- Research
- Open access
- Published:
Boundedness in a two-dimensional chemotaxis system with signal-dependent motility and logistic source
Boundary Value Problems volume 2023, Article number: 84 (2023)
Abstract
In this paper, we study the following chemotaxis system with a signal-dependent motility and logistic source:
under homogeneous Neumann boundary conditions in a smooth bounded domain \(\Omega \subset \mathbb{R}^{2}\), where the motility function \(\gamma (v)\) satisfies \(\gamma (v)\in C^{3}([0,\infty ))\) with \(\gamma (v)>0\), and \(\frac{|\gamma '(v)|^{2}}{\gamma (v)}\) is bounded for all \(v > 0\). The purpose of this paper is to prove that the model possesses globally bounded solutions. In addition, we show that all solutions \((u, v)\) of the model will exponentially converge to the unique constant steady state \((1, 1)\) as \(t\rightarrow +\infty \) when \(\mu \geq \frac{K}{4^{1+r}}\) with \(K=\max_{0< v\leq \infty} \frac{|\gamma '(v)|^{2}}{\gamma (v)}\).
1 Introduction
Experimental observations show that colonies of bacteria and simple eukaryotes can generate complex shapes and patterns. In order to understand the mechanism of pattern formations, extensive mathematical models were derived, including the Keller–Segel system in [10] modeling the pattern formations driven by chemotactic bacteria
where the cell diffusion rate μ and the chemotactic sensitivity χ are assumed to depend only on the signal concentration. In (1.1), the cell diffusion rate μ and chemotactic sensitivity χ are linked via
Here the parameter σ denotes the ratio of effective body length to step size, and \(\gamma '(v)<0\) (resp. >0) if the diffusive motility decreases (resp. increases) with respect to the chemical concentration.
One notices that \(\sigma =0\) implies that \(\chi = -\mu '\), the motion of cells is biased by the local concentration chemotactic signal and is prescribed by the motility \(\gamma (v)\) of cells, so that the system (1.1) can be written as
with homogeneous Neumann boundary conditions. Recently, the mathematical research on the system (1.2) has attracted a lot of interest. Tao and Winkler [22] considered the chemotaxis model with \(\tau = 1\) under the condition that the motility function \(\gamma (v)\) satisfies \(\gamma \in {C^{3}}([0,\infty ))\), \({C_{1}} < \gamma (v) < {C_{2}}\), and \(\vert {\gamma '(v)} \vert \le {C_{3}}\) for all \(v > 0\), and they showed that the chemotaxis model has globally bounded solutions. Yoon and Kim [23] proved that there exists a globally bounded solution for the system (1.2) with \(\tau = 1\) and \(\gamma ( v )=\frac{{{C_{0}}}}{{{v^{k}}}}\) (\({k > 0} \)) for small constant \(C_{0} > 0\) in any dimension. Lately, the smallness assumption of \(C_{0} > 0\) was removed for the parabolic–elliptic case of (1.2) with \(\tau = 0\) when \(n \leq 2\), \(k > 0\) or \(n\geq 3\) with \(k < \frac{2}{{n - 2}}\); Ahn and Yoon in [1] proved that the model (1.2) possesses a globally bounded and classical solution.
In [7], Jiang and Laurençot proved the existence of a global and bounded classical solution to the model (1.2) with \(\tau = 0\) when \(\gamma \in {C^{3}}((0,\infty ))\), \(\gamma > 0\), \({K_{v}} \stackrel{\Delta}{=} \sup_{s \in [v,\infty ]} \{ \gamma (s) \} < \infty \), \(v > 0\) and if \(n\geq 2\), \(u_{0}\) satisfying
In addition, these solutions were shown to be uniformly bounded with respect to time when \(\gamma \in {C^{3}}((0,\infty ))\), \(\gamma ' \le 0\), and there are \(k \ge l >0 \) such that \(\mathop {\lim } _{v \to \infty } \inf {v^{k}}\gamma ( v ) > 0\) and \(\mathop {\lim } _{v \to \infty } \sup {v^{l}}\gamma ( v ) < \infty \) for any \(k < \frac{n}{{n - 2}}\) and \(k - l < \frac{2}{{n - 2}}\) if \(n\geq 3\) and \(u_{0}\) satisfies (1.3).
