BOUNDEDNESS AND LARGE TIME BEHAVIOR

Accepted manuscript to appear in M3AS
Accepted Manuscript
Mathematical Models and Methods in Applied Sciences
Article Title: Boundedness and Large Time Behavior in a Quasilinear Chemotaxis

Model for Tumor Invasion
Author(s): Dan Li, Chunlai Mu, Pan Zheng
DOI: 10.1142/S0218202518500380
Math. Models Methods Appl. Sci. Downloaded from www.worldscientific.com
Received: 17 November 2017

by UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA on 03/15/18. For personal use only.
Accepted: 26 February 2018
To be cited as: Dan Li, Chunlai Mu, Pan Zheng, Boundedness and Large Time
Behavior in a Quasilinear Chemotaxis Model for Tumor Inva-
sion, Mathematical Models and Methods in Applied Sciences, doi:
10.1142/S0218202518500380
Link to final version: https://doi.org/10.1142/S0218202518500380
This is an unedited version of the accepted manuscript scheduled for publication. It has been uploaded
in advance for the benefit of our customers. The manuscript will be copyedited, typeset and proofread
before it is released in the final form. As a result, the published copy may differ from the unedited
version. Readers should obtain the final version from the above link when it is published. The authors
are responsible for the content of this Accepted Article.
T
February 11, 2018 13:18 WSPC/INSTRUCTION FILE LiMuZheng-m3as
IP
CR
Mathematical Models and Methods in Applied Sciences
c World Scientific Publishing Company
⃝
US
Boundedness and Large Time Behavior in a Quasilinear Chemotaxis
Model for Tumor Invasion
Dan Li
College of Mathematics and Statistics, Chongqing University,
Chongqing 401331, P. R. China

AN liwadanj@126.com
Chunlai Mu
College of Mathematics and Statistics, Chongqing University,
clmu2005@163.com
Pan Zheng
Department of Applied Mathematics,
DM
Chongqing University of Posts and Telecommunications,

zhengpan52@sina.com
Received (Day Month Year)

Revised (Day Month Year)
This paper deals with the quasilinear chemotaxis system modeling tumor invasion


 ut = ∇ · (D(u)∇u) − ∇ · (uS(x, u, v) · ∇v), x ∈ Ω, t > 0,

vt = ∆v + wz, x ∈ Ω, t > 0,

 wt = −wz, x ∈ Ω, t > 0,

zt = ∆z − z + u x ∈ Ω, t > 0
TE
under homogenous Neumann boundary conditions in a smoothly convex bounded domain

Ω ⊂ Rn (n = 2, 3, 4, 5), where D is a given function satisfying D(u) ≥ CD um−1 for
all u > 0 with m > 0 and CD > 0. Here the matrix-valued function S ∈ C 2 (Ω ×
[0, ∞)2 ; Rn×n ) fulfills
|S(x, u, v)| ≤ CS (1 + u)−α
for all (x, u, v) ∈ Ω × [0, ∞)2 with some CS > 0 and α > 0. It is shown that for all
reasonably regular initial data, a corresponding initial-boundary value problem for this
EP
system possesses a globally defined weak solution under some assumptions. Based on
this boundedness property, it can finally be proved that in the ( large time limit, ) any
such solution approaches the spatially
∫ homogenous equilibrium
∫ u0 , v0 + ∫w0 , 0, u0 in an
1 1 1
appropriate sense, where u0 := |Ω| Ω u0 , v0 := |Ω| Ω v0 and w0 := |Ω| Ω w0 provided
that merely u0 ̸≡ 0 on (0, ∞). To the best of our knowledge, there are the first results
on boundedness and asymptotic behavior of the system.
Keywords: Chemotaxis; Tumor invasion; Boundedness; Asymptotic behavior.

