19). We set
ψn(s)=ψ(s)+1n | (5.17) |
By [8,18,21,22], the approximating problem (Pn) has a solution un in C((0,T),L1(Ω))∩L∞(Q). Then, the definition of the weak solution {un}⊆C∞(¯Q) of (Pn) satisfies the following expression
∫T0⟨un(⋅,t),ξt(⋅,t)⟩Ωdt+∫T0h(t)⟨fn(⋅,t),ξ(⋅,t)⟩Ωdt+⟨u0n,ξ(⋅,0)⟩Ω+ |
+∫T0⟨g(un),ξ⟩∂Ωdt=∫T0⟨∇ψn(un),∇ξ⟩Ωdxdt | (5.18) |
for every ξ in C1(¯Q) such that ξ(⋅,T)=0 in Ω and ∂ξ∂η=0 on S.
Now we establish some technical estimates which will be used in the proof of the existing solution.
Lemma 5.2 Assume that (I), (J), (A), μ∈M+(Q) and u0∈M+(Ω) are satisfied. Let un be the solution of the approximation problem (Pn), then
∥un(⋅,t)∥L1(Ω)≤C(∥u0∥M+(Ω)+∥μ∥M+(Q)). | (5.19) |
∥∇ψn(un)∥L2(Q)+∥ψn(un)∥L2(Q)≤C(∥u0∥M+(Ω)+∥μ∥M+(Q)). | (5.20) |
for almost every t∈(0,T) and C is a positive constant.
The sequence {[ψn(un)]t} is bounded in L2((0,T),(H1(Ω))∗)+L1(¯Q).
Proof of Lemma 5.2. To prove the estimate (5.19), we consider the approximation problem (Pn) such that
{uns=Δψn(un)+h(s)fn(x,s)inΩ×(τ,τ+t),∂ψn(un)∂η=g(un)on∂Ω×(τ,τ+t),un(x,τ)=u0n(x)inΩ×{τ}, | (5.21) |
where τ+t≤T and τ, t∈(0,T).
Let us consider ξ∈C1,2(¯Ω×[τ,τ+t]) such that ∂ξ∂η=0 on ∂Ω×(τ,τ+t) and ξ(⋅,τ+t)=0 in Ω as a test function in the above approximation problem (5.21), then we have
∫Ω×(τ,τ+t)unξsdxds+∫Ω×(τ,τ+t)ψn(un)Δξdxds+∫∂Ω×(τ,τ+t)g(un)ξdH(x)ds+ |
+∫Ω×(τ,τ+t)h(s)fn(x,s)ξ(x,s)dxds+∫Ωμn(x)ξ(x,τ)dx=0. | (5.22) |
By the mean value theorem and the assumption (I), the Eq (5.22) yields
∫Ω×(τ,τ+t)un(ξs+θnΔξ)dxds+∫∂Ω×(τ,τ+t)g(un)ξdH(x)ds+ |
+∫Ω×(τ,τ+t)h(s)fn(x,s)dxds+∫Ωμn(x)ξ(x,τ)dx=0, | (5.23) |
where θn(x,t)=∫10ψ′un(αun)dα.
On the other hand, we consider the following backward parabolic equations
{−ϕs−θϵΔϕ=1τinQτ=Ω×(τ,τ+t),∂ϕ∂η=0onSτ=∂Ω×(τ,τ+t),ϕ(⋅,τ+t)=0inΩ×{τ+t}, | (5.24) |
has an unique solution ϕ in C1,2(¯Qτ)∩C(Qτ) and 0<ϕ≤C for any τ,t∈(0,T) (see [18, Lemma 4.2]). Then for ξ=ϕ, there holds
1τ∫τ+tτ∫Ωun(x,s)dxds=∫Ωμn(x)ϕ(x,τ)dx+∫τ+tτ∫∂Ωg(un)ϕdH(x)ds+ |
+∫τ+tτ∫Ωh(s)fn(x,s)ϕdxds | (5.25) |
By the assumptions (A), (J), (4.19) and (4.1), there exists a positive constant C such that the expression below is satisfied
1τ∫τ+tτ∫Ωun(x,s)dxds≤C(∥u0∥M+(Ω)+∥μ∥M+(Q)). | (5.26) |
By letting τ→0+, we obtain the estimate (5.19). Where C=C(h(T),∥g(un)∥L∞(R+),∣S∣)>0. To prove the estimate (5.20), we consider Tγ+1(ψn(un)) as a test function in the approximation problem (Pn), then we have
∫{(x,t)∈QT/ψn(un)≤γ+1}∣∇ψn(un)∣2dxdt=∫Ω(∫u0n(x)0Tγ+1(ψn(s))ds)dx− |
−∫Ω(∫un(x,T)0Tγ+1(ψn(s))ds)dx+∫T0∫∂Ωg(un)Tγ+1(ψn(un))dH(x)dt+ |
+∫T0∫ΩTγ+1(ψn(un))h(t)fn(x,t)dxdt | (5.27) |
where Tλ(s)=min{λ,s}. It follows that there exists a positive constant C such that
∫{(x,t)∈QT/ψn(un)≤γ+1}∣∇ψn(un)∣2dxdt |
≤(γ+1)∫Ωμn(x)dx+C(γ+1)∥g(un)∥L∞(R+)+h(T)∫Qfn(x,t)dxdt. |
For the suitable positive constant C=C(h(T),γ,∥g(un)∥L∞(R+),∥μ∥M+(Ω),∥u0∥M+(Ω),∣S∣)>0, the following estimate holds
∫{(x,t)∈QT/ψn(un)≤γ+1}∣∇ψn(un)∣2dxdt≤C. | (5.28) |
On the other hand, we assume that Gλ(s)=max{λ,s} and we choose Gγ+1(ψn(un)) as a test function in the approximation problem (Pn), then we have
∫{(x,t)∈QT/ψn(un)>γ+1}∣∇ψn(un)∣2dxdt=∫Ω(∫u0n(x)0Gγ+1(ψn(s)))ds)dx− |
−∫Ω(∫un(x,T)0Gγ+1(ψn(s))ds)dx+∫T0∫∂Ωg(un)Gγ+1(ψn(un))dH(x)dt+ |
+∫T0∫Ωh(t)fn(x,t)Gγ+1(ψn(un))dH(x)dt. | (5.29) |
It implies that
∫{(x,t)∈Q/ψn(un)>γ+1}∣∇ψn(un)∣2dxdt |
≤(γ+1)∫Ωμn(x)dx+(γ+1)M∥g(un)∥L∞(R+)+h(T)∫Qfn(x,t)dxdt |
It follows that
∫{(x,t)∈Q/ψn(un)>γ+1}∣∇ψn(un)∣2dxdt≤C. | (5.30) |
Combining the inequality (5.28) with (5.30), we deduce that
∫Q∣∇ψn(un)∣2dxdt≤C | (5.31) |
By the assumption (I), then ψn(un)∈L2(Q), whence the estimate (5.20) holds.