Considering the presence of cell generation and death in a biological realistic setting, this can be expressed through logical sources. Researchers usually considered the following density-suppressed motility chemotaxis model with logical sources:
Essentially, (1.4) with \(\mu > 0\) has been used in [4] to justify that the bacterial motion with density-suppressed motility (i.e., \(\gamma ' (v) < 0\)) can produce the stripe pattern formation observed in the experiment of [11]. Fujie and Jiang [5] proved the global existence of a classical solution for (1.4) in the two-dimensional setting when \(u_{0}\) was assumed to be as in (1.3) and \(\gamma (v)\) satisfied \(\gamma \in {C^{3}}([0,\infty ))\), \(\gamma > 0\), \({K_{v}} \stackrel{\Delta}{=} \sup_{s \in [v,\infty ]} \{ \gamma (s) \} < \infty \), \(v > 0\). Moreover, if \(\mu = 0\) and \(\gamma (v)\) also satisfies \(\mathop {\lim } _{v \to +\infty } {v^{k}}\gamma (v) < + \infty \), for \(k > 0\), the global solution to (1.4) in the two-dimensional case is proven to be bounded uniformly in time. Recently, Lyu and Wang [12] explored how strong the logistic damping can warrant the global boundedness of solutions to (1.4) under the minimal conditions for the density-suppressed motility function \(\gamma (v)\), and further established the asymptotic behavior of solutions under some conditions.
In order to address the dependence of dynamical behaviors of solutions on the interactions between nonlinear cross-diffusion, generalized logistic source, and nonlinear signal production, Tao and Fang [17] considered the density-suppressed motility mode
They proved that if \(\beta <\frac{2}{N+2}\alpha \), then the system has a globally bounded classical solution, and further established the asymptotic behavior of solutions for sufficiently large μ.
Inspired by the above works, in this paper we consider the initial–Neumann boundary value problem of the following parabolic–elliptic system:
in a smooth bounded domain \(\Omega \subset \mathbb{R}^{2}\). Here \(\mu , \alpha , r> 0\) are any given constants. We denote the cell density by u and the chemical concentration by v. In order to study the large-time behavior of the system (1.5), we assume that the motility function \(\gamma (v)\) satisfies:
In this paper we shall develop some results on the global boundedness and large-time behavior of solutions to the system (1.5) with general motility \(\gamma (v)\). The main result of this paper reads as follows.
Theorem 1.1
Let \(\Omega \subset \mathbb{R}^{2}\) be a bounded domain with a smooth boundary. Suppose that parameters \(\mu ,\alpha ,r>0\), and the motility function \(\gamma (v)\) satisfies (H). If \(\frac{1+2\alpha}{2(1+\alpha )}\leq r\leq 1\leq \alpha \), then for any initial data \(u_{0}\) satisfying the conditions (1.3), the system (1.5) possesses a globally bounded solution \((u, v)\) which is bounded in \(\Omega \times (0,\infty )\) in the sense that there exists \(C>0\) satisfying
Theorem 1.2
Under the same assumptions as in Theorem 1.1, if the constant μ satisfies \(\mu \geq \frac{K}{4^{1+r}}\) with \(K=\max_{0< v\leq \infty} \frac{|\gamma '(v)|^{2}}{\gamma (v)}\), then the globally bounded solution of (1.5) satisfies
Moreover, the convergence rate is exponential in the sense that there exist constants λ, C such that
2 Preliminaries
We first recall the local existence of classical solutions to equations (1.5). The proof is based on an appropriate fixed point theorem and the maximum principle, refer to [9, Lemma 2.1] for more details.
Lemma 2.1
(Local existence)
Let \(\Omega \subset \mathbb{R}^{2}\) be a bounded domain with a smooth boundary and assume that the motility function γ satisfies condition (H). Assume that the initial data \(u_{0}\) satisfies the conditions (1.3). Then there exists a unique local-in-time nonnegative classical solution
to (1.5). Here, \(T_{\max}\in (0,\infty ]\) denotes the maximal existence time. Moreover, if \(T_{\max}<\infty \), then
At the end of this section, we state some a priori estimates on u, v, which shall be used in the sequel.
Lemma 2.2
Let \((u, v)\) be the solution of the system (1.5). Then it holds that
and
Proof
Integrating the first equation of (1.5) over Ω, we obtain
Due to the Hölder inequality, we conclude that \(\int _{\Omega }u^{1+\alpha}\,dx\geq \frac{1}{| \Omega | ^{\alpha}} (\int _{\Omega }u\,dx )^{1+ \alpha}\), which implies that
and hence (2.2). Now (2.3) results from a time integration of to the second equation of (1.5). As the parameters satisfy \(\frac{1+2\alpha}{2(1+\alpha )}\leq r\leq 1\leq \alpha \), one has
and hence (2.3) follows. □
3 Boundedness of solutions
In this section, we shall prove Theorem 1.1. First, we show the global existence of uniformly-in-time bounded solutions.
