Review Special Issues

Sex steroid hormone receptors, their ligands, and nuclear and non-nuclear pathways

  • Received: 27 February 2015 Accepted: 04 June 2015 Published: 08 June 2015
  • The ability of a cell to respond to a particular hormone depends on the presence of specific receptors for those hormones. Once the hormone has bound to its receptor, and following structural and biochemical modifications to the receptor, it separates from cytoplasmic chaperone proteins, thereby exposing the nuclear localization sequences that result in the activation of the receptor and initiation of the biological actions of the hormone on the target cell. In addition, recent work has demonstrated new pathways of steroid signaling through orphan and cell surface receptors that contribute to more rapid, “non-nuclear” or non-transcriptional effects of steroid hormones, often involving G-protein-mediated pathways. This review will summarize some of these studies for estrogens, androgens and progestins.

    Citation: Valentina Contrò, John R. Basile, Patrizia Proia. Sex steroid hormone receptors, their ligands, and nuclear and non-nuclear pathways[J]. AIMS Molecular Science, 2015, 2(3): 294-310. doi: 10.3934/molsci.2015.3.294

    Related Papers:

    [1] Lu Gao, Yuanshun Tan, Jin Yang, Changcheng Xiang . Dynamic analysis of an age structure model for oncolytic virus therapy. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2023, 20(2): 3301-3323. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2023155
    [2] Miller Cerón Gómez, Eduardo Ibarguen Mondragon, Eddy Lopez Molano, Arsenio Hidalgo-Troya, Maria A. Mármol-Martínez, Deisy Lorena Guerrero-Ceballos, Mario A. Pantoja, Camilo Paz-García, Jenny Gómez-Arrieta, Mariela Burbano-Rosero . Mathematical model of interaction Escherichia coli and Coliphages. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2023, 20(6): 9712-9727. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2023426
    [3] Christopher Botelho, Jude Dzevela Kong, Mentor Ali Ber Lucien, Zhisheng Shuai, Hao Wang . A mathematical model for Vibrio-phage interactions. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2021, 18(3): 2688-2712. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2021137
    [4] Chun Lu, Bing Li, Limei Zhou, Liwei Zhang . Survival analysis of an impulsive stochastic delay logistic model with Lévy jumps. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2019, 16(5): 3251-3271. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2019162
    [5] Divine Wanduku . The stochastic extinction and stability conditions for nonlinear malaria epidemics. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2019, 16(5): 3771-3806. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2019187
    [6] Shengqiang Liu, Lin Wang . Global stability of an HIV-1 model with distributed intracellular delays and a combination therapy. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2010, 7(3): 675-685. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2010.7.675
    [7] Yun Kang, Sourav Kumar Sasmal, Amiya Ranjan Bhowmick, Joydev Chattopadhyay . Dynamics of a predator-prey system with prey subject to Allee effects and disease. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2014, 11(4): 877-918. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2014.11.877
    [8] Haifeng Huo, Fanhong Zhang, Hong Xiang . Spatiotemporal dynamics for impulsive eco-epidemiological model with Crowley-Martin type functional response. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2022, 19(12): 12180-12211. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2022567
    [9] Kazuo Yamazaki, Xueying Wang . Global stability and uniform persistence of the reaction-convection-diffusion cholera epidemic model. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2017, 14(2): 559-579. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2017033
    [10] Dengxia Zhou, Meng Liu, Ke Qi, Zhijun Liu . Long-time behaviors of two stochastic mussel-algae models. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2021, 18(6): 8392-8414. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2021416
  • The ability of a cell to respond to a particular hormone depends on the presence of specific receptors for those hormones. Once the hormone has bound to its receptor, and following structural and biochemical modifications to the receptor, it separates from cytoplasmic chaperone proteins, thereby exposing the nuclear localization sequences that result in the activation of the receptor and initiation of the biological actions of the hormone on the target cell. In addition, recent work has demonstrated new pathways of steroid signaling through orphan and cell surface receptors that contribute to more rapid, “non-nuclear” or non-transcriptional effects of steroid hormones, often involving G-protein-mediated pathways. This review will summarize some of these studies for estrogens, androgens and progestins.


    Phage therapy is the use of bacteriophage as a therapeutic agent for the treatment of bacterial infections and has existed since the early 20th century. A bacteriophage is a virus that infects and lyses bacteria. This type of virus does not harm other cells and can kill bacteria. The killing ability of a bacteriophage is a remarkable feature that can be employed in treating bacterial disease. Bacteriophages also have many advantages over antibiotics. Accordingly, bacteriophages are used as potential agents to substitute for antibiotics for curing bacterial diseases. Accordingly, numerous bacteriophage models have been established in recent decades, and many valuable results have been obtained.

    Many papers on predator–prey models are available for the study of the stability and other dynamic behavior of various mathematical models. Some significant studies on the Leslie–Gower predator–prey models can be found in [1,2,3]. In [1,2], the authors investigated the global stability of the interior equilibrium with help from the Lyapunov function. In [3], the authors explored the positivity, boundedness, existence, and stability of various equilibria in addition to the Hopf bifurcation. Kar [4,5] investigated the stability and the different dynamic behavioral characteristics of the prey–predator model as regards the Holling type II functional response. Other prey–predator fishery models with various types of functional responses and which investigate the feasible steady states together with their existence and stability were discussed in [6,7,8]. The authors in [9,10,11] presented some studies related to the teaming approach of the prey–predator model. The persistence, permanence criteria of the system, and local and global behavior of the different equilibrium solutions were depicted in these articles. Many other variants for studying the persistence of the system, existence, and local and global dynamics at all the possible equilibria can be found in [12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19].

    Campbell [20] studied the predator–prey association between bacteriophage and bacteria. This association was developed by Levin et al. [21] to propose a general chemostat model on resource-limited growth, predation, and competition. Aviram and Rabinovitch [22] presented a mathematical model concerning the coexistence of bacteria and bacteriophage in a chemostat. Refer to [23,24] for the study of the persistence and extinction of bacteria and their resistant strain in the chemostat. The authors in [25,26] introduced the other significant work that examines the boundedness, permanence, existence, and local and global stability of the chemostat model of bacteria and virulent bacteriophage. Sahani and Gakkhar [27] provided an impulsive phage therapy model. They identified two important parametric conditions for curing bacterial disease under certain conditions. The authors in [28,29,30,31,32] analyzed mathematical models for the interactions in marine bacteriophage infections. Gakkhar and Sahani [33] established the coexistence of bacteria, bacteriophage, and infected bacteria. They provided the conditions for the existence and stability of susceptible bacteria-free equilibrium and also considered a simple Hopf-bifurcation for non-zero equilibrium point. Calsina et al. [34] introduced a structured cell-population model for the interaction of bacteria and phages, and computed the optimal lysis timing (latent period).

    The research on the interactions among bacteria, phages, and the immune system is vital for the reasonable use of bacteriophage treatments. Meanwhile, bacterial elimination using bacteriophage is potentially beneficial and can be used in curing bacterial infection [35]. Therefore, mathematical models regarding the phage therapy that combine the nonlinear interactions of bacteria, phages, and the immune system have attracted more attention from authors [36,37,38,39,40]. For example, Wang [38] extended the basic mathematical model of bacteria and phages in a chemostat that was proposed by [23] to include host innate immunity. The author investigated the effects of the host immune response on the dynamics of the model. Shu et al. [39] investigated a bacteriophage model based on the adaptive immune system in the bacteria to examine the stability analysis and bifurcation of equilibria. Leung and Weitz [40] proposed a mathematical model for phage therapy that incorporates the interactions of bacteria, phages, and the immune system to identify a synergistic regime whereby the phage and immune system jointly contribute to the elimination of bacteria. They also show that the synergy between the phage and the immune system is crucial for effective phage therapy in eliminating bacterial pathogens.

    The model in [40] was presented by a system of nonlinear ordinary differential equations as follows:

    $ {˙B=rB(1BKC)ϕBPϵIB1+B/KD,˙P=βϕBPωP,˙I=αI(1IKI)BB+KN,
    $
    (1.1)

    with the initial conditions

    $ B(0)0,P(0)0,I(0)0.
    $
    (1.2)

    Here, all the parameters are positive. $ B(t) $, $ P(t) $, and $ I(t) $ denote the population densities of the bacteria, phages, and innate immune response at time $ t $, respectively. $ r $ and $ \alpha $ are the intrinsic growth rates of the bacteria and the innate immune response. $ K_C $ and $ K_I $ are the carrying capacities of the bacteria and the innate immune response. $ \beta $, $ \phi $, and $ \omega $ indicate the burst size, adsorption rate, and decay rate of the phage, respectively. $ \epsilon $ is the killing rate of the innate immune response, $ K_N $ is the bacterial concentration when the innate immune response growth rate is half its maximum, and $ K_D $ is the bacterial concentration when the innate immune response is half saturated. In model (1.1), the immune system that kills bacteria is activated when the bacteria are persistent. The phage can infect and lyse the bacterial population reproduction. Moreover, phage particles can decompose at the outside of cells.