To end the proof of this Lemma, we consider that for every ξ∈C1c(Q) such that if we choose ϕ=ψ′n(un)ξ arbitrary as a test function in problem (Pn), then the following stands true
∫Qξt[ψn(un)]dxdt=−∫Qξψ′n(un)div(∇ψn(un))dxdt−∫Qh(t)fn(x,t)ψ′n(un)ξdxdt | (5.32) |
It follows that
∫Qξt[ψn(un)]dxdt=∫Qψ′n(un)∇ψn(un)∇ξdxdt−∫Qh(t)fn(x,t)ϕdxdt− |
−∫Sg(un)ψ′n(un)ξdH(x)dt+∫Qψ″n(un)ψ′n(un)∣∇ψn(un)∣2ξdxdt. | (5.33) |
Now we estimate each term in the right hand side of (5.33), we obtain
|∫Qψ′n(un)∇ψn(un)∇ξdxdt|≤∥ψ′n∥L∞(R+)∫Q∣∇ξ∣∣∇ψn(un)∣dxdt. | (5.34) |
From Hölder's inequality and (5.31), the inequality (5.34) reads as
|∫Qψ′n(un)∇ψn(un)∇ξdxdt|≤C∥∇ξ∥L2(Q). | (5.35) |
By the assumption (J) and (4.19), we deduce the estimate
|∫Qh(t)fn(x,t)ξdxdt|≤C∥ξ∥L∞(Q) | (5.36) |
where C=C(h(T),∥μ∥M+(Ω),∥u0∥M+(Ω))>0 is a constant.
By the assumptions and , there exists a positive constant such that
(5.37) |
Furthermore, one has
In view of (5.28), the expression below holds true
(5.38) |
where . By (5.35)-(5.38) and (5.33), we infer that the sequence is bounded in .
Now we study the limit points of the sequences and as .
Proposition 5.1 Suppose that the assumptions , and are satisfied. Let be the solution of the approximation problem . Then there exists a subsequence and such that
(5.39) |
(5.40) |
(5.41) |
(5.42) |
where and .
Proof of Proposition 5.1. The convergences (5.39) and (5.40) are the consequence of assumption (I)-(i) and estimate (5.20) respectively. By Lemma 5.1, the sequence is bounded in . By [45], there exists a subsequence and such that
Furthermore, by [9, Proposition 5.1] and (5.41) holds true and we have
with which leads to (5.42) be satisfied. In view of the assumptions (I)- and (5.17), we get
Therefore the following convergence holds true.
Remark 5.1 For any subsequence and the function given in Proposition 5.1, the following assertions
, and hold.
Proposition 5.2 Assume that the hypotheses , , , and are satisfied. Let be the subsequence and the function mentioned in Proposition 5.1. Then there exist a subsequence and such that
(5.43) |
(5.44) |
(5.45) |
Moreover, there hold
(5.46) |
for almost every . Furthermore and for almost every , there holds
(5.47) |
Proof. By the assumption (I)-, and using Hölder's inequality, we have
From the estimate (5.20), there exists a positive constant such that
(5.48) |
According to Lemma 5.1, the assumption (I) and (5.48), we infer that
(5.49) |
By Fatou's Lebesgue Lemma, we obtain
(5.50) |
Then there exists zero Lebesgue measure set such that
(5.51) |
for every . In view of (5.51), the sequence for every . By [44, Chapter IV, Section 1.1, Proposition 5], there exists a subsequence and a.e in such that the convergence
(5.52) |
holds true. Furthermore, from the assertions (5.19), (5.52) and the Prohorov Theorem (see [44, Chapter II, Section 2.6, Theorem 1] or [25, Proposition A.2] or [17, Proposition 1]), there exists a sequence of the Young measures associated with the sequence converges narrowly over to a Young measure which the disintegration is the Dirac mass concentrated at the point for a.e in (see [17]). By [25, Proposition A.4], there exist sequences of measure sets , and , such that
(5.53) |
where , is a barycenter of the limiting Young measure associated with the subsequence and supp for almost every .
By (5.19) and the compactness result, the sequence is uniformly bounded in . Therefore, there exists a Radon measure such that . Finally, the sequence is of . Hence in and the statement (5.43) is completed. By the assumption (I)-, there holds
(5.54) |
By the assertion (5.54) and [45, Proposition 5.2] or [25], we obtain
(5.55) |
where and
(5.56) |
Furthermore, we also obtain the next result via (5.55)
By combining the assertion (5.53) and the previous equality, we conclude that a.e in , when the convergence (5.44) is satisfied.
By virtue of the convergence (5.53), the next convergence result
(5.57) |
holds true. Since the function (see assumption (H)-(i)) and from Fatou's Lebesgue Lemma, then there exists a positive constant such that
(5.58) |
Therefore, there exists a zero Lebesgue measure set such that
(5.59) |
for every . In view of (5.59) and (5.57), there exists a function such that the convergence (5.45) is achieved.