Lemma 3.1
Let the same assumptions as in Theorem 1.1hold. Then there exists a constant \(C> 0\) independent of t such that the solution of (1.5) satisfies
Proof
Multiplying the first equation of (1.5) by lnu, and integrating the result by parts, one has
for all \(t\in (0,T_{\max})\). From the assumptions in (H), we can find a constant \(K > 0\) such that
We now estimate the first integrals on the right of this inequality (3.2). Using the Hölder and Young inequalities, we have
for all \(t\in (0,T_{\max})\), and substituting into (3.2) gives
Applying the Agmon–Douglis–Nirenberg \(L^{p}\) estimates (cf. [1, 2]) to the second equation of (3.5) with homogeneous Neumann boundary conditions, we know that for all \(p > 1\), there exists a constant \(C_{1} > 0\) such that
The Sobolev embedding theorem yields \({ \Vert {\nabla v} \Vert _{{L^{ \frac{{2 ( {1 + \alpha } )}}{\alpha }}} ( \Omega )}} \le {C_{2}}{ \Vert v \Vert _{{W^{2, \frac{{2 ( {1 + \alpha } )}}{{1 + 2\alpha }}}} ( \Omega )}}\) in two dimensions (i.e., \(n = 2\)) which, together with (3.6), implies
On the other hand, using the \(L^{p}\)-interpolation inequality and the fact \({ \Vert {u ( { \cdot ,t} )} \Vert _{{L^{1}} ( \Omega )}} \le {m_{*} }\) (see Lemma 2.2), with positive parameters satisfying \(\frac{1+2\alpha}{2(1+\alpha )}\leq r\leq 1\leq \alpha \), we have
the last inequality holding due to the Young inequality. We substitute (3.7) and (3.8) into (3.5) to obtain
where we have used the following fact (see [21, Lemma 3.1]): Let \(\mu >0\), \(\alpha \geq 1\), and \(b\geq 0\), then there exists a constant \(l := l(\mu ,b,\alpha )>0\) such that
Hence from (3.9), we obtain
which gives \(\int _{\Omega }{u\ln u}\,dx - \int _{\Omega }u \,dx \le {C_{9}}\) and then
Since \(u\ln u \ge - \frac{1}{e}\), we derive
which yields (3.1). □
Next, we will show that there exists some \(p> 1\) close to 1 such that \(\int _{\Omega }{{u^{p}}}\,dx\) is uniformly bounded in time. The following basic statement can be found in [6, Chap. 4, Sect. 21] or [14, p. 43].
Lemma 3.2
Suppose that \(\Omega \subset \mathbb{R}^{2}\) is a bounded domain with a smooth boundary, and let G denote Green’s function of \(- \Delta + 1\) in Ω subject to Neumann boundary conditions. Then we have
In order to estimate the product uv in terms of \(u\ln u\) and \({e^{\beta v}}\) below, we shall refer to a variant of the Young inequality.
Lemma 3.3
Let \(\beta > 0\). Then
Proof
The assertion easily follows by simply maximizing \(x \in ( {0,\infty } ) \mapsto xy - \frac{1}{\beta }x \ln x\) for fixed \(\beta > 0 \) and \(y > 0\). □
We next provide a specific estimate for the solution of a linear elliptic equation with a source term in \({L^{1}}\).