C
AMS Subject Classification: 35B35; 35B34; 35K55; 92C17
1
AC
T
IP
CR
2 D. Li et al.
1. Introduction
Chemotaxis is the oriented movement of the bacteria in response to the gradients
of the concentration of the chemical signal substance in their environment. The
movement towards a higher concentration of the chemical substance is called pos-
US
itive chemotaxis and the movement towards a lower concentration of the chemical
substance is called negative chemotaxis. It plays a significant role in many biological
fields, and models for chemotaxis have been successfully applied to the aggregation
patterns 64,65 , slime molds 31,32 , skin pigmentation pattern 49 , angiogenesis in tu-
mor progression and wound healing 5 , and many other examples. An experimental
example for the reaction of cancer cells to the increasing concentrations of matrix
degrading enzymes (MDEs) such as urokinase plasminogen activator (uPA) secreted

AN
by themselves and the increasing densities of the non-diffusible extracellular ma-
trix (ECM) through detecting the macromolecules adhered therein by haptotaxis
(see Ref. 2). In the relevant biological situation, the cancer cells secrete a chemical
signal as urokinase plasminogen activator that diffuse in the extracellular matrix
and arrive to the endothelial cells. Then, uPA bind to specific receptors of the en-
dothelial cells and activate them. Activated endothelial cells release enzymes that
can degrade neighboring healthy tissue such as the extracellular matrix (ECM) to
allow the migration of cancer cells and then proliferate into the surrounding ma-
DM
trix. To describe the progress of cancer invasion and metastatic in different stages,
most of mathematical models describing the different stage of tumor invasion and
metastatic have been developed before (see e.g. Refs. 3, 12-15, 21, 36, 50 and 52).
Recently, there have been increasing biological and mathematical interests in math-
ematical model of Chaplain-Lolas type cancer invasion 13,14 and abundant results
have been obtained (see e.g. Refs. 39, 40, 53-56, 58-62, 66-68 and references therein
for detailed results). Moreover, for the quasilinear chemotaxis system


 ut = ∇ · (D(u)∇u) − ∇ · (uS(x, u, v) · ∇v), x ∈ Ω, t > 0,

vt = ∆v + wz, x ∈ Ω, t > 0,
(1.1)
TE

 w = −wz, x ∈ Ω, t > 0,
 t
zt = ∆z − z + u x ∈ Ω, t > 0
which was recently proposed by Fujie et al. 19 as a modified tumor invasion model
with chemotaxis effect of Chaplain and Anderson type 15 , a comprehensive solution
theory seems yet lacking. Here, Ω ⊂ Rn (n ≥ 1) is a bounded domain with a
smooth boundary ∂Ω, ∂/∂ν is the derivative with respect to the outer normal ν
EP
of ∂Ω. In this framework, u = u(x, t) denotes the tumor cells density on Ω ⊂ Rn

at location x and time t, while v = v(x, t) describes the concentration of so-called
active extracellular matrix (ECM*) which are produced by the biochemical reaction
between the extracellular matrices and the matrix degrading enzymes and play a
role as an attractant of the migration of tumor cells which are at their core driven
by chemotaxis in many biological process, w = w(x, t) stands for the extracellular
matrix (ECM) and z = z(x, t) is used to describe the concentration of matrix
C
degrading enzymes (MDE), respectively. Besides diffusing randomly, tumor cells

AC
T
IP
CR
Boundedness and Large Time Behavior for a Tumor Invasion Model 3
partially orient their movement toward increasing concentrations of the diffusible

active extracellular matrices. The nonlinear term uS(x, u, v) · ∇v models the cell
movement towards the higher concentrations of the chemical signal where S(x, u, v)
is chemotactic sensitivity function and D(u) is the diffusion function.
As a variant of the classical Keller-Segel model 31 , the following model
US
{
ut = ∇ · (D(u)∇u) − ∇ · (uS(x, u, v) · ∇v), x ∈ Ω, t > 0,
(1.2)
τ vt = ∆v − v + u, x ∈ Ω, t > 0
was initially proposed by Painter and Hillen ( Refs. 48, see also Winkler et al. 4 ) to
describe the aggregation process of cellular slime mold of Dictyostelium discoideum
in response to the chemical cyclic adenosine monophosphate (cAMP) in mathemat-