To show (5.46), we consider the functions defined by setting
and for every . It is worthy observing that in and . According to the above results, there exists a subsequence in Lemma 5.1 and Proposition 5.1. For any nonnegative function , we choose as a test function in the approximation problem , then we obtain the following identity
(5.60) |
where . Since the sequence is uniformly bounded in , then as and as . By Lemma 5.1 and Proposition 5.1, and by applying the Dominated Convergence Theorem, results to
(5.61) |
Similary, we get
(5.62) |
By the statement (4.19) and Proposition 5.1, we have
(5.63) |
Given the properties of the sequence and passing to limit in (5.61), (5.62) and (5.63) when , then the following holds
(5.64) |
Similarly we obtain
(5.65) |
And
(5.66) |
On the other hand, we have
Since in , in and the sequence is uniformly bounded in , then we deduce that
(5.67) |
According to the convergence statement (5.43), we have
(5.68) |
where .
Furthermore, from the Eqs (5.43) and (5.66) we obtain the following
(5.69) |
It follows that
(5.70) |
Likewise, from (5.67) one has
It implies that
(5.71) |
Combining the statements (5.64)-(5.66), (5.70), (5, 71) with (5.60) yields
Since is a singular measure with respect to the Lebesgue measure for a suitable , where is zero Lebesgue measure in . Hence the assertion (5.46) is obtained.
From [44, Chapter 5, Section 5.2.1, Theorem 1], the estimate (5.19) yields
(5.72) |
The estimate (5.47) is completed.
Proof of Theorem 2.2. By Proposition 5.1 and Proposition 5.2, we have a.e in . Hence the problem has a weak Radon measure-valued solution in .
Remark 5.1 By Theorem 2.2, the result holds
(5.73) |
for almost every . By (5.73), there exists zero Lebesgue measure set such that
(5.74) |
for all Borel sets , with and .
Proposition 5.3. Suppose that the assumptions and are fulfilled. Let be the subsequence and the function given in Proposition 5.1. Then the following sets
have zero Lebesgue measure. Moreover and has zero Lebesgue measure.
Proof of Proposition 5.3. By [9, Proposition 5.2], the set has zero Lebesgue measure. Assume that
Then, it is worth observing that
(5.75) |
To prove that , it is enough to show that as .
Since the function in (see the assumption -(i)), then we have
(5.76) |
It follows that
(5.77) |
By the estimate (5.19), we have
(5.78) |
Since as , then (3.62) yields as .
Assume that , then for every . Since . Therefore, , that is holds true. The fact that , then . Consequently, is zero Lebesgue measure set.
Proposition 6.1. Under assumptions , and . Let be a very weak Radon measure-valued solution to the problem and for every such that on , there holds
(6.1) |
Proof of Proposition 6.1 Let us consider that for every , the smooth function , such that
(6.2) |
Let us choose as a test function in , there holds
(6.3) |
It is worth observing that the first term on the left hand side of the equality (6.3) gives
(6.4) |
Let us consider a zero Lebesgue measure set in such that for any , one has
(6.5) |
We assume that a sequence of test functions in such that
and
Then for every , there holds
(6.6) |
By Dominated Convergence Theorem, we obtain
(6.7) |
for every with
Since , for every and for every sequence , as such that
(6.8) |
holds true.
Since , then we have
(6.9) |
So that there exists a subsequence and a Radon measure such that
(6.10) |
By the standard density arguments, one has
(6.11) |
where , hence (6.1) is obtained.
Proof of Theorem 2.4 Let be two very weak solutions obtained as limit of approximation of with initial data and respectively. Let , be two approximating sequence solutions to the problem . We consider a test function such that in and on in the approximation problem in the sense of the Definition 2.3, then there holds
(6.12) |
where , , , and are two approximating functions.
By the assumption a.e in , then for any sequences , one has on . Consequently the third term on the right hand-side of the equation (6.12) vanishes.
For almost every , we consider the function defined as
(6.13) |
Obviously and for every there exists a positive constant such that
(6.14) |
This ensures that for every , the problem
(6.15) |
has a unique solution with (see [18,21]).
Moreover, it can be seen that
(6.16) |
Let us consider the function such that for any and
(6.17) |
Choosing as a test function in (6.15), then we obtain
(6.18) |
It follows that
(6.19) |
holds, for some constant independent on .
From (6.16) and (6.19), there exists a constant such that
(6.20) |
On the other hand, multiplying (6.15) by and we obtain
which leads to
(6.21) |
where . Therefore, we get
(6.22) |
By standard density arguments, we can choose as a test function in (6.15). It implies that (6.12) yields
(6.23) |
Letting to infinity in (6.23). Then it enough to observe from (6.20), there exists which is obtained by extracting the subsequence of the such that
(6.24) |
(6.25) |
Since and the compactness theorem states in [21], we deduce that
(6.26) |
(6.27) |
By (6.16) and (6.22), there exists such that the following statements
(6.28) |
(6.29) |
holds true. By Theorem 2.1, the solutions of the problem are unique in . Therefore in and in . Furthermore, the sequences and satisfy the assumption (2.6). By combining the above assumptions and Dominated Convergence Theorem, the Eq (6.23) reads
It follows that in .
In this section, we prove the result of decay estimate solutions.