    The model formulated by the authors in [40] is useful in clinical trials for bacterial infections. However, in this study, the conditions for the existence of all the equilibria and their stability behavior and the persistence and extinction of model (1.1), were not discussed. However, these features are biologically and ecologically crucial. When the equilibrium points are stable, their description summarizes the biologically significant aspects of the model. When the said points are unstable, it must be established whether stable cycles of population fluctuation occur or whether the instability leads to ever increasing fluctuations with the eventual extinction of at least one of the populations [21]. The persistence of populations must be sustained to maintain the balance of an ecosystem in the real world. Note that the persistence of a system indicates that all the species are present and none of them will face extinction.

    Given the above observations, we examine the dynamic behavior of the phage therapy model, including the existence of all feasible equilibria, their stability, persistence and nonpersistence of system (1.1) and verify the theoretical results through numerical simulation. From these studies, the necessary and sufficient conditions that have biologically compelling interpretations for bacterial persistence and phage extinction are obtained. Moreover, we numerically confirmed the effect of intrinsic growth rate of bacteria and the immune killing rate on the persistence and extinction of the bacteria and phages.

    The study is organized as follows. In Section 2, we describe the positivity and boundedness of the solutions of system (1.1). In Section 3, we provide all the feasible equilibria of the system, their existence, and local stability analysis. In Section 4, we establish the global stability analysis of the equilibrium solutions $ E_3 $, $ E_4 $, and $ E_5 $ under certain conditions. Moreover, we examine the uniform persistence of the model system (1.1) and phage extinction. In Section 5, we present and discuss the numerical simulation results. In Section 6, the conclusion of this study is presented.

    In this section, we analyze the positivity and boundedness of the solutions of model (1.1).

    Theorem 2.1. (i) All solutions $ (B(t), P(t), I(t)) $ of system (1.1) with initial condition (1.2) exist in the interval $ \left[0, \infty\right) $ and satisfy $ B(t)\geq 0 $, $ P(t)\geq 0 $, $ I(t)\geq 0 $, and $ \forall t\geq 0 $.

    (ii) All the solutions of system (1.1) with initial condition (1.2) are bounded for all $ t\geq 0 $.

    Proof. (ⅰ) Let us define the right side of model (1.1) as function $ g $. Clearly $ g $ is continuous. Therefore, $ g $ is locally Lipschitz on $ \mathbb{R}_+ ^{3} = \left\{(B, P, I):B\geq 0, P\geq 0, I\geq 0\right\} $. Thus, the solution $ (B(t), P(t), I(t)) $ of system (1.1) with (1.2) exists and is unique on $ \left[0, \zeta\right) $, where $ 0 < \zeta \leq +\infty $. Under model system (1.1) with (1.2), we obtain

    $ B(t)=B(0) exp[t0{rrKCB(s)ϕP(s)ϵI(s)1+B(s)/KD}ds]0,P(t)=P(0) exp[t0{βϕB(s)ω}ds]0,I(t)=I(0) exp[t0{α(1I(s)KI)B(s)B(s)+KN}ds]0,
    $

    which completes the proof.

    (ⅱ) We consider $ W(t) = \beta B(t)+P(t) $. Then, differentiating $ W $ w.r.t $ t $ along the trajectories of model (1.1) yields

    $ dWdt=βdBdt+dPdt=rβB(1BKC)βϵBI1+B/KDωP.
    $

    Hence,

    $ dWdt+ωW=βB[(r+ω)rKCB]βϵBI1+B/KDβB[(r+ω)rKCB]βKC4r(r+ω)2:=ν.
    $

    We obtain the following expression through the theorem of differential inequality [41]:

    $ 0\leq W(t)\leq {\rm e}^{\omega (t_0-t)} W(t_0)+\frac{\nu}{\omega}(1-{\rm e}^{\omega (t_0-t)}). $

    This expression shows that $ B(t) $ and $ P(t) $ are bounded. Now, we will ascertain the boundedness of $ I(t) $. Given that variables $ B $ and $ I $ are positive, we obtain the following expression through the third equation of (1.1):

    $ \frac{dI}{dt}\leq \alpha I\left(1-\frac{I}{K_I}\right). $

    Changing variable $ u(t) = \frac{1}{I(t)} $ yields

    $ ˙u(t)+αu(t)>αKI.
    $
    (2.1)

    Hence, both sides of Eq (2.1) are multiplied by the integrating factor $ \frac{{\rm e}^{\alpha t}}{K_I} $. Then, we obtain the following expression after the integration:

    $ u(t) > \frac{{\rm e}^{\alpha(t_0-t)}+u(t_0)K_I-1}{K_I {\rm e}^{\alpha(t_0-t)}}. $

    Consequently,

    $ I(t) < \frac{I(t_0)K_I}{I(t_0)+[K_I-I(t_0)]{\rm e}^{\alpha(t_0-t)}}. $

    Therefore, $ I(t) $ is bounded in its maximal domain. This expression completes the proof.

    In this section, the existence and local behavior of all the possible equilibrium points of system (1.1) are considered.

    In this subsection, we present the existence of various equilibrium solutions of model (1.1). Straightforward calculations reveal that the possible equilibria of system (1.1) are as follows:

    1. Trivial equilibrium: $ E_0 = (0, 0, 0) $.

    2. Axial equilibrium: (i) $ E_1 = (K_C, 0, 0) $ and (ii) $ E_2 = (0, 0, K_I) $.

    3. Planar equilibrium:

    (ⅰ) $ E_3 = (\bar{B}, \bar{P}, 0) $, where $ \bar{B} = \frac{\omega}{\beta\phi} $, $ \bar{P} = \frac{r}{\phi}\left(1-\frac{\omega}{\beta\phi K_C}\right) $ with

    $ ω<βϕKC.
    $
    (3.1)

    (ⅱ) $ E_4 = (B^{\prime}, 0, I^{\prime}) $, where

    $ B^{\prime} = \frac{K_C-K_D}{2} +\sqrt{\frac{(K_C+K_D)^2}{4}-\frac{\epsilon K_I K_C K_D}{r}},\quad I^{\prime} = K_I $

    with

    $ KC>KD,
    $
    (3.2)
    $ r>ϵKI.
    $
    (3.3)

    4. Interior equilibrium: $ E_5 = (B^*, P^*, I^*) $, where

    $ B^* = \frac{\omega}{\beta\phi},\ P^* = \frac{1}{\phi}\left(r(1-\frac{\omega}{\beta\phi K_C}) -\frac{\epsilon K_I}{1+\omega/\beta\phi K_D}\right),\ I^* = K_I $

    with

    $ r>ϵβ2ϕ2KIKCKD(βϕKCω)(ω+βϕKD).
    $
    (3.4)

    In this subsection, we analyze the local stability of all possible equilibria of model (1.1) by calculating the corresponding variational matrices of each equilibrium point. The findings are shown by the following theorem:

    Theorem 3.1. (i) The trivial equilibrium $ E_0 = (0, 0, 0) $ of system (1.1) is unstable;

    (ii) The axial equilibrium $ E_1 = (K_C, 0, 0) $ is unstable;

    (iii) The axial equilibrium $ E_2 = (0, 0, K_I) $ is stable if $ r < \epsilon K_I $;

    (iv) The planar equilibrium $ E_3 = (\bar{B}, \bar{P}, 0) $ is unstable;

    (v) The planar equilibrium $ E_4 = (B^{\prime}, 0, I^{\prime}) $ is locally asymptotically stable if

    $ r < \frac{\epsilon K_I K_C K_D^2}{(K_C-2B^{\prime})(B^{\prime}+K_D)^2}, \ \ \mathit{\text{and}}\ \ \omega > \beta\phi B^{\prime}; $

    (vi) The positive interior equilibrium $ E_5 = (B^*, P^*, I^*) $ is locally asymptotically stable if it exists, and

    $ r > \frac{\epsilon\beta^2\phi^2K_I K_C K_D}{(\omega+\beta\phi K_D)^2}, $

    i.e., the intrinsic growth rate of bacteria exceeds a threshold value.

    Proof. (ⅰ) The variational matrix of system (1.1) at $ E_0 = (0, 0, 0) $ is presented by

    $ J(E_0) = (r000ω0000)
    . $

    The roots of the characteristic equation of $ J(E_0) $ are $ \lambda_1 = r > 0 $ and $ \lambda_2 = -\omega < 0 $. This concept implies that $ E_0 $ is unstable.

    (ⅱ) The variational matrix of system (1.1) at $ E_1 = (K_C, 0, 0) $ is expressed by

    $ J(E_1) = (rϕKCϵKC1+KC/KD0βϕKCω000αKCKC+KN)
    . $

    Then, the roots of the characteristic equation of $ J(E_1) $ are $ \lambda_1 = -r < 0 $, $ \lambda_2 = \beta\phi K_C-\omega $, and $ \lambda_3 = \frac{\alpha K_C}{K_C+K_N} > 0 $. $ \lambda_3 $ is positive, an outcome which implies that $ E_1 $ is unstable in the $ B \rm{-}P \rm{-}I $ space. If $ \lambda_2 > 0 $ (i.e., $ \omega < \beta\phi K_C $), then $ E_1 $ is unstable in the $ P \rm{-}I $ plane and stable in the $ B $ direction. However, if $ \lambda_2 < 0 $ (i.e., $ \omega > \beta\phi K_C $), then $ E_1 $ is stable in the $ B \rm{-}P $ plane and unstable in the $ I $ direction. We can describe this outcome biologically as follows: if the carrying capacity of bacteria is less than a threshold value, then equilibrium without the phage and immune system is locally asymptotically stable in the $ B \rm{-}P $ plane. This threshold value depends on the phage parameters (decay rate, burst size, and adsorption rate). Given the existence condition of $ E_3 $ (i.e., $ \lambda_2 = \beta\phi K_C-\omega > 0 $), $ E_1 $ is unstable in $ B \rm{-}P $ plane. Thus, $ E_1 $ is unstable when $ E_3 $ exists.