AN
ical biology. The main issue of the investigation in the mathematical analysis of
system (1.2) is whether the solutions of the models are bounded or blow-up (see
e.g. Refs. 6, 8-11, 16-17, 22-27, 29, 33-34, 37-38, 41, 43-48, 51, 57, 69 and 71-76). In
particular, for system (1.2) with D(u) ≡ 1 and S(x, u, v) ≡ 1, it is known from these
results that the main elements which determine the solution behavior are spatial
dimension and the total mass of cells (no blow up in 1D 24,46 , critical mass blow-up
in 2D 25,29,41,43,45,51 and, the large initial data blow-up in ≥ 3D 71,72 . Furthermore,
for system (1.2) with D(u) ̸≡ 1, it can be observed that the three different version
DM
of chemotaxis sensitivities: the signal-dependent sensitivity S(u, v) = CvS or (1+δv)CS

2
with CS > 0 and δ > 0 (see Refs. 17 and 73) which reflects the inhibition of cell
movement in the location of the high signal concentration 23,37 , the u−dependent
sensitivity S(u, v) = uq or u(u + 1)q with q ∈ R 16,57 which shows the volume-filling
effect in the process of chemotaxis 48 and the tensor-valued sensitivity S = (Sij )2×2
with Sij ∈ C 2 (Ω × [0, ∞) × [0, ∞)) for i, j ∈ (1, 2) 6,38 which describes the rotational
chemotactic migration happening close to the physical boundary of the domain 75,76
have been deeply investigated by Cieślak and Stinner 10,11 , Tao and Winkler 57,69
and Zheng et al. An important discovery is that the nonlinear variants of chemo-
tactic sensitivity S = S(u, v) (see e.g. Refs. 8, 23 and 22) and diffusivity 9,33,34,74
TE
can prevent finite-time blow-up.

As compared to system (1.2), the indirect chemotaxis mechanism in (1.1) with
D(u) ≡ 1 and S(x, u, v) ≡ 1 has been shown to have a role in enhancing the reg-
ularity and boundedness properties of solutions. To be more precise, Fujie el at.
18
established the local existence and uniqueness of system (1.1). Very recently,
Fujie el at.19 clarified how far this indirect chemotactic feedback may enhance the
EP
regularity and boundedness properties of solutions and obtained that any type of
blow-up is thereby entirely suppressed in the physically relevant case n ≤ 3 and
that furthermore basically all solutions approach a spatially homogeneous equilib-
rium in the large time limit, which left behind some questions like: how does the
solution converge to that equilibrium, algebraically or exponentially, and, what will
happen when n ≥ 4, will indirect chemotactic cross-diffusion still enforce bounded-
ness unconditionally? For the direct Keller-Segel model (1.2) with D(u) ≡ 1 and
C
n
S(x, u, v) ≡ 1, it has been known that the boundedness of L 2 +ϵ −norm of the cell
AC
T
IP
CR
4 D. Li et al.
density u can successfully ensure its boundedness L∞ −norm and that certain small-
n
ness conditions on the initial data with respect to L 2 −norm of u0 and Ln −norm of
∇z0 ensures boundedness (see Ref. 7). Inspired largely by the work in Ref. 7, Jin
el at. 30 observed that the boundedness of the model (1.1) can be indeed reduced
n
to the spatial L 4 +ϵ − boundedness of its component u only and shown that any
US
bounded solution of (1.1) converges not only uniformly but also exponentially to
its equilibrium (u0 , v 0 + w0 , 0, u0 ) under the small assumptions on the initial date
||u0 ||L n4 (Ω) , ||z0 ||L n2 (Ω) and ||∇v0 ||Ln (Ω) by utilizing the Neumann heat semigroup
theory, which resolves the open problem left in Ref. 19. As far as we know, the
mathematical analysis of (1.1) with nonlinear diffusion about the large time behav-
ior of solutions seems to be quite fragmentary yet, even for the chemotaxis-only
AN
with nonlinear diffusion described above.
Main results. In this paper, our main purpose is concerned with the effect
of the nonlinear diffusion D(u) and the matrix-valued sensitivity S of the form in
(1.9) for the coupled tumor invasion system (1.1). Motivated by Refs. 57 and 70,
we investigate the boundedness and the large time behavior of the weak solutions
to (1.1) in the higher-dimensional case. In order to formulate our main results in
this direction, let us specify the precise evolution problem addressed in the sequel
by considering (1.1) along with the initial data
DM
u(x, 0) = u0 (x), v(x, 0) = v0 (x), w(x, 0) = w0 (x) and z(x, 0) = z0 (x), x ∈ Ω