Proof of Theorem 2.5. We consider and two solutions of the approximation problems and respectively. For any such that in and on as a test function of the approximation problem , then there holds
(7.1) |
For every , we consider be a sequence of smooth functions such that and in . Let us choose into the Eq (7.1), then (7.1) reads
(7.2) |
Letting in the previous equation and using the properties of the Dirac mass at , then we have the following expression
(7.3) |
for any with and is a constant. On the other hand, by (4.5) we have
By (2.11)-(2.13) and the properties of the Green function , we get the following result
By the assumptions (A), (4.1) and (4.2), there exists a positive constant such that
(7.4) |
By Gronwall's inequality, (7.4) yields
(7.5) |
where is a constant. Combining (7.3) with (7.5), we deduce that
(7.6) |
By [24, Chapter V, Section 5.2.1, Theorem 1], the semi-continuity of the total variation yields,
(7.7) |
Hence (2.18) holds.
We consider and two solutions of the approximation problems and respectively. For any such that in and on as a test function of the approximation problem . Therefore, we have the following equation
(7.8) |
Taking into the equality (7.8), then we obtain
Letting in the previous equation and using the properties of the Dirac mass at , then we have
(7.9) |
By (4.1), the above inequality (7.9) yields
(7.10) |
By [24, Chapter V, Section 5.2.1, Theorem 1], the semi-continuity of the total variation yields,
where a constant. Hence (2.19) is achieved. Now we consider the auxiliary function such that
(7.11) |
for every . The derivation of the expression with respect to the variable gives
(7.12) |
Since and we multiply the Eq (7.12) by the function and then we integrate the result over (for any ), then we obtain
(7.13) |
By replacing the expression of in (7.13), we deduce that
(7.14) |
By assumptions , , (2.16) and (4.19), there exists a constant such that
(7.15) |
According to [24, Chapter V, Section 5.2.1, Theorem 1], we conclude from the estimate (7.15), the following estimate
Hence the estimate (2.21) is completed.
To show the existence of the problem , we employ the natural approximation method. Therefore, the solution of the problem is constructed by limiting point of a family of solutions to the approximation problem. To this purpose, we consider the function such that and in (for any compact set ), then we get
where and in with .
Now we consider the approximation of problem
() |
where and a sequence of standard mollifiers. Furthermore, the sequence satisfies the assumption (4.1).
Then for every , there exists solution of the approximation problem .
In the next Lemma, we state the technical estimates important for the proof of the existing solutions.
Lemma 8.1 Assume that , and are satisfied. The sequence be a weak solution of the approximation problem . Then, there holds
(8.1) |
(8.2) |
where is a constant. Moreover, for every there holds
(8.3) |
where is a constant.
Proof of Lemma 8.1 We consider as a test function in the approximation problem , then we have
(8.4) |
Assume that and . It is worth observing that . To show that in , it is enough to prove that in . Indeed, we choose , then we get
(8.5) |
where in and in (see the assumption ). Therefore a.e in . Hence the solution of the approximation problem , a.e .
Now we consider the regularizing sequence for every such that
(i) in , , in ,
(ii) as for every .
We choose as a test function in the approximation problem and by employing the assumptions and , then we get
(8.6) |
where . Since in (see the hypothesis ), then (8.6) reads
(8.7) |
Again, by considering the limit when , the estimate (8.1) holds true. Now we consider another regularizing sequence for every such that if , if , if . It is obvious to see that in . We take the function and we choose as a test function in , then we obtain
(8.8) |
Since and , therefore there exists a positive constant C such that
(8.9) |
where . By the assumption , the statement holds. Whence the estimate (8.2) is achieved.
Again, recalling the Hölder's inequality, we get
where and . Therefore, there exists a positive constant such that
(8.10) |
By the assumption , the statement holds. Hence the estimate (8.3) is achieved.
Proof of Theorem 2.6. From the estimate (8.2) and assumption , we can extract from a subsequence such that
(8.11) |
(8.12) |
By (8.3), the sequence and applying [44, Chapter IV, Section 1.1, Proposition 5], there exists a subsequence and such that the convergence
(8.13) |
By repeating the same method as in the Proposition 5.2, we deduce that
(8.14) |
where a.e in , in and a.e in .
By [24, Chapter V, Section 5.2.1, Theorem 1], the estimate (8.1) yields
Hence the estimate (2.23) is completed.
Remark 8.1 The sets
have zero Lebesgue measure. Moreover and supp.
Proof of Theorem 2.7. We choose as a test function in the approximation problem , then we have
By the previous proof mentioned above, we deduce that
(8.15) |
where is a constant. By letting , then (8.15) reads
(8.16) |
By virtue of [24, Chapter V, Section 5.2.1, Theorem 1], then the semi-continuity of the total variation yields
(8.17) |
for almost every and . By considering to the limit as in the following inequality
Hence the statement (2.24) follows.
In this paper, we study the existence, uniqueness, decay estimates, and the asymptotic behavior of the Radon measure-valued solutions for a class of nonlinear parabolic equations with a source term and nonzero Neumann boundary conditions. To attain this, we use the natural approximation method, the definition of the weak solutions, and the properties of the Radon measure. Concerning the study of the existence and uniqueness of the solutions to the problem (P), we first show that the source term corresponding to the solution of the linear inhomogeneous heat equation with measure data is a unique Radon measure-valued. Moreover, we establish the decay estimates of these solutions by using the suitable test functions and the auxiliary functions. Finally, we analyze the asymptotic behavior of these solutions by establishing the decay estimate of the difference between the solution to the problem (P) and the solution to the steady state problem (E).