    (ⅲ) The variational matrix of system (1.1) at $ E_2 = (0, 0, K_I) $ is denoted by

    $ J(E_2) = (rϵKI000ω0000)
    . $

    Thus, the roots of the characteristic equation of $ J(E_2) $ are $ \lambda_1 = r-\epsilon K_I $ and $ \lambda_2 = -\omega < 0 $. Hence, $ E_2 $ is stable if $ \lambda_1 < 0 $, a condition which implies that $ r < \epsilon K_I $. This outcome can be described biologically as follows: if the maximum bacterial growth rate $ r $ is less than the maximum per capita immune killing rate $ \epsilon K_I $, then equilibrium without the bacteria and phage is stable. Given the existence condition of $ E_4 $ (i.e., $ \lambda_1 = r-\epsilon K_I > 0 $), $ E_2 $ is unstable. Hence, $ E_2 $ is unstable if $ E_4 $ exists.

    (ⅳ) The variational matrix of system (1.1) at $ E_3 = (\bar{B}, \bar{P}, 0) $ is provided by

    $ J(E_3) = (rωβϕKCωβϵωKDω+βϕKDrβ(1ωβϕKC)0000αωω+βϕKN)
    . $

    The roots of the characteristic equation of $ J(E_3) $ are $ \lambda_1 = \frac{\alpha\omega}{\omega+\beta\phi K_N} $ and the solutions of the quadratic equation,

    $ \lambda^2 + A_1\lambda + A_2 = 0, $

    where

    $ \left\{ A1=rωβϕKC>0,A2=rω(1ωβϕKC)>0,  when  ω<βϕKC.
    \right. $

    Thus, if the existence condition of $ E_3 $ (3.1) holds, then $ E_3 $ is locally asymptotically stable in the $ B \rm{-}P $ plane. Given that $ \lambda_1 = \frac{\alpha\omega}{\omega+\beta\phi K_N} $ is positive, $ E_3 $ is unstable in the $ B \rm{-}P \rm{-}I $ space. We observed that if the carrying capacity of the bacteria is greater than a threshold value, then equilibrium without the immune system is locally asymptotically stable in the $ B \rm{-}P $ plane. This threshold value depends on the phage parameters (decay rate, burst size, and adsorption rate).

    (ⅴ) The variational matrix of system (1.1) at $ E_4 = (B^{\prime}, 0, I^{\prime}) $ is defined by

    $ J(E_4) = (r2rKCBϵKIK2D(B+KD)2ϕBϵBKDB+KD0βϕBω000αBB+KN)
    . $

    The roots of the characteristic equation of $ J(E_4) $ are $ \lambda_1 = r-\frac{2r}{K_C}B^{\prime}-\frac{\epsilon K_I K_D^2}{(B^{\prime}+K_D)^2} $, $ \lambda_2 = \beta \phi B^{\prime}-\omega $, and $ \lambda_3 = -\frac{\alpha B^{\prime}}{B^{\prime}+K_N} < 0 $. $ E_4 $ is locally asymptotically stable in the $ B \rm{-}I $ plane if $ \lambda_1 < 0 $ (i.e., $ r < \frac{\epsilon K_I K_C K_D^2}{(K_C-2B^{\prime})(B^{\prime}+K_D)^2} $). Moreover, $ E_4 $ is locally asymptotically stable in the $ B \rm{-}P \rm{-}I $ space if $ \lambda_1 < 0 $ and $ \lambda_2 < 0 $, provided that $ r < \frac{\epsilon K_I K_C K_D^2}{(K_C-2B^{\prime})(B^{\prime}+K_D)^2} $ and $ \omega > \beta\phi B^{\prime}. $ This outcome can be biologically interpreted as follows: if the intrinsic growth rate and equilibrium density of the bacteria is lower than some threshold values, then equilibrium without phages is locally asymptotically stable in the $ B \rm{-}P \rm{-}I $ space.

    (ⅵ) The variational matrix of system (1.1) at the positive equilibrium $ E_5 = (B^*, P^*, I^*) $ is provided as follows:

    $ J(E_5) = (r2rKCBϕPϵI(1+B/KD)2ϕBϵB1+B/KDβϕP0000αBB+KN)
    . $

    Hence, $ \lambda_1 = -\frac{\alpha B^*}{B^*+K_N} $ is one of the roots of the characteristic equation of $ J(E_5) $. The other two roots are provided by equation

    $ \lambda^2 + N_1\lambda + N_2 = 0, $

    where

    $ {N1=r+2rKCB+ϕP+ϵI(1+B/KD)2,N2=βϕ2BP.
    $
    (3.5)

    Substituting the value of $ B^* $, $ P^* $, and $ I^* $ in (3.5) yields

    $ \left\{N1=rωβϕKCϵωβϕKIKD(ω+βϕKD)2,N2=rω(1ωβϕKC)ϵωKI1+ω/βϕKD.
    \right. $

    $ \lambda_1 = -\frac{\alpha\omega}{\omega+\beta\phi K_N} < 0 $. The existence condition (3.4) of $ E_5 = (B^*, P^*, I^*) $ provided $ N_2 > 0 $. Thus, $ E_5 $ is locally asymptotically stable in the $ B \rm{-}P \rm{-}I $ space whenever it exists and $ N_1 > 0 $, thereby implying that $ r > \frac{\epsilon\beta^2\phi^2K_I K_C K_D}{(\omega+\beta\phi K_D)^2}. $ This outcome can be biologically described as follows: if the intrinsic growth rate of bacteria exceeds a threshold value, then coexistence equilibrium $ E_5 $ is locally asymptotically stable. This expression completes the proof.

    In this section, the global behavior at equilibria $ E_3 $, $ E_4 $ and $ E_5 $ of system (1.1) is established under certain parametric conditions. We also discuss some conditions for the persistence and nonpersistence of model (1.1).

    In this subsection, we first present the global stability of $ E_3 $ and $ E_4 $ by applying the Bendixson–Dulac criterion. Then, we explore the global stability of $ E_5 $ by using an appropriate Lyapunov function.

    Theorem 4.1. If equilibrium without immune system $ E_3 $ exists and is locally asymptotically stable in the interior of the positive quadrant of the $ B \rm{-}P $ plane, then $ E_3 $ is globally asymptotically stable in that plane.

    Proof. Let us construct

    $ ψ(B,P)=1BP,a1(B,P)=rB(1BKC)ϕBP,  anda2(B,P)=βϕBPωP.
    $

    $ \psi(B, P) > 0 $ in the interior of the positive quadrant of the $ B \rm{-}P $ plane. Thus, we obtain

    $ Δ(B,P)=B(a1ψ)+P(a2ψ)=B[rP(1BKC)ϕ]+P(βϕωB)=rPKC<0.
    $

    $ \Delta(B, P) $ has no sign change and is not zero in the positive quadrant of the $ B \rm{-}P $ plane. When the Bendixson–Dulac criterion is applied, system (1.1) has no limit cycle and completely lies in the positive quadrant of the $ B \rm{-}P $ plane. Therefore, $ E_3 $ is globally asymptotically stable.

    Theorem 4.2. If equilibrium without phages $ E_4 $ exists and is locally asymptotically stable in the $ B \rm{-}I $ plane, then $ E_4 $ is globally asymptotically stable in region $ \mathbb{R}_+ ^{2} $ of the $ B \rm{-}I $ plane, where

    $ R2+={(B,I):B>0,I>0,(B+KD)2[rKI(B+KN)+αKCI]ϵKIKCKDI(B+KN)>0}.
    $

    Proof. Let us construct

    $ ψ(B,I)=1BI,c1(B,I)=rB(1BKC)ϵBI1+B/KD,  andc2(B,I)=αI(1IKI)BB+KN.
    $

    $ \psi(B, I) > 0 $ in the interior of the positive quadrant of the $ B \rm{-}I $ plane. Hence, we obtain

    $ Δ(B,I)=B(c1ψ)+I(c2ψ)=B[rI(1BKC)ϵ1+B/KD]+I[α(1IKI)1B+KN]=rIKC+ϵKD(B+KD)2αKI(B+KN)<0when
    $
    $ (B+KD)2[rKI(B+KN)+αKCI]ϵKIKCKDI(B+KN)>0.
    $
    (4.1)

    Therefore, the theorem holds.

    Theorem 4.3. If $ \beta < 1 $, then the positive interior equilibrium $ E_5 = (B^*, P^*, I^*) $ is globally asymptotically stable in the interior of the positive octant ($ i.e., \ Int.\mathbb{R}_+ ^{3} $).