Lemma 3.4
Let \(\Omega \subset \mathbb{R}^{2}\) be a bounded domain with a smooth boundary. Then for all \(M > 0\) there exist \(\beta > 0\) and \(C > 0\) such that
and the solution v of
satisfies
Proof
Since (3.14) is trivial in the special case \(u\equiv 0\), we may assume that \(u\not\equiv 0\). Then with G denoting Green’s function of \(- \Delta + 1\) in Ω under homogeneous Neumann boundary conditions, v can be represented as
see [14, p. 43]. Now Lemma 3.2 provides \(A > 0\) and \(L > 0\) such that
Therefore, invoking Jensen inequality, (3.12), and Fubini theorem, we find that for each \(\beta >0\),
If we now fix \(\beta >0\) to be small enough fulfilling \(\beta LM < 2\), then \({C_{1}}: = {\sup_{y \in \Omega }}\int _{\Omega }{{{ \vert {x - y} \vert }^{ - \beta LM}}}\,dx\) is finite due to the boundedness of Ω, and therefore
holds for any such \(\beta >0\). □
Lemma 3.5
Let \(\Omega \subset \mathbb{R}^{2}\) be a bounded domain with a smooth boundary. There exists \(C> 0\) such that the solution of (3.13) satisfies
Proof
Now in order to prove (3.16), we use v as a test function in (3.13) to obtain
We find \(\beta > 0\) and \({C_{1},C_{2}} > 0\) such that \(\int _{\Omega }{{e^{\beta v}}}\,dx \le {C_{1}}\), \(\int _{\Omega}u\ln u\,dx \leq {C_{2}}\). We employ Lemma 3.3 to estimate
which, together with (3.17), establishes (3.16). □
Next, we will show that there exists some \(p > 1\) close to 1 such that \(\int _{\Omega }{{u^{p}}}\,dx\) is uniformly bounded in time.
Lemma 3.6
Suppose the conditions in Theorem 1.1hold. Then there exists \(p > 1\) close to 1 such that
where \(C > 0\) is a constant independent of t.
Proof
We multiply the first equation of (1.5) by \({u^{p - 1}}\) to obtain
The Cauchy–Schwarz inequality and (3.3) allow us to have
Using the Hölder and Gagliardo–Nirenberg inequalities, as well as (3.16) and (3.6), one has
Then we can substitute (3.20) and (3.21) into (3.19) to obtain
Using the Young and Hölder inequalities, we can prove that
Moreover, we can choose \(p > 1\) satisfying \(\frac{{K{C_{3}}(p-1) }}{2} < \frac{\mu }{2}\) to derive that
Then the combination of (3.22), (3.23), and (3.24) gives
Applying the ODE comparison principle to (3.25), we have (3.18) for some \(p > 1\) close to 1. □
Next, we will show \({ \Vert {v ( { \cdot ,t} )} \Vert _{{L^{\infty }} ( \Omega )}}\) is uniformly bounded in time, which rules out the possibility of degeneracy.
Lemma 3.7
Suppose the conditions in Theorem 1.1hold. Then there exist constants \(C, {\gamma _{1}}, {\gamma _{2}}> 0\) such that
and
Proof
From Lemma 3.6, we can find a constant \(C_{1} > 0\) such that \({ \Vert {u ( { \cdot ,t} )} \Vert _{{L^{p}} ( \Omega )}} \le {C_{1}}\) for some \(p > 1\). Then applying the elliptic regularity estimate to the second equation of (1.5), one has
which, along with the Sobolev inequality, gives (3.26). Then since \(0 < \gamma ( v ) \in {C^{3}} ( { [ {0,\infty } )} )\), we can find two positive constants \({\gamma _{1}}\) and \({\gamma _{2}}\) such that (3.27) holds. □
Lemma 3.8
Suppose the conditions in Theorem 1.1hold. Then there exists a constant \(C > 0\) such that
Proof
Multiplying the first equation of (1.5) by u and integrating the result by parts, using the Young inequality and (3.3), we end up with
which, combined with (3.27), gives
We differentiate the second equation of the system (1.5) and multiply the result by \(2\nabla v\) to obtain
where we have used the identity \(\Delta { \vert {\nabla v} \vert ^{2}} = 2\nabla v \cdot \nabla \Delta v + 2{ \vert {{D^{2}}v} \vert ^{2}}\). Then multiplying (3.32) by \({ \vert {\nabla v} \vert ^{2}}\) and integrating the results, we have
With the inequality \(\frac{{\partial {{ \vert {\nabla v} \vert }^{2}}}}{{\partial \nu}} \le 2\lambda { \vert {\nabla v} \vert ^{2}}\) on ∂Ω (see [13, Lemma 4.2]) and the following trace inequality (see [16, Remark 52.9]) for any \(\varepsilon > 0\):