This work was partially supported by National Natural Sciences Foundation of China, grant No: 11571057
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
[1] |
Ghosh SS, Wang J, Yannie PJ, et al. (2020) Intestinal barrier dysfunction, LPS translocation, and disease development. J Endocr Soc 4: bvz039. https://doi.org/10.1210/jendso/bvz039 ![]() |
[2] |
Paone P, Cani PD (2020) Mucus barrier, mucins and gut microbiota: the expected slimy partners?. Gut 69: 2232-2243. https://doi.org/10.1136/gutjnl-2020-322260 ![]() |
[3] |
Ashida H, Ogawa M, Kim M, et al. (2011) Bacteria and host interactions in the gut epithelial barrier. Nat Chem Biol 8: 36-45. https://doi.org/10.1038/nchembio.741 ![]() |
[4] |
Van der Sluis M, De Koning BA, De Bruijn AC, et al. (2006) Muc2-deficient mice spontaneously develop colitis, indicating that MUC2 is critical for colonic protection. Gastroenterology 131: 117-129. https://doi.org/10.1053/j.gastro.2006.04.020 ![]() |
[5] |
Bergstrom KS, Kissoon-Singh V, Gibson DL, et al. (2010) Muc2 protects against lethal infectious colitis by disassociating pathogenic and commensal bacteria from the colonic mucosa. PLoS Pathog 6: e1000902. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.ppat.1000902 ![]() |
[6] |
Johansson ME, Larsson JM, Hansson GC (2011) The two mucus layers of colon are organized by the MUC2 mucin, whereas the outer layer is a legislator of host-microbial interactions. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 108: 4659-4665. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1006451107 ![]() |
[7] |
Kamphuis JBJ, Mercier-Bonin M, Eutamène H, et al. (2017) Mucus organisation is shaped by colonic content; a new view. Sci Rep 7: 8527. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-08938-3 ![]() |
[8] |
Derrien M, Collado MC, Ben-Amor K, et al. (2008) The Mucin degrader Akkermansia muciniphila is an abundant resident of the human intestinal tract. Appl Environ Microbiol 74: 1646-1648. https://doi.org/10.1128/AEM.01226-07 ![]() |
[9] |
Johansson MEV, Phillipson M, Petersson J, et al. (2008) The inner of the two Muc2 mucin-dependent mucus layers in colon is devoid of bacteria. Proc Nat Acad Sci 105: 15064-15069. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0803124105 ![]() |
[10] |
Pédron T, Mulet C, Dauga C, et al. (2012) A crypt-specific core microbiota resides in the mouse colon. mBio 3: e00116-12. https://doi.org/10.1128/mBio.00116-12 ![]() |
[11] |
Swidsinski A, Loening-Baucke V, Lochs H, et al. (2005) Spatial organization of bacterial flora in normal and inflamed intestine: a fluorescence in situ hybridization study in mice. World J Gastroenterol 11: 1131-1140. https://doi.org/10.3748/wjg.v11.i8.1131 ![]() |
[12] |
Swidsinski A, Weber J, Loening-Baucke V, et al. (2005) Spatial organization and composition of the mucosal flora in patients with inflammatory bowel disease. J Clin Microbiol 43: 3380-3389. https://doi.org/10.1128/JCM.43.7.3380-3389.2005 ![]() |
[13] |
Round JL, Lee SM, Li J, et al. (2011) The Toll-like receptor 2 pathway establishes colonization by a commensal of the human microbiota. Science 332: 974-977. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1206095 ![]() |
[14] |
Lee SM, Donaldson GP, Mikulski Z, et al. (2013) Bacterial colonization factors control specificity and stability of the gut microbiota. Nature 501: 426-429. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature12447 ![]() |
[15] |
Ulluwishewa D, Anderson RC, McNabb WC, et al. (2011) Regulation of tight junction permeability by intestinal bacteria and dietary components. J Nutr 141: 769-776. https://doi.org/10.3945/jn.110.135657 ![]() |
[16] |
Cani PD, Bibiloni R, Knauf C, et al. (2008) Changes in gut microbiota control metabolic endotoxemia-induced inflammation in high-fat diet-induced obesity and diabetes in mice. Diabetes 57: 1470-1481. https://doi.org/10.2337/db07-1403 ![]() |
[17] |
Suzuki T, Hara H (2010) Dietary fat and bile juice, but not obesity, are responsible for the increase in small intestinal permeability induced through the suppression of tight junction protein expression in LETO and OLETF rats. Nutr Metab (Lond) 7: 19. https://doi.org/10.1186/1743-7075-7-19 ![]() |
[18] |
Stenman LK, Holma R, Korpela R (2012) High-fat-induced intestinal permeability dysfunction associated with altered fecal bile acids. World J Gastroenterol 18: 923-929. https://doi.org/10.3748/wjg.v18.i9.923 ![]() |
[19] |
Araújo JR, Tomas J, Brenner C, et al. (2017) Impact of high-fat diet on the intestinal microbiota and small intestinal physiology before and after the onset of obesity. Biochimie 141: 97-106. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biochi.2017.05.019 ![]() |
[20] |
Cani PD, Amar J, Iglesias MA, et al. (2007) Metabolic endotoxemia initiates obesity and insulin resistance. Diabetes 56: 1761-1772. https://doi.org/10.2337/db06-1491 ![]() |
[21] |
Ghanim H, Abuaysheh S, Sia CL, et al. (2009) Increase in plasma endotoxin concentrations and the expression of Toll-like receptors and suppressor of cytokine signaling-3 in mononuclear cells after a high-fat, high-carbohydrate meal: implications for insulin resistance. Diabetes Care 32: 2281-2287. https://doi.org/10.2337/dc09-0979 ![]() |
[22] |
Ryu JK, Kim SJ, Rah SH, et al. (2017) Reconstruction of LPS transfer cascade reveals structural determinants within LBP, CD14, and TLR4-MD2 for efficient LPS recognition and transfer. Immunity 46: 38-50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.immuni.2016.11.007 ![]() |