    Proof. Define the positive definite Lyapunov function $ V(B, P, I):\mathbb{R}_+ ^{3} \rightarrow \mathbb{R} $ to validate the global stability at $ E_5 = (B^*, P^*, I^*) $, such that

    $ V(B,P,I) = V_1(B,P,I)+V_2(B,P,I)+V_3(B,P,I), $

    where $ V_1(B, P, I) = (B-B^*-B^*\ \rm{ln}(B/{B^*})) $, $ V_2(B, P, I) = (P-P^*-P^*\ \rm{ln}(P/{P^*})) $, and $ V_3(B, P, I) = (I-I^*-I^*\ \rm{ln}(I/{I^*})) $.

    $ V(B, P, I) $ is continuous on $ Int.\mathbb{R}_+ ^{3} $ and zero at $ E_5 = (B^*, P^*, I^*) $. Then, differentiating function $ V $ with respect to time $ t $ along the trajectories of (1.1) yields

    $ dVdt=dV1dt+dV2dt+dV3dt.
    $
    (4.2)

    Moreover, the time derivatives of $ V_1 $, $ V_2 $, and $ V_3 $ along the solutions of system (1.1) are as follows:

    $ dV1dt=(BB)[r(1BKC)ϕPϵI1+B/KD],
    $
    (4.3)
    $ dV2dt=(PP)(βϕBω),
    $
    (4.4)
    $ dV3dt=(II)[αBB+KNαBIKI(B+KN)].
    $
    (4.5)

    $ E_5 = (B^*, P^*, I^*) $ satisfies (1.1). Thus, we obtain the following expression after a straightforward computation:

    $ ϵI1+B/KD=r(1BKC)ϕP,ω=βϕB,KI=I.
    $
    (4.6)

    Substituting the three values of (4.6) into (4.3)-(4.5) yields

    $ dV1dt=rKC(BB)2ϕ(BB)(PP),
    $
    (4.7)
    $ dV2dt=βϕ(BB)(PP),
    $
    (4.8)
    $ dV3dt=αBI(B+KN)(II)2.
    $
    (4.9)

    Substituting (4.7)-(4.9) into (4.2) and using algebraic calculation yield

    $ dVdt= rKC(BB)2ϕ(BB)(PP)+βϕ(BB)(PP)αBI(B+KN)(II)2 12(2rKCϕ+βϕ)(BB)2+12(ϕ+βϕ)(PP)2αBI(B+KN)(II)2.
    $

    If the condition in Theorem 4.3 holds, then $ \frac{dV}{dt} < 0 $ along all the trajectories in $ \mathbb{R}_+ ^{3} $, except $ E_5 = (B^*, P^*, I^*) $. Therefore, $ E_5 = (B^*, P^*, I^*) $ is globally asymptotically stable.

    Note 1. Theorem 4.3 shows that burst size $ \beta $ (the amount of new virions released per lysis) plays an important role in making system (1.1) globally asymptotically stable.

    In this subsection, we establish the uniform persistence and non-persistence behaviors of model (1.1). We show the uniform persistence of the model using the average Lyapunov function method.

    Theorem 4.4. Assume that the hypotheses in Theorems 4.1 and 4.2 hold. Then, model (1.1) is permanent or uniformly persistent if $ \omega < \beta\phi K_C $, $ r > \epsilon K_I $, and $ \omega < \beta\phi \left(\frac{K_C-K_D}{2}+ \sqrt{\frac{(K_C+K_D)^2}{4}-\frac{\epsilon K_I K_C K_D}{r}}\right) $.

    Proof. We define the average Lyapunov function for (1.1) as follows:

    $ \Upsilon(X) = B^\delta P^{\delta_1} I^{\delta_2}, $

    where $ \delta $, $ \delta_1 $, and $ \delta_2 $ are positive constants. Function $ \Upsilon(X) $ is the nonnegative continuous function defined in $ \mathbb{R}_+ ^{3} $. Therefore, we obtain

    $ Ω(X)=˙Υ(X)Υ(X)=δ˙BB+δ1˙PP+δ2˙II= δ[r(1BKC)ϕPϵI1+B/KD]+δ1(βϕBω)+δ2[α(1IKI)BB+KN].
    $

    We assume that conditions (3.1), (3.2), and (3.3) hold. The hypotheses in Theorems 4.1 and 4.2 hold. Then, planar equilibria $ E_3 $ and $ E_4 $ exist. Furthermore, no periodic orbits are observed in the interior of the $ B \rm{-}P $ plane and region $ \mathbb{R}_+ ^{2} $ of the $ B \rm{-}I $ plane. Hence, system (1.1) is uniformly persistent enough to prove that $ \Omega(X) $ is positive for all equilibria $ X $ in domain $ G $ of $ \mathbb{R}_+ ^{3} $ where

    $ G{(B,P,I):B>0,P>0,I>0,(B+KD)2[rKI(B+KN)+αKCI]ϵKIKCKDI(B+KN)>0}
    $

    for the appropriate selection of $ \delta $, $ \delta_1 $, and $ \delta_2 > 0 $. Specifically, the conditions described below must be satisfied for system (1.1) to persist.

    $ Ω(E0):=δrδ1ω>0,
    $
    (4.10)
    $ Ω(E1):=δ1(βϕKCω)+δ2(αKCKC+KN)>0,
    $
    (4.11)
    $ Ω(E2):=δ(rϵKI)δ1ω>0,
    $
    (4.12)
    $ Ω(E3):=δ2αωω+βϕKN>0,
    $
    (4.13)
    $ Ω(E4):=δ1[βϕ(KCKD2+(KC+KD)24ϵKIKCKDr)ω]>0.
    $
    (4.14)

    We can make $ \Omega(E_0) > 0 $ by increasing $ \delta $. Hence, inequality (4.10) holds. Inequality $ \omega < \beta\phi K_C $ implies that (4.11) also holds. If $ r > \epsilon K_I $, then increasing $ \delta $ is enough. We can make $ \Omega(E_2) > 0 $, implying that inequality (4.12) holds. $ \frac{\alpha\omega}{\omega+\beta\phi K_N} $ is positive. Thus, inequality (4.13) holds. The following condition must be satisfied for inequality (4.14):

    $ ω<βϕ(KCKD2+(KC+KD)24ϵKIKCKDr).
    $
    (4.15)

    Finally, we know that model (1.1) is permanent or uniformly persistent.

    Note 2. Theorem 4.4 indicates that system (1.1) is uniformly persistent if the bacteria growth rate is greater than the innate immune killing rate, and if the carrying capacity of bacteria and the equilibrium density of the bacteria are greater than the threshold values that depends upon the phage parameters.

    Remark 1. For the persistence of system (1.1), when conditions (a) $ \omega < \beta\phi K_C $, (b) $ r > \epsilon K_I $, and (c) $ \omega < \beta\phi \left(\frac{K_C-K_D}{2}+ \sqrt{\frac{(K_C+K_D)^2}{4}-\frac{\epsilon K_I K_C K_D}{r}}\right) $ hold, the equilibrium without phage and immune system $ E_1 = (K_C, 0, 0) $ becomes unstable in the $ B \rm{-}P $ plane, while the equilibrium without bacteria and phage $ E_2 = (0, 0, K_I) $ and the equilibrium without phages $ E_4 = (B^{\prime}, 0, I^{\prime}) $ both become unstable in the $ B \rm{-}P \rm{-}I $ space.

    Now, we provide a sufficient condition under which system (1.1) is non-persistent. The following lemma must be recalled.

    Lemma 4.5. (see [8,42]) If $ k_1 $, $ k_2 > 0 $, and $ \frac{dX}{dt}\leq(\geq) X(t) (k_1-k_2X(t)) $ with $ X(0) > 0 $, then

    $ \limsup\limits_{t \to \infty} X(t) \leq \frac{k_1}{k_2}\quad (\liminf\limits_{t \to \infty} X(t) \geq \frac{k_1}{k_2}). $

    Theorem 4.6. If $ \omega > \beta \phi K_C $, then $ \lim \limits_{t\rightarrow \infty}P(t) = 0 $, that is, the phage becomes extinct.

    Proof. Applying the positivity of variables $ B $, $ P $, and $ I $ and the first equation of (1.1) yields

    $ \frac{dB}{dt} \leq rB \left(1- \frac{B}{K_C}\right). $

    Using Lemma 4.5 yields

    $ \limsup\limits_{t \to \infty} B(t)\leq K_C. $

    Hence, $ T^* \in \mathbb{R}_+ $ for arbitrary $ \eta > 0 $. Accordingly,

    $ B(t)KC+η,tT.
    $
    (4.16)

    Using the second equation in (1.1) and (4.16) yields

    $ \frac{dP(t)}{dt}\leq P(-\omega + \beta \phi K_C). $

    Then,

    $ P(t) \leq P(0) {\rm e}^{(-\omega + \beta \phi K_C)t}. $

    With the given hypothesis, $ P(t)\to 0 $ as $ t\to\infty $. Specifically, the phage becomes extinct.

    Note 3. Biologically, Theorem 4.6 indicates that when the carrying capacity of bacteria is less than the threshold value ($ K_C < \omega/\beta \phi $), (i.e., a high decay rate, low adsorption rate, and small burst size), the phage disappears.