(1.3)
and the boundary conditions
( ) ∂v ∂z
D(u)∇u − uS(x, u, v) · ∇v · ν = 0 and = = 0, x ∈ ∂Ω (1.4)
∂ν ∂ν
in a bounded convex domain Ω ⊂ Rn with smooth boundary, where throughout
this paper we assume for convenience that the initial data (u0 , v0 , w0 , z0 ) satisfy

TE
κ
 u0 ∈ C 1,∞


(Ω) for some κ > 0 with u0 ≥ 0 in Ω and u0 ̸≡ 0,
v0 ∈ W (Ω) with v0 ≥ 0 in Ω,
1 (1.5)

 w 0 ∈ C (Ω) with w0 > 0 in Ω and

z0 ∈ C 0 (Ω) with z0 > 0 in Ω.
As for the diffusion coefficient in (1.1), we shall assume that D generalizes the
porous-medium-like prototype D(u) = mum−1 by satisfying
EP
θ
D(u) ∈ Cloc ([0, ∞)) for some θ > 0 (1.6)
as well as
D(u) ≥ CD um−1 for all u > 0 (1.7)
with some m > 0 and CD > 0, noting that this includes both degenerate and
C
non-degenerate diffusion at u = 0.
AC
T
IP
CR
Apart from this, we shall merely suppose that
S ∈ C 2 (Ω × [0, ∞) × [0, ∞); Rn×n ) (1.8)
and
US
|S(x, u, v)| ≤ CS (1 + u)−α for some constants α > 0 and CS > 0, (1.9)
which originates from the modeling approaches including volume-filling effect, that
is, the movement of cells is inhibited near points where the cells are densely packed
(cf. Ref. 48), and the exponent α > 0 therein implies that the role of chemotaxis
will weaken when the cells density increases.
In the context of these assumptions, the first of our main results asserts global
AN
existence of a bounded domain solution in the following sense.
Theorem 1.1. Let n ∈ {2, 3, 4, 5} and Ω ⊂ Rn be a bounded convex domain with

smooth boundary. Assume that D and S fulfill (1.6)-(1.9) with m ≥ 1 − n2 and
{4
− n1 − α if n = 2, 3,
m ≥ 312n−24 12n−24 (1.10)
7n−12 − 7n−12 α if n = 4, 5.
Then for any (u0 , v0 , w0 , z0 ) satisfying (1.5), the problem (1.1), (1.3), (1.4) admits
DM
at least one global weak solution (u, v, w, z) in the sense of Definition 4.1 below.
Also, this solution is bounded in Ω × (0, ∞) in the sense that for all t > 0
||u(·, t)||L∞ (Ω) + ||v(·, t)||W 1,∞ (Ω) + ||w(·, t)||L∞ (Ω) + ||z(·, t)||L∞ (Ω) ≤ C (1.11)
with some positive constant C independent of t. In addition, v, w and z are contin-