[23] |
Andrews C, McLean MH, Durum SK (2018) Cytokine tuning of intestinal epithelial function. Front Immunol 9: 1270. https://doi.org/10.3389/fimmu.2018.01270 ![]() |
[24] |
Matziouridou C, Rocha SDC, Haabeth OA, et al. (2018) iNOS- and NOX1-dependent ROS production maintains bacterial homeostasis in the ileum of mice. Mucosal Immunol 11: 774-784. https://doi.org/10.1038/mi.2017.106 ![]() |
[25] | Rohr MW, Narasimhulu CA, Rudeski-Rohr TA, et al. (2020) Negative effects of a high-fat diet on intestinal permeability: A review. Adv Nutr 11: 77-91. https://doi.org/10.1093/advances/nmz061 |
[26] |
Everard A, Belzer C, Geurts L, et al. (2013) Cross-talk between Akkermansia muciniphila and intestinal epithelium controls diet-induced obesity. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 110: 9066-9071. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1219451110 ![]() |
[27] |
Roopchand DE, Carmody RN, Kuhn P, et al. (2015) Dietary polyphenols promote growth of the gut bacterium Akkermansia muciniphila and attenuate high-fat diet-induced metabolic syndrome. Diabetes 64: 2847-2858. https://doi.org/10.2337/db14-1916 ![]() |
[28] |
Ottman N, Reunanen J, Meijerink M, et al. (2017) Pili-like proteins of Akkermansia muciniphila modulate host immune responses and gut barrier function. PLoS One 12: e0173004. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0173004 ![]() |
[29] |
Schneeberger M, Everard A, Gómez-Valadés AG, et al. (2015) Akkermansia muciniphila inversely correlates with the onset of inflammation, altered adipose tissue metabolism and metabolic disorders during obesity in mice. Sci Rep 5: 16643. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep16643 ![]() |
[30] |
Dao MC, Everard A, Aron-Wisnewsky J, et al. (2016) Akkermansia muciniphila and improved metabolic health during a dietary intervention in obesity: relationship with gut microbiome richness and ecology. Gut 65: 426-436. https://doi.org/10.1136/gutjnl-2014-308778 ![]() |
[31] |
Bi J, Liu S, Du G, et al. (2016) Bile salt tolerance of Lactococcus lactis is enhanced by expression of bile salt hydrolase thereby producing less bile acid in the cells. Biotechnol Lett 38: 659-665. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10529-015-2018-7 ![]() |
[32] |
Anhê FF, Roy D, Pilon G, et al. (2015) A polyphenol-rich cranberry extract protects from diet-induced obesity, insulin resistance and intestinal inflammation in association with increased Akkermansia spp. population in the gut microbiota of mice. Gut 64: 872-883. https://doi.org/10.1136/gutjnl-2014-307142 ![]() |
[33] |
Anhê FF, Nachbar RT, Varin TV, et al. (2019) Treatment with camu camu (Myrciaria dubia) prevents obesity by altering the gut microbiota and increasing energy expenditure in diet-induced obese mice. Gut 68: 453-464. https://doi.org/10.1136/gutjnl-2017-315565 ![]() |
[34] |
Depommier C, Everard A, Druart C, et al. (2019) Supplementation with Akkermansia muciniphila in overweight and obese human volunteers: a proof-of-concept exploratory study. Nat Med 25: 1096-1103. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41591-019-0495-2 ![]() |
[35] |
de la Cuesta-Zuluaga J, Mueller NT, Corrales-Agudelo V, et al. (2016) Metformin is associated with higher relative abundance of mucin-degrading Akkermansia muciniphila and several short-chain fatty acid–producing microbiota in the gut. Diabetes Care 40: 54-62. https://doi.org/10.2337/dc16-1324 ![]() |
[36] |
Wu H, Esteve E, Tremaroli V, et al. (2017) Metformin alters the gut microbiome of individuals with treatment-naive type 2 diabetes, contributing to the therapeutic effects of the drug. Nat Med 23: 850-858. https://doi.org/10.1038/nm.4345 ![]() |
[37] |
Shin NR, Lee JC, Lee HY, et al. (2014) An increase in the Akkermansia spp. population induced by metformin treatment improves glucose homeostasis in diet-induced obese mice. Gut 63: 727-735. https://doi.org/10.1136/gutjnl-2012-303839 ![]() |
[38] |
Ganesh BP, Klopfleisch R, Loh G, et al. (2013) Commensal Akkermansia muciniphila exacerbates gut inflammation in Salmonella Typhimurium-infected gnotobiotic mice. PLoS One 8: e74963. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0074963 ![]() |
[39] |
Han Y, Song M, Gu M, et al. (2019) Dietary intake of whole strawberry inhibited colonic inflammation in dextran-sulfate-sodium-treated mice via restoring immune homeostasis and alleviating gut microbiota dysbiosis. J Agric Food Chem 67: 9168-9177. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jafc.8b05581 ![]() |
[40] |
Lukovac S, Belzer C, Pellis L, et al. (2014) Differential modulation by Akkermansia muciniphila and Faecalibacterium prausnitzii of host peripheral lipid metabolism and histone acetylation in mouse gut organoids. mBio 5: e01438-14. https://doi.org/10.1128/mBio.01438-14 ![]() |
[41] |
Plovier H, Everard A, Druart C, et al. (2017) A purified membrane protein from Akkermansia muciniphila or the pasteurized bacterium improves metabolism in obese and diabetic mice. Nat Med 23: 107-113. https://doi.org/10.1038/nm.4236 ![]() |
[42] |
Zhang L, Carmody RN, Kalariya HM, et al. (2018) Grape proanthocyanidin-induced intestinal bloom of Akkermansia muciniphila is dependent on its baseline abundance and precedes activation of host genes related to metabolic health. J Nutr Biochem 56: 142-151. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jnutbio.2018.02.009 ![]() |
[43] |