we have
By the Gagliardo–Nirenberg inequality and the fact \({ \Vert {{{ \vert {\nabla v} \vert }^{2}}} \Vert _{{L^{1}} ( \Omega )}} = \Vert {\nabla v} \Vert _{{L^{2}} ( \Omega )}^{2} \le {C_{2}}\) (see Lemma 3.5), we have
Then a combination of (3.34) and (3.35) gives
Next, we will estimate the last term on the right of (3.33). To this end, we use the Young inequality and the facts \(\vert {\Delta v} \vert \le \sqrt {2} \vert {{D^{2}}v} \vert \) and \(\nabla { \vert {\nabla v} \vert ^{2}} = 2D{}^{2}v \cdot \nabla v\) to derive
Substituting (3.36) and (3.37) into (3.33), one has
Combining (3.31) and (3.38) and using the Young inequality, we can find some \(\varsigma > 0\) such that
With the boundedness of \({ \Vert u \Vert _{{L^{1}} ( \Omega )}}\) and \({ \Vert {u\ln u} \Vert _{{L^{1}} ( \Omega )}}\) and the inequality in [15, Lemma 3.5], we can choose ε small enough to obtain
On the other hand, using the Gagliardo–Nirenberg inequality, we can derive that
Substituting (3.40) and (3.41) into (3.39), and choosing \(\varsigma = \frac{1}{{{C_{2}}{C_{9}}}}\), we end up with \(\frac{d}{{dt}}\int _{\Omega }{{u^{2}}}\,dx + \mu \int _{\Omega }{{u^{2 + \alpha }}}\,dx \le {C_{10}}\) which, along with the Young inequality and \(\int _{\Omega }{{u^{2}}}\,dx \le \mu \int _{\Omega }{{u^{2 + \alpha }}}\,dx + {C_{11}}\) yields
This gives (3.29) with the help of the ODE comparison principle. □
Next, we shall show the boundedness of \({ \Vert {u ( { \cdot ,t} )} \Vert _{{L^{\infty }} ( \Omega )}}\). To this end, we first improve the regularity of v. More precisely, we have the following results.
Lemma 3.9
Suppose the conditions in Theorem 1.5hold. Then we have
where \(C > 0\) is a constant independent of t.
Proof
Using (3.6) and (3.29), we can derive that \({ \Vert {v ( { \cdot ,t} )} \Vert _{{W^{2,2} ( \Omega )}}} \le {C_{1}}{ \Vert {{u^{r}} ( { \cdot ,t} )} \Vert _{{L^{2}} ( \Omega )}} \le {C_{1}}{ \Vert {u ( { \cdot ,t} )} \Vert _{{L^{2}} ( \Omega )}}+{C_{2}} \le {C_{3}}\), which, by the Gagliardo–Nirenberg inequality, gives
Then multiplying the first equation of (1.5) by \({u^{2}}\) and integrating over Ω by parts, one obtains
which, subject to the facts (3.3) and (3.43), gives rise to
Using the Gagliardo–Nirenberg inequality with the fact \({ \Vert {{u^{\frac{3}{2}}}} \Vert _{{L^{\frac{4}{3}}} ( \Omega )}}= \Vert u \Vert _{{L^{2}} ( \Omega )}^{{ \frac{3}{2}}} \le {C_{7}}\), we can show that
On the other hand, using the Hölder and Young inequalities, one has
Substituting (3.45) and (3.46) into (3.44) gives
By the ODE comparison principle, we have
Using the elliptic regularity (3.6) and Sobolev embedding theorem again, from (3.47) we derive
This finishes the proof. □
Proof of Theorem 1.1
With the aid of Lemma 3.9 and a Moser-type iteration (cf. Lemma 3.6 in [9] or Lemma A.1 in [18]), we obtain that u is bounded in \((0, T_{\max} )\). Thus, we can find a positive constant C independent of t such that
which, together with Lemma 2.1, shows that \(T_{\max}=\infty \). Therefore, \((u, v)\) is a global bounded classical solution to the system (1.1) and the proof of Theorem 1.1 is completed. □
4 Large time behavior
In this section, we will study the large-time behavior of the solution for the system (1.5). Let
and
Then based on some ideas in [8, 19], we shall show that the constant steady state \((1, 1)\) is globally asymptotically stable by showing \(A ( t )\) is a Lyapunov functional under the conditions \(\mu \ge \frac{K}{{{4^{1 + r}}}}\).
We next introduce the following lemma, which is a useful tool in this section.
Lemma 4.1
([2, Lemma 3.1])
Let \(f:(1,\infty ) \to [ {0,\infty } )\) be uniformly continuous such that
Then
We construct an appropriate energy function to the system (1.5), which is prepared for the proof of the large-time behavior.