    In this section, we describe the numerical simulations to explain our analytical findings and stability results in the prior sections. For this, we consider the three sets of parameter values of system (1.1) as provided in Table 1.

    Table 1.  Meanings and three sets of parameter values used in numerical simulations.
    Parameter Description Data 1 Data 2 Data 3
    $ \phi $ adsorption rate of phage 0.2 0.2 0.76
    $ \alpha $ intrinsic growth rate of innate immune response 0.38 0.38 0.2
    $ \beta $ burst size of phage 0.2 0.2 0.69
    $ \epsilon $ killing rate of innate immune response 0.3 0.5 0.3
    $ \omega $ decay rate of phage 0.1 0.3 0.9
    $ r $ intrinsic growth rate of bacteria 1 1 1
    $ K_C $ carrying capacity of bacteria 5 5 40
    $ K_D $ bacterial concentration when innate immune response is half saturated 3 3 20
    $ K_I $ carrying capacity of innate immune response 0.5 2.48 0.58
    $ K_N $ bacterial concentration when the innate immune response growth rate is half its maximum 0.8 0.8 0.2

     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV

    For the set of parameter values in Data 1, the conditions of persistence in Theorem 4.4 are satisfied. For these parameter values, all the species, namely, $ B(t) $, $ P(t) $, and $ I(t) $, persist, and a stable population is obtained for all the species (Figure 1). Figure 1 indicates that the densities of phage species $ P $ and immune system $ I $ initially decrease, while the bacteria species slightly decreases initially and then increase slowly. Finally, all three species achieve steady states and become asymptotically stable. We also plot the dynamics of the model for different initial conditions using these parameter values (Figure 2). In Figure 2(a)(c), the populations of all the species, namely, $ B(t) $, $ P(t) $, and $ I(t) $, tend to be in steady state. In Figure 2(d), all the solutions of system (1.1) approach $ E_5 = (2.5, 2.091, 0.5) $, starting from various initial points. Thus, coexistence equilibrium point $ E_5 = (2.5, 2.091, 0.5) $ becomes an attractor.

    Figure 1.  Asymptotic stable solution $ E_5 = (2.5, 2.091, 0.5) $ of system (1.1) for the parametric values provided in Data 1. This figure depicts that the three species, namely, $ B(t) $, $ P(t) $, and $ I(t) $, persist and finally develop to their steady states.
    Figure 2.  Time series plot of (a) bacterial $ B $, (b) phage $ P $, (c) innate immune response $ I $, and (d) phase portrait of system (1.1) for different initial conditions with parameter values provided in Data 1. Figures (a)–(c) show that the populations of $ B $, $ P $, and $ I $ tend to their steady states ($ 2.5 $, $ 2.091 $, and $ 0.5 $, respectively). Figure (d) shows that $ E_5 = (2.5, 2.091, 0.5) $ is locally asymptotically stable.

    In Figure 3, we show the variation of $ B $ and $ P $ with time for five different values of parameter $ r $, and the rest of the parameters have the same values as those in Data 1. More precisely, if $ r = 0.6 $, $ r = 1 $, and $ r = 1.5 $, such that $ r > \epsilon K_I $, then all bacterial and phage populations converge to their equilibrium values, implying that system (1.1) becomes persistent. Meanwhile, if $ r = 0.05 $ and $ r = 0.15 $, such that $ r\leq\epsilon K_I $, then system (1.1) is nonpersistent, that is, leads to the extinction of some species because the populations of $ B $ and $ P $ tend toward zero. Figure 3 shows that whenever the intrinsic growth rate of bacteria exceeds the immune killing rate, the bacteria and phage populations persist; otherwise, the bacteria and phage populations become extinct. This phenomenon indicates that the intrinsic growth rate of bacteria and the immune killing rate may suppress the persistence and extinction of bacteria and phage.

    Figure 3.  Behavior of $ B $ and $ P $ for the parameters in Data 1 with different values of $ r $. (a) Effect of $ r $ on bacterial $ B $, (b) Effect of $ r $ on phage $ P $.

    For the set of parameters stated in Data 1, except $ \omega = 0.3 $, the extinction condition of phage $ P $ given in Theorem 4.6 is satisfied. We observe that if the carrying capacity of bacteria is less than a certain threshold value, phage population $ P $ becomes extinct, while bacterial population $ B $ and the population of innate immune response $ I $ persist (see Figure 4). In Figure 4(a), the phage population significantly decreases and ultimately tends toward zero, while bacteria population $ B $ increases toward the equilibrium level, immune system $ I $ decreases toward the steady state level. In Figure 4(b), we also describe the solution curves starting from different initial points. This figure shows that all the phage populations ($ P $) tend toward zeros, implying phage extinction for system (1.1).

    Figure 4.  Phage extinction of system (1.1) for parametric values provided in Data 1 except $ \omega = 0.3 $. (a) The figure displays that the solution approaches the steady state $ (4.706, 0, 0.5) $ for initial point $ (2, 3, 2) $. (b) The figure indicates that the phage populations tends to zero for initial points $ (2, 0.2, 1) $, $ (0.6, 1, 0.8) $, $ (2, 2.2, 2) $, $ (1, 4, 0.5) $ and $ (2, 5.7, 1) $.

    In the set of parameters exhibited in Data 2, the stability condition of $ E_2 $ in Theorem 3.1(iii) is satisfied. We see that the equilibrium without bacteria and phage $ E_2 = (0, 0, 2.48) $ is stable if the maximum bacterial birth rate is less than the maximum per capita immune killing rate, as described in Figure 5. Figure 5 indicates that species $ B $ and $ P $ are extinct, while species $ I $ persists. The stability conditions of $ E_4 $ in Theorem 3.1(v) are satisfied by further changing the parameter values $ \epsilon = 0.4 $ and setting the other parameters similarly as in Data 2. In this case, system (1.1) has an equilibrium without phages $ E_4 = (2.058, 0, 2.48) $, and we observe that $ E_4 $ is locally asymptotically stable if the intrinsic growth rate of bacteria and the equilibrium density of the bacteria are less than the threshold values (see Figure 6). Figure 6(a) illustrates that in the parametric values stated in Data 2, except $ \epsilon = 0.4 $, phage $ P $ eventually becomes extinct, while bacteria $ B $ and innate immune response $ I $ persist and finally obtain their steady states $ (2.058, 0, 2.48) $. Figure 6(b) shows that all the solutions, beginning from various initial conditions, approach $ E_4 = (2.058, 0, 2.48) $.

    Figure 5.  Asymptotic stable equilibrium point $ E_2 = (0, 0, 2.48) $ for system (1.1) with parametric values presented in Data 2. This figure shows that the populations of $ B $ and $ P $ become extinct, while that of $ I $ exists.
    Figure 6.  (a) Solution curves of the species, indicating that the solution of the system converges to $ E_4 = (2.058, 0, 2.48) $. (b) Phase portrait of system (1.1), indicating $ E_4 = (2.058, 0, 2.48) $ is locally asymptotically stable for various initial values. All parameters are mentioned in Data 2 except $ \epsilon = 0.4 $.

    In the set of parameters stated in Data 3 of Table 1, system (1.1) has a coexistence equilibrium $ E_5 = (1.705, 1.038, 0.58) $. According to Theorem 3.1(vi), we conclude that $ E_5 $ is locally asymptotically stable if the intrinsic growth rate of bacteria species is greater than the threshold value (see Figure 7). Figure 7(a) shows that the bacteria and phage populations initially exhibit oscillations, and the amplitude of oscillations gradually decreases and eventually becomes stable. For species $ I $, a steady state achieved. Figure 7(b) represents the stable phase portrait of system (1.1).

    Figure 7.  (a) Asymptotic stable solution of system (1.1) around $ E_5 = (1.705, 1.038, 0.58) $, indicating that the solution of the system evolves to its steady states. (b) Phase portrait diagram, showing that there is a stable solution in the $ B \rm{-}P \rm{-}I $ space. The parameter values are stated in Data 3.

    This paper focuses on the dynamical analysis of the phage therapy model (1.1) proposed by Leung and Weitz in [40]. On the basis of this model, we develop the mathematical analysis of the model theoretically and numerically. First, we consider the basic dynamic behaviors, such as the positivity and boundedness of system (1.1). Theorem 2.1 shows that all the solutions of system (1.1) are positive and bounded, implying that the system is biologically well–behaved. Then, we discuss the sufficient conditions for the existence and local stability of all the equilibrium solutions of the system.

    From Theorems 3.1 (ⅱ) and (3.1), we conclude that the instability of the equilibrium without phage and immune system $ E_1 $ offers a sufficient condition for the existence of equilibrium without immune system $ E_3 $. Similarly, we can deduce that the instability of the equilibrium without bacteria and phage $ E_2 $ provides an existence condition for the equilibrium without phages $ E_4 $ (refer to Theorems 3.1 (ⅲ) and (3.3)).