Tveter KM, Villa-Rodriguez JA, Cabales AJ, et al. (2020) Polyphenol-induced improvements in glucose metabolism are associated with bile acid signaling to intestinal farnesoid X receptor. BMJ Open Diabetes Res Care 8. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjdrc-2020-001386 ![]() |
[44] |
Mezhibovsky E, Knowles KA, He Q, et al. (2021) Grape polyphenols attenuate diet-induced obesity and hepatic steatosis in mice in association with reduced butyrate and increased markers of intestinal carbohydrate oxidation. Front Nutr 8: 675267. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnut.2021.675267 ![]() |
[45] |
Ezzat-Zadeh Z, Henning SM, Yang J, et al. (2021) California strawberry consumption increased the abundance of gut microorganisms related to lean body weight, health and longevity in healthy subjects. Nutr Res 85: 60-70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nutres.2020.12.006 ![]() |
[46] | Gao X, Xie Q, Kong P, et al. (2018) Polyphenol- and caffeine-rich postfermented Pu-erh tea improves diet-induced metabolic syndrome by remodeling intestinal homeostasis in mice. Infect Immun 86. https://doi.org/10.1128/IAI.00601-17 |
[47] |
Régnier M, Rastelli M, Morissette A, et al. (2020) Rhubarb supplementation prevents diet-induced obesity and diabetes in association with increased Akkermansia muciniphila in mice. Nutrients 12. https://doi.org/10.3390/nu12102932 ![]() |
[48] |
Mezhibovsky E, Knowles KA, He Q, et al. (2021) Grape polyphenols attenuate diet-induced obesity and hepatic steatosis in mice in association with reduced butyrate and increased markers of intestinal carbohydrate oxidation. Front Nutr 8: 1-14. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnut.2021.675267 ![]() |
[49] |
Villa-Rodriguez JA, Ifie I, Gonzalez-Aguilar GA, et al. (2019) The gastrointestinal tract as prime site for cardiometabolic protection by dietary polyphenols. Adv Nutr 10: 999-1011. https://doi.org/10.1093/advances/nmz038 ![]() |
[50] |
Johansson ME, Hansson GC (2012) Preservation of mucus in histological sections, immunostaining of mucins in fixed tissue, and localization of bacteria with FISH. Methods Mol Biol 842: 229-235. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-61779-513-8_13 ![]() |
[51] |
Bovee-Oudenhoven IM, Termont DS, Heidt PJ, et al. (1997) Increasing the intestinal resistance of rats to the invasive pathogen Salmonella enteritidis: additive effects of dietary lactulose and calcium. Gut 40: 497. https://doi.org/10.1136/gut.40.4.497 ![]() |
[52] |
Savage DC, Dubos R (1968) Alterations in the mouse cecum and its flora produced by antibacterial drugs. J Exp Med 128: 97-110. https://doi.org/10.1084/jem.128.1.97 ![]() |
[53] |
Van Herreweghen F, Van den Abbeele P, De Mulder T, et al. (2017) In vitro colonisation of the distal colon by Akkermansia muciniphila is largely mucin and pH dependent. Benef Microbes 8: 81-96. https://doi.org/10.3920/BM2016.0013 ![]() |
[54] |
Sangiorgi E, Capecchi MR (2008) Bmi1 is expressed in vivo in intestinal stem cells. Nat Genet 40: 915-920. https://doi.org/10.1038/ng.165 ![]() |
[55] |
Vetushchi A, Sferra R, Caprilli R, et al. (2002) Increased proliferation and apoptosis of colonic epithelial cells in dextran sulfate sodium-induced colitis in rats. Dig Dis Sci 47: 1447-1457. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1015931128583 ![]() |
[56] |
Dinh CH, Yu Y, Szabo A, et al. (2016) Bardoxolone methyl prevents high-fat diet-induced colon inflammation in mice. J Histochem Cytochem 64: 237-255. https://doi.org/10.1369/0022155416631803 ![]() |
[57] | Xie Y, Ding F, Di W, et al. (2020) Impact of a highfat diet on intestinal stem cells and epithelial barrier function in middleaged female mice. Mol Med Rep 21: 1133-1144. https://doi.org/10.3892/mmr.2020.10932 |
[58] |
John Totafurno MB, Cheng Hazel (1987) The crypt cycle: Crypt and villus production in the adult intestinal epithelium. Biophys J 52: 279-294. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0006-3495(87)83215-0 ![]() |
[59] |
Sainsbury A, Goodlad RA, Perry SL, et al. (2008) Increased colorectal epithelial cell proliferation and crypt fission associated with obesity and roux-en-Y gastric bypass. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 17: 1401-1410. https://doi.org/10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-07-2874 ![]() |
[60] | Shahbazi P, Nematollahi A, Arshadi S, et al. (2021) The protective effect of Artemisia spicigera ethanolic extract against Cryptosporidium parvum infection in immunosuppressed mice. Iran J Parasitol 16: 279-288. https://doi.org/10.18502/ijpa.v16i2.6318 |
[61] |
Argenzio RA, Liacos JA, Levy ML, et al. (1990) Villous atrophy, crypt hyperplasia, cellular infiltration, and impaired glucose-NA absorption in enteric cryptosporidiosis of pigs. Gastroenterology 98: 1129-1140. https://doi.org/10.1016/0016-5085(90)90325-U ![]() |
[62] |
Liu X, Lu L, Yao P, et al. (2014) Lipopolysaccharide binding protein, obesity status and incidence of metabolic syndrome: a prospective study among middle-aged and older Chinese. Diabetologia 57: 1834-1841. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00125-014-3288-7 ![]() |
[63] |
Moreno-Navarrete JM, Ortega F, Serino M, et al. (2012) Circulating lipopolysaccharide-binding protein (LBP) as a marker of obesity-related insulin resistance. Int J Obes (Lond) 36: 1442-1449. https://doi.org/10.1038/ijo.2011.256 ![]() |
[64] |
Birchenough GM, Nyström EE, Johansson ME, et al. (2016) A sentinel goblet cell guards the colonic crypt by triggering Nlrp6-dependent Muc2 secretion. Science 352: 1535-1542. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aaf7419 ![]() |