Lemma 4.2
Suppose \((u, v)\) is the solution of (1.5) obtained in Lemma 2.1. Let K and \(A ( t )\) be defined by (4.1) and (4.2), respectively. Then we have the following results:
-
(1)
\(A ( t ) \ge 0\) for any \(t > 0\).
-
(2)
If \(\mu \ge \frac{K}{{{4^{1 + r}}}}\), then there exists a positive constant δ such that for all \(t > 0\),
$$ \begin{aligned} \frac{d}{{dt}} A ( t ) \le - F ( t ), \end{aligned} $$(4.4)where
$$ \begin{aligned} F ( t ): = \delta \int _{\Omega }{{{ ( {u - 1} )}^{2}}}\,dx. \end{aligned} $$(4.5)
Proof
First, we will show the nonnegativity of \(A ( t ) \). In fact, letting \(\varphi ( u ): = u - 1 - \ln u\), \(u > 0\), noting that \(\varphi ( 1 ) = \varphi ' ( 1 ) = 0\), and applying Taylor’s formula to \(\varphi ( u )\) at \(u = 1\) gives
where Å© is between 1 and u, which implies \(A ( t ) \ge 0\).
Taking the time derivative of (4.2), we get
Using the Young inequality and assumptions (4.1), we have the following estimates:
Substituting into the above formula (4.6), when \(t > {t_{0}}\), \({t_{0}} > 0\), we have
Because \(u > 0\) and \(\alpha \ge 1\), through the calculation \(( {u - 1} ) ( {{u^{\alpha }} - 1} ) \ge { ( {u - 1} )^{2}}\), we can get
By simply treating the second equation of the model (1.5), we get
Multiplying both sides of the above equation (4.10) by \(( {v - 1} )\) and integrating at the same time, using the Young inequality, we obtain
When \(\alpha \ge 1\), one has \(\frac{{1 + 2\alpha }}{{2 ( {1 + \alpha } )}} \le r \le 1\), and then the point \((\tilde{x},\tilde{t}) \in \Omega \times (0,\infty )\) has the property that \(u(\tilde{x},\tilde{t}) \le \frac{1}{2}\), so we can easily draw a conclusion
As a point \((\tilde{x},\tilde{t}) \in \Omega \times (0,\infty )\) satisfies \(u(\tilde{x},\tilde{t}) > \frac{1}{2}\), \(\tilde{g} ( s ): = {s^{r}}\), \(s \in ( {\frac{1}{4}, \infty } )\), according to the mean value theorem, there exists \(\theta \in (0,1)\) such that
Calculating the derivatives \(\tilde{g}' ( s ) = r{s^{r - 1}} > 0\), \(\tilde{g}'' ( s ) = r ( {r - 1} ){s^{r - 2}} < 0\), we see that \(\tilde{g}' ( s )\) decreases monotonically for \(s \in ( {\frac{1}{4},\infty } )\). If \(u(\tilde{x},\tilde{t}) > \frac{1}{2}\) and \(u - u\theta + \theta > \frac{1}{2}\), then
Collecting (4.12)–(4.14), we have
Substituting (4.11) and (4.15) into (4.9), we have
When μ is appropriately large, we have \(\mu \ge \frac{K}{{{4^{1 + r}}}}\), \(\mu - \frac{K}{{{4^{1 + r}}}} = \delta > 0\), and we can substitute it into the above equation (4.16) to get
Therefore \(F ( t ): = \delta \int _{\Omega }{{{ ( {u - 1} )}^{2}}}\,dx\), completing the proof. □
Lemma 4.3
Suppose that \(\mu \ge \frac{K}{{{4^{1 + r}}}}\) and let \((u, v)\) be the global classical solution of the system (1.5). Then it follows that
and
Proof
From Lemma 4.2, for any δ, integrating inequality (4.17) from \({t_{0}} > 0\) to ∞, we can get
Due to the elliptic regularity [24] and the global boundedness of solutions, we conclude that there exist \(\sigma \in (0,1)\) and \({L_{1}} > 0\) such that
for all \(t > 0\). So \(\int _{\Omega }{{{ ( {v - 1} )}^{2}}} + { ( {u - 1} )^{2}}\,dx\) is uniformly continuous. Since \(A ( t ) \ge 0\), combining (4.20) and Lemma 4.1, we can get \(\int _{\Omega }{{{ ( {u - 1} )}^{2}}}\,dx \to 0\), as \(t \to \infty \). From the second equation of the chemotaxis model (1.5), using the Young inequality, we can obtain
From this, it can be directly concluded that
From (4.15), the following formula can be obtained:
The following formula can be obtained from the Gagliardo–Nirenberg inequality and (4.21):
whenever \(\varphi \in {W^{1,\infty }} ( \Omega ) \cap {L^{2}} ( \Omega )\), in particular, if φ is taken to be \(u - 1\) or \(v-1\), from (4.23) to (4.25) we can get
finishing the proof. □
Next, we shall show that the convergence rate is exponential.