uous in Ω × (0, ∞), and u as an L∞ (Ω)−valued function is continuous on [0, ∞)
with respect to the weak−⋆ topology, i.e.,
0 ∞
u ∈ Cw −⋆ ([0, ∞); L (Ω)). (1.12)
TE
Remark 1.1. It can be observed from Theorem 1.1 that if the diffusion function
D(u) ≡ 1 and the chemotactic sensitivity S(x, u, v) is the constant unit matrix,
Theorem 1.1 is consistent with the result of Theorem 1.1 in Ref. 19 which states
that results on global boundedness of classical solutions to the PDE system in (1.1)
currently are available for arbitrarily large initial data for n ≤ 3, whereas such
solutions have been constructed only under appropriate smallness condition on the
initial data ||u0 ||L n4 (Ω) , ||z0 ||L n2 (Ω) and ||∇v0 ||Ln (Ω) for n ≥ 4 (see Ref. 30). Com-
EP
pared with the results in Ref. 30, Theorem 1.1 implies that suitably large diffusion
exponent m and nonlinear variant of chemotactic sensitivity in (1.1) would benefit
the global existence and boundedness of solutions to the tumor model (1.1). Un-
fortunately, we have to leave an open question here that our above results whether
can be extended to the case n ≥ 6?
Remark 1.2. As compared to the arguments in Refs. 19 and 30, the novelty of this
C
paper is that we will use Alikakos-Moser iteration 1 approach to obtain the existence
AC
T
IP
CR
6 D. Li et al.
of bounded solutions of the nonlinear diffusion case and our approach underlying
the derivation of Theorem 1.1 will be based on an entropy-like estimate involving
the functional of the form ||u(·, t)||Lp (Ω) for solutions of system (1.1), where we
eventually only need to choose p arbitrarily large, which is slightly different from
US
the coupled functional ||u(·, t)||Lp (Ω) + ||∇v(·, t)||L2q (Ω) (p, q > 1) for the quasilinear
chemotaxis model (1.2) (see∫ Ref. ∫57), the advantage here lies in that the natural
mass conservation property Ω u ≡ Ω u0 is sufficient to derive some useful regularity
information of v and z directly by the relations vt = ∆v + wz and wt = −wz.
Remark 1.3. We have to leave open the question whether the condition (1.10) is
optimal.
AN
Next we can show that all the above solutions approach the∫ unique spatially
homogeneous equilibrium corresponding to the bacterial mass Ω u0 in the large
time limit, provided that u0 is nontrivial, which is evidently necessary for such a
behavior:
Theorem 1.2. Let n ∈ {2, 3, 4, 5} and Ω ⊂ Rn be a bounded convex domain with
smooth boundary. Suppose that D and S satisfy (1.6)-(1.10) with m ≥ 1 − n2 .
Then whenever (u0 , v0 , w0 , z0 ) fulfills (1.5) with u0 ̸≡ 0, the global weak solution
DM
constructed in Theorem 1.1 satisfies
⋆
u(·, t) ⇀ u0 in L∞ (Ω),
v(·, t) → v0 + w0 in L∞ (Ω),
(1.13)
w(·, t) → 0 in L∞ (Ω),
z(·, t) → u0 in L∞ (Ω)
1
∫ 1
∫ 1
∫
as t → ∞, where u0 := |Ω| Ω 0
u , v0 := |Ω| Ω
v0 and w0 := |Ω| Ω
w0 .
Very recently, Winkler 70 established the global boundedness and the large time
behavior for the three-dimensional chemotaxis-Stokes system with nonlinear diffu-
TE
sion and general sensitivity


 nt + u · ∇n = ∇ · (D(n)∇n) − ∇ · (nS(x, n, c) · ∇c), x ∈ Ω, t > 0,


ct + u · ∇c = ∆c − nf (c), x ∈ Ω, t > 0,
(1.14)

 ut + κ(u · ∇u) = ∆u − ∇P + n∇ϕ, x ∈ Ω, t > 0,

∇ · u = 0, x ∈ Ω, t > 0
which was initially proposed by Tuval et al. 63 to describe the dynamics of the
EP
cell concentration, oxygen concentration and fluid velocity. Here n = n(x, t) and
c = c(x, t) denote the density of the cell population and the oxygen concentration,
respectively, and u = u(x, t) and P = P (x, t) represent the fluid velocity and the
associated pressure. f (c) is the consumption rate of the oxygen by the cells. The
essential modeling hypotheses underlying (1.14) are that cell movement is partially
directed by gradients of the chemical which they assume, that convection transports
both cells and oxygen, and that the presence of bacteria, which are slightly heav-
C
ier than water, influences the fluid motion through buoyant forces in an external
AC
T
IP
CR
gravitational potential ϕ. Oxygen is consumed by bacteria rather than produced by