[65] |
Visioli F (2015) Xenobiotics and human health: A new view of their pharma-nutritional role. PharmaNutrition 3: 60-64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.phanu.2015.04.001 ![]() |
[66] | Lambert MGSaGH.Xenobiotic-induced hepatotoxicity: mechanisms of liver injury and methods of monitoring hepatic function. Clin Chem (1997) 43: 1512-1525. https://doi.org/10.1093/clinchem/43.8.1512 |
[67] |
Hall DM, Sattler GL, Sattler CA, et al. (2001) Aging lowers steady-state antioxidant enzyme and stress protein expression in primary hepatocytes. J Gerontol Biol Sci 56A: B259-B267. https://doi.org/10.1093/gerona/56.6.B259 ![]() |
[68] |
Liang H, Jiang F, Cheng R, et al. (2021) A high-fat diet and high-fat and high-cholesterol diet may affect glucose and lipid metabolism differentially through gut microbiota in mice. Exp Anim 70: 73-83. https://doi.org/10.1538/expanim.20-0094 ![]() |
[69] |
Reagan WJ, Yang RZ, Park S, et al. (2012) Metabolic adaptive ALT isoenzyme response in livers of C57/BL6 mice treated with dexamethasone. Toxicol Pathol 40: 1117-1127. https://doi.org/10.1177/0192623312447550 ![]() |
[70] |
Kuhn P, Kalariya HM, Poulev A, et al. (2018) Grape polyphenols reduce gut-localized reactive oxygen species associated with the development of metabolic syndrome in mice. PLoS One 13: e0198716. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0198716 ![]() |
[71] |
Dubourg G, Lagier JC, Armougom F, et al. (2013) High-level colonisation of the human gut by Verrucomicrobia following broad-spectrum antibiotic treatment. Int J Antimicrob Agents 41: 149-155. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2012.10.012 ![]() |
[72] | Chen CY, Hsu KC, Yeh HY, et al. (2020) Visualizing the effects of antibiotics on the mouse colonic mucus layer. Ci Ji Yi Xue Za Zhi 32: 145-153. https://doi.org/10.4103/tcmj.tcmj_70_19 |
[73] |
Taira T, Yamaguchi S, Takahashi A, et al. (2015) Dietary polyphenols increase fecal mucin and immunoglobulin A and ameliorate the disturbance in gut microbiota caused by a high fat diet. J Clin Biochem Nutr 57: 212-216. https://doi.org/10.3164/jcbn.15-15 ![]() |
[74] | Forgie AJ, Ju T, Tollenaar SL, et al. (2022) Phytochemical-induced mucin accumulation in the gastrointestinal lumen is independent of the microbiota. bioRxiv : 2022.2003.2011.483917. https://doi.org/10.1101/2022.03.11.483917 |
[75] |
Davies HS, Pudney PDA, Georgiades P, et al. (2014) Reorganisation of the salivary mucin network by dietary components: Insights from green tea polyphenols. PLOS One 9: e108372. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0108372 ![]() |
[76] |
Tveter KM, Villa JA, Cabales AJ, et al. (2020) Polyphenol-induced improvements in glucose metabolism are associated with bile acid signaling to intestinal farnesoid X receptor. BMJ Open Diabetes Res Care 8: 1-12. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjdrc-2020-001386 ![]() |
[77] |
Hansen CH, Krych L, Nielsen DS, et al. (2012) Early life treatment with vancomycin propagates Akkermansia muciniphila and reduces diabetes incidence in the NOD mouse. Diabetologia 55: 2285-2294. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00125-012-2564-7 ![]() |
[78] |
Petersson J, Schreiber O, Hansson GC, et al. (2011) Importance and regulation of the colonic mucus barrier in a mouse model of colitis. Am J Physiol Gastrointest Liver Physiol 300: G327-333. https://doi.org/10.1152/ajpgi.00422.2010 ![]() |
[79] | Mack DR, Michail S, Wei S, et al. (1999) Probiotics inhibit enteropathogenic E. coli adherence in vitro by inducing intestinal mucin gene expression. Am J Physiol 276: G941-950. https://doi.org/10.1152/ajpgi.1999.276.4.G941 |
[80] |
Mack DR, Ahrne S, Hyde L, et al. (2003) Extracellular MUC3 mucin secretion follows adherence of Lactobacillus strains to intestinal epithelial cells in vitro. Gut 52: 827-833. https://doi.org/10.1136/gut.52.6.827 ![]() |
[81] | Lazlo Szentkuti M-LE (1998) Comparative lectin-histochemistry on the pre-epithelial mucus layer in the distal colon of conventional and germ-free rats. Comp Biochem Physiol 119A: 379-386. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1095-6433(97)00434-0 |
[82] |
Umesaki Y, Tohyama K, Mutai M (1982) Biosynthesis of microvillus membrane-associated glycoproteins of small intestinal epithelial cells in germ-free and conventionalized mice. J Biochem 92: 373-379. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.jbchem.a133943 ![]() |
[83] |
Kandori H, Hirayama K, Takeda M, et al. (1996) Histochemical, lectin-histochemical and morphometrical characteristics of intestinal goblet cells of germfree and conventional mice. Exp Anim 45: 155-160. https://doi.org/10.1538/expanim.45.155 ![]() |
[84] |
Comelli EM, Simmering R, Faure M, et al. (2008) Multifaceted transcriptional regulation of the murine intestinal mucus layer by endogenous microbiota. Genomics 91: 70-77. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ygeno.2007.09.006 ![]() |
[85] |
Wlodarska M, Willing B, Keeney KM, et al. (2011) Antibiotic treatment alters the colonic mucus layer and predisposes the host to exacerbated Citrobacter rodentium-induced colitis. Infect Immun 79: 1536-1545. https://doi.org/10.1128/IAI.01104-10 ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
1. | Quincy Stévène Nkombo, Fengquan Li, Christian Tathy, Existence and asymptotic behavior of Radon measure-valued solutions for a class of nonlinear parabolic equations, 2021, 2021, 1687-1847, 10.1186/s13662-021-03668-3 |