Lemma 4.4
Assume that \(\mu \ge \frac{K}{{{4^{1 + r}}}}\) and \((u, v)\) is the global classical solution of the system (1.5). Then there exist two positive constants \(\varepsilon > 0\), \(C > 0\) such that for all \(t >T_{1}>0\),
Proof
By using L’Hôpital’s rule, we obtain
thus,we can pick \(T_{1}>0\) such that
According to (4.5) and (4.27), there exists \(\varepsilon > 0\) such that
By the Grönwall inequality, we readily conclude that
Therefore
Similarly, combining with (4.24), we can obtain
which finishes the proof of Lemma 4.4. □
Next, we shall show the boundedness of \({ \Vert {\nabla u} \Vert _{{L^{4}}}}\) to obtain the convergence rate with the \({{L^{\infty }} ( \Omega )}\)-norm. More precisely, we have the following result.
Lemma 4.5
There exists a constant \(C > 0\) independent of t such that the solution \((u, v)\) of (1.5) satisfies
for all \(t\in (0,T_{\max})\).
Proof
Using the first equation of (1.5), we obtain
Using the identity \(\Delta { \vert {\nabla u} \vert ^{2}} = 2\nabla u \cdot \nabla \Delta u + 2{ \vert {{D^{2}}u} \vert ^{2}}\), we can estimate the term \(J_{1}\) as follows:
Using the boundedness of \({ \Vert u \Vert _{{L^{\infty }} ( \Omega )}}\) and \({ \Vert v \Vert _{{W^{1,\infty }} ( \Omega )}}\) obtained in Theorem 1.1, assumptions (H), as well as the fact \(\Delta v = v - {u^{r}}\), we have
which substituted into \(J_{2}\) gives
Moreover, the boundedness of \({ \Vert u \Vert _{{L^{\infty }} ( \Omega )}}\) directly gives
Substituting (4.32)–(4.35) into (4.31), and noting that \(0 < {\gamma _{1}} \le \gamma ( v )\) and \(\vert {\Delta u} \vert \le \sqrt {2} \vert {{D^{2}}u} \vert \), we have
which leads to
On the other hand, using the boundedness of \({ \Vert u \Vert _{{L^{\infty }} ( \Omega )}}\) and the fact \(\vert {\Delta u} \vert \le \sqrt {2} \vert {{D^{2}}u} \vert \) again, we have
which substituted into (4.37) gives
Then applying the ODE comparison principle to (4.39) yields (4.30), and the proof is completed. □
Lemma 4.6
Suppose \(\mu \ge \frac{K}{{{4^{1 + r}}}}\). There exist constants \(\varepsilon >0\), \(C > 0\) independent of t such that the solution \((u, v)\) of (1.5) satisfies
and
Proof
Using the Gagliardo–Nirenberg inequality, as well as (4.26) and (4.30), we have
On the other hand, from the second equation of (1.5), we infer that \(\psi (x,t): = v(x,t) - 1\) satisfies
Then using the elliptic maximum principle, we obtain from (4.43) and (4.12), (4.14) that
The proof is completed. □
Proof of Theorem 1.2
This is an immediate consequence of Lemmas 4.3 and 4.6. □
Availability of data and materials
The data used to support the findings of this study are included within the article.