    For the equilibrium without phage and immune system $ E_1 $ to be locally asymptotically stable (LAS) in the $ B \rm{-}P $ plane, the carrying capacity of bacteria must be less than the threshold value, which depends on the decay rate, burst size, and adsorption rate of phage. The LAS criteria of equilibrium without bacteria and phage $ E_2 $, the bacterial growth rate should be less than the innate immune killing rate. For the equilibrium without immune system $ E_3 $ to be LAS in the $ B \rm{-}P $ plane, the carrying capacity of bacteria must greater than the threshold value, which depends on the decay rate, burst size, and adsorption rate of phage. For the equilibrium without phages $ E_4 $ to be LAS, the intrinsic growth rate of bacteria and the equilibrium density of the bacteria should be less than the threshold values. For the LAS of coexistence equilibrium $ E_5 $, the intrinsic growth rate must be greater than the threshold value. In Section 5, some numerical simulations are performed to verify the above theoretical results (see Theorem 3.1 and Figures 1, 2, and 47).

    Transcritical bifurcations are directly related to the deletion or creation of a new equilibrium and its local stability nature. The system has undergone two possible transcritical bifurcations, which depend entirely on the threshold values of the carrying capacity of bacteria and the innate immune response. When the carrying capacity of bacteria ($ K_C $) is less than the threshold $ \omega /(\beta \phi) $, the equilibrium without phage and immune system $ E_1 $ is locally asymptotically stable. However, as soon as $ K_C $ exceeds $ \omega/(\beta \phi) $, then it leads not only $ E_1 $ as unstable but also this is the necessary criteria for existence of equilibrium without immune system $ E_3 $ and at $ K_C = \omega/(\beta \phi) $, $ E_3 $ reduces to $ E_1 $. Therefore, transcritical bifurcation occurs at the threshold condition $ K_C = \omega/(\beta \phi) $, around the equilibrium without phage and immune system $ E_1 $. Using the same argument as above, we can easily state that another transcritical bifurcation occurs at the equilibrium without bacteria and phage $ E_2 $ for $ K_I = r/\epsilon $ and $ K_I < r/\epsilon $, leading to the existence of equilibrium without phages $ E_4 $.

    We analyze the global stability behavior for the equilibrium without immune system $ E_3 $ and that without phages $ E_4 $ by applying the Bendixson–Dulac criterion (see Theorems 4.1 and 4.2). The equilibrium without immune system $ E_3 $ and that without phages $ E_4 $ are globally asymptotically stable in the $ B \rm{-}P $ and $ B \rm{-}I $ planes, respectively, whenever they are locally asymptotically stable. In Theorem 4.3, we also establish the global asymptotic stability of coexistence equilibrium $ E_5 $ by applying the Lyapunov functional method. The role of the burst size of phage in the phage therapy model is crucial in determining the global stability behavior of the coexistence equilibrium.

    We derive the sufficient conditions for the uniform persistence of system (1.1) (refer the Theorem 4.4). Biologically, if the birth rate of bacteria is greater than the immune killing rate and the carrying capacity of bacteria and the equilibrium density of the bacteria are greater than the threshold values, then the system is uniformly persistent. This is supported by some numerical examples in Figures 1, 2, and 7. In Theorem 4.6, we provide a certain condition for the extinction of the phage population. Biologically, this extinction criteria explains that if the carrying capacity of bacteria remains below the threshold value, which depends on the phage values, then the phage becomes extinct, and the system is non-persistent. This result reveals that a phage with a high value of $ \omega/\beta \phi $ (i.e., a high decay rate, a low adsorption rate, and a small burst size) will become extinct. This finding is also supported by a numerical example (refer to Theorem 4.6 and Figure 4).

    Numerically, the bacteria growth and innate immune killing rates affect the population of the species. Species $ B $ and $ P $ exist if the bacteria growth rate exceeds the innate immune killing rate; otherwise, they become extinct (see Figure 3).

    Biologically, all species that co-exist exhibit an oscillatory balance behaviour. Meanwhile, a periodic solution arises in a system when the analyzed equilibrium point changes in stability as a function of its parameters. To capture the oscillating coexistence of populations, we establish the existence of Hopf bifurcation around coexistence equilibrium $ E_5 $ by considering the parameters in system (1.1) as a bifurcation parameter for future work. In addition, we will study model (1.1) with time delay to obtain a more realistic model. We will consider the influence of time delay on the stability of the system and the existence of a Hopf bifurcation solution. We will investigate the direction and stability of Hopf-bifurcating periodic solutions with the help of normal form theory and the center manifold theorem.

    The authors would like to thank the reviewers and the editor for their careful reading, helpful comments and suggestions that greatly improved the paper.