References
Ahn, J., Yoon, C.: Global well-posedness and stability of constant equilibria in parabolic–elliptic chemotaxis systems without gradient sensing. Nonlinearity 32, 1327–1351 (2019)
Bai, X., Winkler, M.: Equilibration in a fully parabolic two-species chemotaxis system with competitive kinetics. Indiana Univ. Math. J. 65, 553–583 (2016)
Bellomo, N., Bellouquid, A., Tao, Y.: Toward a mathematical theory of Keller–Segel models of pattern formation in biological tissues. Math. Models Methods Appl. Sci. 25, 1663–1763 (2015)
Fu, X., Tang, L.H., Liu, C.: Stripe formation in bacterial system with density-suppressed motility. Phys. Rev. Lett. 108, 198102 (2012)
Fujie, K., Jiang, J.: Global existence for a kinetic model of pattern formation with density-suppressed motilities. J. Differ. Equ. 269, 5338–5378 (2020)
Jäger, W., Luckhaus, S.: On explosions of solutions to a system of partial differential equations modelling chemotaxis. Transl. Am. Math. Soc. 329, 819–824 (1992)
Jiang, J., Laurençot, P.: Global existence and uniform boundedness in a chemotaxis model with signal-dependent motility. J. Differ. Equ. 299, 513–541 (2021)
Jin, H.Y., Kim, Y.J., Wang, Z.A.: Boundedness, stabilization, and pattern formation driven by density-suppressed motility. SIAM J. Appl. Math. 78, 1632–1657 (2018)
Jin, H.Y., Wang, Z.A.: The Keller–Segel system with logistic growth and signal-dependent motility. Discrete Contin. Dyn. Syst., Ser. B 26, 3023–3041 (2021)
Keller, E.F., Segel, L.A.: Initiation of slime mold aggregation viewed as an instability. J. Theor. Biol. 26, 399–415 (1970)
Liu, C., Fu, X., Liu, L.: Sequential establishment of stripe patterns in an expanding cell population. Science 334, 238–241 (2011)
Lyu, W.B., Wang, Z.A.: Logistic damping effect in chemotaxis models with density-suppressed motility. Adv. Nonlinear Anal. 12, 336–355 (2023)
Mizoguchi, N., Souplet, P.: Nondegeneracy of blow-up points for the parabolic Keller–Segel system. Ann. Inst. Henri Poincaré, Anal. Non Linéaire 31, 851–875 (2014)
Nagai, T.: Blowup of nonradial solutions to parabolic–elliptic systems modeling chemotaxis in two-dimensional domains. J. Inequal. Appl. 6, 37–55 (2001)
Nagai, T., Senba, T., Yoshida, K.: Application of the Trudinger–Moser inequality to a parabolic system of chemotaxis. Funkc. Ekvacioj 40, 411–433 (1997)
Quittner, P., Souplet, P.: Superlinear Parabolic Problems: Blow-up, Global Existence and Steady States. Birkhäuser, Basel (2007)
Tao, X.Y., Fang, Z.B.: Global boundedness and stability in a density-suppressed motility model with generalized logistic source and nonlinear signal production. Z. Angew. Math. Phys. 73, 1–19 (2022)
Tao, Y., Winkler, M.: Boundedness in a quasilinear parabolic-parabolic Keller–Segel system with subcritical sensitivity. J. Differ. Equ. 252, 692–715 (2012)
Tao, Y.S., Wang, Z.A.: Competing effects of attraction vs. repulsion in chemotaxis. Math. Models Methods Appl. Sci. 23, 1–36 (2013)
Tao, Y.S., Wang, Z.A.: Competing effects of attraction vs. repulsion in chemotaxis. Math. Models Methods Appl. Sci. 23, 1–36 (2013)
Tao, Y.S., Winkler, M.: Energy-type estimates and global solvability in a two-dimensional chemotaxis-haptotaxis model with remodeling of non-diffusible attractant. J. Differ. Equ. 257, 784–815 (2014)
Tao, Y.S., Winkler, M.: Effects of signal-dependent motilities in a Keller–Segel-type reaction–diffusion system. Math. Models Methods Appl. Sci. 27, 1645–1683 (2017)
Yoon, C., Kim, Y.J.: Global existence and aggregation in a Keller–Segel model with Fokker–Planck diffusion. Acta Appl. Math. 149, 101–123 (2017)
Zhang, Q.S., Li, Y.X.: An attraction–repulsion chemotaxis system with logistic source. Z. Angew. Math. Mech. 96, 570–584 (2016)
Acknowledgements
The paper is supported by China West Normal University PhD Project [22kE008].
Funding
Not applicable.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
All authors have contributed significantly, and finished the manuscript together.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Ethics approval and consent to participate
Not applicable.
Competing interests
The authors declare no competing interests.
Additional information
Publisher’s Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
About this article
Cite this article
Hu, Y., Du, W. Boundedness in a two-dimensional chemotaxis system with signal-dependent motility and logistic source. Bound Value Probl 2023, 84 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13661-023-01766-7
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13661-023-01766-7