    The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

    [1] Pietras RJ, Szego CM (1977) Specific binding sites for oestrogen at the outer surfaces of isolated endometrial cells. Nature 265: 69-72. doi: 10.1038/265069a0
    [2] Pietras RJ, Szego CM (1980) Partial purification and characterization of oestrogen receptors in subfractions of hepatocyte plasma membranes. Biochem J 191: 743-760.
    [3] Tremblay GB, Tremblay A, Copeland NG, et al. (1997) Cloning, chromosomal localization and functional analysis of the murine estrogen receptor beta. Mol Endocrinol 11: 353-365.
    [4] Leitman DC, Paruthiyil S, Yuan C, et al. (2012) Tissue specific regulation of genes by estrogen receptors Sem. Reprod Med 30: 14-22 doi: 10.1055/s-0031-1299593
    [5] Meneses-Morales I, Tecalco-Cruz AC, Barrios-García T, et al. (2014) SIP1/NHERF2 enhance estrogen receptor alpha transactivation in breast cancer cells. Nucleic Acids Res 42: 6885-6900. doi: 10.1093/nar/gku311
    [6] Wright PK, May FEB, Darby S, et al. (2009) Estrogen regulates vesicle trafficking gene expression in EFF-3, EFM-19 and MCF-7 breast cancer cells. Int J Clin Exp Pathol 2: 463-475.
    [7] Manavathi B, Dey O, Gajulapalli VNR, et al. (2013) Derailed estrogen signaling and breast cancer: an authentic couple. Endocr Rev 34: 1-32 doi: 10.1210/er.2011-1057
    [8] Mani SK, Mermelstein PG, Tetel MJ, et al. (2012) Convergence of Multiple Mechanisms of Steroid Hormone Action. Horm Metab Res 44: 569-576. doi: 10.1055/s-0032-1306343
    [9] Zhao C, Dahlman-Wright K, Gustafsson JA (2008) Estrogen receptor beta: an overview and update. Nucl Recept Signal 6: e003.
    [10] Mooradian AD, Morley JE, Korenman SC (1987) Biological actions of androgens. Endocr Rev 8: 1-28 doi: 10.1210/edrv-8-1-1
    [11] Picard D (2006) Chaperoning steroid hormone action. Trends Endocrinol Metab 17: 229-235. doi: 10.1016/j.tem.2006.06.003
    [12] Kicman AT (2008) Pharmacology of anabolic steroids. Brit J Pharmacol 154: 502-521 doi: 10.1038/bjp.2008.165
    [13] Falkenstein E, Tillmann HC, Christ M, et al. (2000) Multiple action of steroid hormones-a focus on rapid, nongenomic effects. Pharmacol Rev 52: 513-56.
    [14] Cato AC, Nestl A, Mink S (2002) Rapid action of steroid receptors in cellular signaling pathways. Sci STKE 138: re9
    [15] Liao RS, Ma S, Miao L, et al. (2013) Androgen receptor-mediated non-genomic regulation of prostate cancer cell proliferation. Transl Androl Urol 2: 187-196
    [16] Simons K, Toomre D (2000) Lipid rafts and signal transduction. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol 1: 31-39.
    [17] Pedram A, Razandi M, Sainson RC, et al. (2007) A conserved mechanism for steroid receptor translocation to the plasma membrane. J Biol Chem 282: 22278-22288. doi: 10.1074/jbc.M611877200
    [18] Kousteni S, Bellido T, Plotkin LI, et al. (2001) Nongenotropic, sex-nonspecific signaling through the estrogen or androgen receptors: dissociation from transcriptional activity Cell 104: 719-730.
    [19] Y Gong, L J Blok, J E Perry, et al. (1995) Calcium regulation of androgen receptor expression in the human prostate cancer cell line LNCaP. Endocrinology 136: 2172-2178
    [20] Trabert B, Wentzensen N, Yang HP, et al. (2013) Is estrogen plus progestin menopausal hormone therapy safe with respect to endometrial cancer risk? Int J Cancer 15: 417-26.
    [21] Westley RL, May FEB (2013) A twenty-first century cancer epidemic caused by obesity: the involvement of insulin, diabetes, and insulin-like growth factors. Int J Endocrinol 2013: 632461.
    [22] Mady EA, Ramadan EE, Ossman AA (2000) Sex steroid hormones in serum and tissue of benign and malignant breast tumor patients. Dis Markers 16: 151-157. doi: 10.1155/2000/305940
    [23] Allen NE, Beral V, Casabonne D, et al. (2009) Moderate alcohol intake and cancer incidence in women. J Natl Cancer Inst 101: 296-305. doi: 10.1093/jnci/djn514
    [24] McCullough LE, Eng SM, Bradshaw PT, et al. (2012) Fat or fit: the joint effects of physical activity, weight gain, and body size on breast cancer risk. Cancer 118: 4860-4868. doi: 10.1002/cncr.27433
    [25] Siddappa K (2002) Cutaneous and mucosal pain syndromes. Indian J Dermatol Venereol Leprol 68: 123-130
    [26] Piérard-Franchimont C, Piérard GE (2002) Postmenopausal aging of the sebaceous follicle: a comparison between women receiving hormone replacement therapy or not. Dermatology 204: 17-22. doi: 10.1159/000051804
    [27] Klein-Nulend J, van Oers RF, Bakker AD, et al. (2014) Bone cell mechanosensitivity, estrogen deficiency, and osteoporosis. J Biomech S0021-9290: 00661-7
    [28] Shen M, Kumar SP, Shi H (2014) Estradiol regulates insulin signaling and inflammation in adipose tissue. Horm Mol Biol Clin Investig 17: 99-107.
    [29] Hammes SR, Levin ER (2011) Minireview: Recent Advances in Extranuclear Steroid Receptor Actions. Endocrinology152: 4489-4495. doi: 10.1210/en.2011-1470
    [30] Collins P, Webb C (1999) Estrogen hits the surface. Nat Med 5: 1130-1131. doi: 10.1038/13453
    [31] Kajiwara M1, Kuraku S, Kurokawa T, et al. (2006). Tissue preferential expression of estrogen receptor gene in the marine snail, Thais clavigera. Gen Comp Endocrinol 148: 315-326
    [32] Koike S, Sakai M, Muramatsu M (1987) Molecular cloning and characterization of rat estrogen receptor cDNA. Nucleic Acids Res 15: 2499-2513. doi: 10.1093/nar/15.6.2499
    [33] Kuiper GG, Enmark E, Pelto-Huikko M, et al. (1996) Cloning of a novel receptor expressed in rat prostate and ovary. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 93: 5925-5930. doi: 10.1073/pnas.93.12.5925
    [34] Giguere V (2008) Transcriptional control of energy homeostasis by the estrogen-related receptors. Endocr Rev 13: 677-696.
    [35] Levin ER (2012) Elusive extranuclear estrogen receptors in breast cancer. Clin Cancer Res 18: 6-8 doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-11-2547
    [36] Pedram A, Razandi M, Wallace DC, et al. (2006) Functional estrogen receptors in the mitochondria of breast cancer cells. Mol Biol Cell 17: 2125-2137. doi: 10.1091/mbc.E05-11-1013
    [37] Giguere V (2002) To ERR in the estrogen pathway. Trends Endocrinol Metab 13: 220-225. doi: 10.1016/S1043-2760(02)00592-1
    [38] Sladek R, Bader J-A, Giguere V (1997) The orphan nuclear receptor estrogen-related receptor alpha is a transcriptional regulator of the human medium-chain acyl coenzyme A dehydrogenase gene. Mol Cell Biol 17: 5400-5409.
    [39] Deblois G, Hall JA, Perry MC, et al. (2009) Genome-wide identification of direct target genes implicates estrogen-related receptor alpha as a determinant of breast cancer heterogeneity. Cancer Res 13: 6149-6157.
    [40] Hall JM, Couse JF, Korach KS (2001) The multifaceted mechanisms of estradiol and estrogen receptor signaling. J Biol Chem 276: 36869-36872. doi: 10.1074/jbc.R100029200
    [41] Bernatchez G, Giroux V, Lassalle T, et al. (2013) ERRα metabolic nuclear receptor controls growth of colon cancer cells. Carcinogenesis 34: 2253-2261. doi: 10.1093/carcin/bgt180
    [42] Chen P, Wang H, Duan Z, et al. (2014) Estrogen-related receptor alpha confers methotrexate resistance via attenuation of reactive oxygen species production and P53 mediated apoptosis in osteosarcoma cells. Biomed Res Int 2014: 616025.
    [43] Herzog B, Cardenas J, Hall RK, et al. (2006) Estrogen-related receptor alpha is a repressor of phosphoenolpyruvate carboxykinase gene transcription. J Biol Chem 281: 99-106. doi: 10.1074/jbc.M509276200
    [44] Klinge CM (2001) Estrogen receptor interaction with estrogen response elements. Nucleic Acids Res 29: 2905-2919. doi: 10.1093/nar/29.14.2905
    [45] May FEB (2014) Novel drugs that target the estrogen-related receptor alpha: their therapeutic potential in breast cancer. Cancer Manag Res 6: 225-252
    [46] Byerly MS, Al Salayta M, Swanson RD, et al. (2013) Estrogen-related receptor beta deletion modulates whole-body energy balance via estrogen-related receptor gamma and attenuates neuropeptide Y gene expression. Eur J Neurosci 13: 1033-1047.
    [47] Misra J, Chanda D, Kim DK, et al. (2014) Orphan nuclear receptor Errγ induces C-reactive protein gene expression through induction of ER-bound Bzip transmembrane transcription factor CREBH. PLoS One 9: e86342. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0086342
    [48] Wang Z, Li P, Zhang Q, et al. (2015) Interleukin-1β regulates the expression of glucocorticoid receptor isoforms in nasal polyps in vitro via p38 MAPK and JNK signal transduction pathways. J Inflamm (Lond) 12: 3.
    [49] Revankar CM, Cimino DF, Sklar LA, et al. (2005) A transmembrane intracellular estrogen receptor mediates rapid cell signaling. Science 307: 1625-1630. doi: 10.1126/science.1106943
    [50] Chevalier N, Paul-Bellon R, Camparo P, et al. (2014) Genetic variants of GPER/GPR30, a novel estrogen-related G protein receptor, are associated with human seminoma. Int J Mol Sci 15: 1574-1589. doi: 10.3390/ijms15011574
    [51] Shahani S, Braga-Basaria M, Maggio M, et al. (2009) Androgens and erythropoiesis: past and present. J Endocrinol Invest 32: 704-716 doi: 10.1007/BF03345745
    [52] Furuya K, Yamamoto N, Ohyabu Y, et al. (2013) Mechanism of the tissue-specific action of the selective androgen receptor modulator S-101479. Biol Pharm Bull 36: 442-451. doi: 10.1248/bpb.b12-00885
    [53] Roy AK, Lavrovsky Y, Song CS, et al. (1999) Regulation of androgen action. Vitam Horm 55: 309-352
    [54] Fortunati N (1999) Sex hormone-binding globulin: not only a transport protein. What news around the corner? J Endocrinol Invest 22: 223-234
    [55] Rosner W, Hryb DJ, Khan MS, et al. (1999) Sex hormone-binding globulin mediates steroid hormone signal transduction at the plasma membrane. J Steroid Biochem Mol Biol 69: 481-485 doi: 10.1016/S0960-0760(99)00070-9
    [56] Fortunati N, Catalano MG, Boccuzzi G, et al. (2010) Sex Hormone-Binding Globulin (SHBG), estradiol and breast cancer. Mol Cell Endocrinol 316: 86-92
    [57] Sá EQ, Sá FC, Oliveira KC, et al. (2014) Association between sex hormone- binding globulin (SHBG) and metabolic syndrome among men. Sao Paulo Med J 132: 111-115 doi: 10.1590/1516-3180.2014.1322666
    [58] Herbert Z, Göthe S, Caldwell JD, et al. (2005) Identification of sex hormone-binding globulin in the human hypothalamus. Neuroendocrinology 81: 287-293. doi: 10.1159/000088170
    [59] Misao R, Nakanishi Y, Fujimoto J, et al. (1995) Expression of sex hormone-binding globulin mRNA in uterine leiomyoma, myometrium and endometrium of human subjects. Gynecol Endocrinol 9: 317-323 doi: 10.3109/09513599509160466
    [60] Selva DM, Hammond GL (2006) Human sex hormone-binding globulin is expressed in testicular germ cells and not in sertoli cells. Horm Metab Res 38: 230-235
    [61] Heinlein CA, Chang C (2002) The roles of androgen receptors and androgen-binding proteins in nongenomic androgen actions. Mol Endoc 16: 2181-2187 doi: 10.1210/me.2002-0070
    [62] Inoue K, Yamasaki S, Fushiki T, et al. (1994) Androgen receptor antagonist suppresses exercise-induced hypertrophy of skeletal muscle. Eur J Appl Physiol Occup Physiol 69: 88-91. doi: 10.1007/BF00867933
    [63] Bamman MM, Shipp JR, Jiang J, et al. (2001) Mechanical load increases muscle IGF-I and androgen receptor mRNA concentrations in humans. Am J Physiol Endocrinol Metab 280: 383-390.
    [64] Kadi F (2008) Testosterone and human skeletal muscle. Brit J Pharmacol 154: 522-528. doi: 10.1038/bjp.2008.118
    [65] Sinha-Hikim I, Taylor WE, Gonzalez-Cadavid NF, et al. (2004) Androgen receptor in human skeletal muscle and cultured muscle satellite cells: up-regulation by androgen treatment. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 89: 5245-5255. doi: 10.1210/jc.2004-0084
    [66] Hoffman JR1, Kraemer WJ, Bhasin S, et al. (2009) Position stand on androgen and human growth hormone use. J Strength Cond Res 23: S1-59. doi: 10.1519/JSC.0b013e31819df2e6
    [67] Basile J, Binmadi N, Zhou H, et al. (2013) Supraphysiological doses of performance enhancing anabolic-androgenic steroids exert direct tossic effects on neuron-like cells. Front Cell Neurosc 7: 1-10
    [68] Castoria G, D'Amato L, Ciociola A, et al. (2011) Androgen-Induced Cell Migration: Role of Androgen Receptor/Filamin A Association. PLoS ONE 6: e17218. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0017218
    [69] Giovannelli P, Di Donato M, Cernera G, et al. (2015) The dual role of androgen receptor in mesenchymal cells. Receptor Clin Invest 2: e664.
    [70] Papadopoulou N, Papakonstanti EA, Kallergi G, et al. (2009) Membrane androgen receptor activation in prostate and breast tumor cells: molecular signaling and clinical impact. IUBMB Life 61: 56-61 doi: 10.1002/iub.150
    [71] Bae YH, Mui KL, Hsu BY, et al. (2014) A FAK-Cas-Rac-lamellipodin signaling module transduces extracellular matrix stiffness into mechanosensitive cell cycling. Sci Signal 7: ra57. doi: 10.1126/scisignal.2004838
    [72] De Naeyer H, Bogaert V, De Spaey A, et al. (2014) Genetic variations in the androgen receptor are associated with steroid concentrations and anthropometrics but not with muscle mass in healthy young men. PLoS One 9: e86235. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0086235
    [73] Brinkmann AO, Faber PW, van Rooij HC, et al. (1989) The human androgen receptor: domain structure, genomic organization and regulation of expression. J Steroid Biochem 34: 307-310. doi: 10.1016/0022-4731(89)90098-8
    [74] Jänne OA, Bardin CW (1984) Androgen and antiandrogen receptor binding. Annu Rev Physiol 46: 107-118. doi: 10.1146/annurev.ph.46.030184.000543
    [75] Garay JP, Park BH (2012) Androgen receptor as a targeted therapy for breast cancer. Am J Cancer Res 2: 434-445.
    [76] Narayanan R, Ahn S, Cheney MD, et al. (2014) Selective androgen receptor modulators (SARMs) negatively regulate triple-negative breast cancer growth and epithelial: mesenchymal stem cell signaling. PLoS One 9: e103202. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0103202
    [77] Wang C, Liu Y, Cao JM (2014) G protein-coupled receptors: extranuclear mediators for the non-genomic actions of steroids. Int J Mol Sci 15: 15412-15425. doi: 10.3390/ijms150915412
    [78] Pi M, Parrill AL, Quarles LD (2010) GPRC6A mediates the non-genomic effects of steroids. J Biol Chem 17: 39953-39964.
    [79] Li X, Lonard DM, O’Malley BW (2004) A contemporary understanding of progesterone receptor function. Mech Ageing Dev 125: 669-678. doi: 10.1016/j.mad.2004.04.007
    [80] Mote PA, Graham JD, Clarke CL (2007) Progesterone receptor isoforms in normal and malignant breast. Ernst Schering Found Symp Proc 2007: 77-107.
    [81] Zhu Y, Bond J, Thomas P (2003) Identification, classification, and partial characterization of genes in humans and other vertebrates homologous to a fish membrane progestin receptor. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 100: 2237-2242. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0436133100
    [82] Kimura I, Nakayama Y, Konishi M, et al. (2012) Functions of MAPR (membrane-associated progesterone receptor) family members as heme/steroid-binding proteins. Curr Protein Pept Sci 13: 687-96
    [83] Su C, Cunningham RL, Rybalchenko N, et al. (2012) Progesterone increases the release of brain-derived neurotrophic factor from glia via progesterone receptor membrane component 1 (Pgrmc1)-dependent ERK5 signaling. Endocrinology 153: 4389-4400 doi: 10.1210/en.2011-2177
    [84] Xu J, Zeng C, Chu W, et al. (2011) Identification of the PGRMC1 protein complex as the putative sigma-2 receptor binding site. Nat Commun 2: 380. doi: 10.1038/ncomms1386
    [85] Kelder J, Azevedo R, Pang Y, et al. (2010) Comparison between steroid binding to membrane progesterone receptor alpha (mPR alpha) and to nuclear progesterone receptor: correlation with physicochemical properties assessed by comparative molecular field analysis and identification of mPR alpha specific agonists. Steroids 75: 314-322 doi: 10.1016/j.steroids.2010.01.010
    [86] Zhu Y, Hanna RN, Schaaf MJ, et al. (2008) Candidates for membrane progestin receptors—past approaches and future challenges. Comp Biochem Physiol C Toxicol Pharmacol 14: 381-389.
    [87] Scarpin KM, Graham JD, Mote PA, et al. (2009) Progesterone action in human tissues: regulation by progesterone receptor (PR) isoform expression, nuclear positioning and coregulator expression. Nucl Recept Signal 7: e009
    [88] Thomas P (2008) Characteristics of membrane progestin receptor alpha (mPR alpha) and progesterone membrane receptor component 1 (PGMRC1) and their roles in mediating rapid progestin actions. Neuroendocrinol 29: 292-312. doi: 10.1016/j.yfrne.2008.01.001
    [89] Smith JL, Kupchak BR, Garitaonandia I, et al. (2008) Heterologous expression of human mPR alpha, mPR beta and mPR gamma in yeast confirms their ability to function as membrane progesterone receptors. Steroids 73: 1160-1173. doi: 10.1016/j.steroids.2008.05.003
    [90] Thomas P, Pang Y, Dong J, et al. (2007) Steroid and G protein binding characteristics of the sea trout and human progestin membrane receptor alpha subtypes and their evolutionary origins. Endocrinology 148: 705-718. doi: 10.1210/en.2006-0974
    [91] Zhu Y, Rice CD, Pang Y, et al. (2003) Cloning, expression, and characterization of a membrane progestin receptor and evidence it is an intermediary in meiotic maturation of fish oocytes. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 100: 2231-2236. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0336132100
    [92] Wang C, Liu Y, Cao JM (2014) Protein-Coupled Receptors: Extranuclear Mediators for the Non-Genomic Actions of Steroids. Int J Mol Sci 15: 15412-15425 doi: 10.3390/ijms150915412
    [93] Rey M, Coirini H (2015) Synthetic neurosteroids on brain protection. Neural Regen Res 10: 17-21 doi: 10.4103/1673-5374.150640
    [94] Singh M, Su C, Ng S (2013) Non-genomic mechanisms of progesterone action in the brain. Front Neurosci 7: 159.
    [95] Lonard DM, Lanz RB, O’Malley BW (2007) Nuclear receptor coregulators and human disease. Endocr Rev 28: 575-587 doi: 10.1210/er.2007-0012
    [96] Tubbs C, Thomas P (2008) Functional characteristics of membrane progestin receptor alpha (mPR alpha) subtypes: a review with new data showing mPRalpha expression in seatrout sperm and its association with sperm motility. Steroids 73: 935-941. doi: 10.1016/j.steroids.2007.12.022
    [97] Tung L, Abdel-Hafiz H, Shen T, et al. (2006) Progesterone receptors (PR)-B and -A regulate transcription by different mechanisms: AF-3 exerts regulatory control over coactivator binding to PR-B. Mol Endocrinol 20: 2656-2670 doi: 10.1210/me.2006-0105
    [98] Molenda-Figueira HA, Murphy SD, Shea KL, et al. (2008) Steroid receptor coactivator-1 from brain physically interacts differentially with steroid receptor subtypes. Endocrinology 149: 5272-5279 doi: 10.1210/en.2008-0048
    [99] Heneghan AF, Connaghan-Jones KD, Miura MT, et al. (2007) Coactivator assembly at the promoter: efficient recruitment of SRC2 is coupled to cooperative DNA binding by the progesterone receptor. Biochemistry 46: 11023-11032. doi: 10.1021/bi700850v
    [100] Giangrande PH, McDonnell DP (1999) The A and B isoforms of the human progesterone receptor: two functionally different transcription factors encoded by a single gene. Recent Prog Horm Res 54: 291-313.
  • This article has been cited by:

    1. Anders S. Nilsson, Cocktail, a Computer Program for Modelling Bacteriophage Infection Kinetics, 2022, 14, 1999-4915, 2483, 10.3390/v14112483
    2. Stephen T. Abedon, Further Considerations on How to Improve Phage Therapy Experimentation, Practice, and Reporting: Pharmacodynamics Perspectives, 2022, 3, 2641-6530, 98, 10.1089/phage.2022.0019
    3. Ei Ei Kyaw, Hongchan Zheng, Jingjing Wang, Hopf bifurcation analysis of a phage therapy model, 2023, 18, 2157-5452, 87, 10.2140/camcos.2023.18.87
    4. Ei Ei Kyaw, Hongchan Zheng, Jingjing Wang, Stability and Hopf Bifurcation Analysis for a Phage Therapy Model with and without Time Delay, 2023, 12, 2075-1680, 772, 10.3390/axioms12080772
    5. Stephen T. Abedon, Automating Predictive Phage Therapy Pharmacology, 2023, 12, 2079-6382, 1423, 10.3390/antibiotics12091423
  • Reader Comments
  • © 2015 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(12212) PDF downloads(1794) Cited by(20)

Figures and Tables

Figures(1)

/

DownLoad:  Full-Size Img  PowerPoint
Return
Return

Catalog