cells. As compared to the tumor invasion model (1.1), the essence is the same in de-
spite of their different biological background. Since the active extracellular matrices
are produced by the biochemical reaction between the matrix degrading enzymes
US
and the extracellular matrices which satisfies the ODE equation wt = −wz. Ob-
viously, the extracellular matrices exponentially decay which directly leads to the
production reduction of the active extracellular matrices. The active extracellu-
lar matrices in tumor invasion model (1.1) and the oxygen in the chemotaxis-fluid
model (1.14) are all consumed by bacteria rather than produced by cells in different
forms. Then in this paper we can apply the same methods in Ref. 70 to analysis
the large time behavior of the tumor invasion model (1.1). To illustrate the conver-
0 Ω
applying the relation
AN
gence property of the extracellular matrix (ECM), we need to derive a suitable lower
bound for z (Lemma 5.1). Since z is connected to w via the third equation in (1.1),
this,
∫ ∞ ∫ in turn, amounts to establishing a positive upper bound ∫ ∞ ∫ for the functional
w(·, t)z(·, t)dxdt which guarantees the finiteness of 0 Ω |∇v(·, t)|2 dxdt by
∫ ∞ v∫t = ∆v + wz in (1.1)(Lemma 3.6). Next we can obtain the
uniform bound of 0 Ω |∇uγ (·, t)|2 dxdt for∫ some γ > 1 on the basis of the bound-
∞∫
edness property of u and the finiteness of 0 Ω |∇v(·, t)|2 dxdt (see Lemma 3.8),
which is essential in our subsequent analysis. The complex proof processes indicate
DM
that the extracellular matrix (ECM) and matrix degrading enzymes (MDE) have
some important influence on the properties of the system (1.1).
This paper is organized as follows. After introducing the regularized system of
(1.1) and collecting some basic estimates of solutions including local existence in
Section 2, we shall establish Theorem 1.1 in Section 3 on the basis of the mass
conservation. In Section 4, on the basis of the previously established estimates, we
can construct the bounded global weak solution of (1.1) by passing to the limit
in a standard manner. In deriving the convergence properties statement asserted
in Theorem 1.2 in Section 5, we shall essentially make use of the boundedness
statement in Theorem 1.1; in ∫ ∞fact,
∫ the latter will enable to exploit the finiteness of
TE
∫∞∫ 2
0 Ω
w(·, t)z(·, t)dxdt and 0 Ω
|∇v(·,
∫ t)| dxdt which heavily depend on a positive
lower bound for the mass functional
∫∞∫ Ω
u(x)dx for all t > 1 (Lemma 4.1) to firstly
γ 2
obtain boundedness also of 0 Ω |∇u (·, t)| dxdt for some γ > 1 (see Lemma 5.3),
and to secondly prove that as a consequence of these three integral inequalities, all
our solutions asymptotically become homogenous in space and thus (1.13) holds.
Throughout this paper, we use symbols C, Ci (i=0,1,2...) ∫ as some generic
∫ posi-
EP
tive constants. Moreover, for simplicity, the integral Ω u(x)dx is written as Ω u(x).
2. Local existence and basic properties

We shall first deal with some boundary regularized approximate problem to over-
come the difficulties brought by the nonlinear boundary condition in this section.
As done in Ref. 70, we introduce an appropriate regularization in which Sϵ defined
C
below vanishes near the lateral boundary.

AC
T
IP
CR
8 D. Li et al.
Next we approximate the diffusion coefficient function in (1.1) by a family

(Dϵ )ϵ∈(0,1) of functions
Dϵ ∈ C 2 ([0, ∞)) such that Dϵ (u) ≥ ϵ for all u > 0 and ϵ ∈ (0, 1) and
(2.1)
D(u) ≤ Dϵ (u) ≤ D(u) + 2ϵ for all u > 0 and ϵ ∈ (0, 1).
US
Next, we let (ρϵ )ϵ∈(0,1) ⊂ C0∞ (Ω) be a family of standard cut-off functions satisfying
0 ≤ ρϵ ≤ 1 in Ω and ρϵ ↗ 1 in Ω as ϵ ↘ 0, and define smooth approximations
Sϵ ∈ C 2 (Ω × [0, ∞)2 ; Rn×n ) of S by letting
Sϵ (x, u, v) = ρϵ (x) · S(x, u, v), x ∈ Ω, u ≥ 0, v ≥ 0 (2.2)

for ϵ ∈ (0, 1) to approximate the sensitivity tensor S, which implies that Sϵ (x, u, v) =






AN
0 on ∂Ω for each fixed ϵ ∈ (0, 1). Therefore, the regularized problem of (1.1) is
presented as follows
uϵt = ∇ · (Dϵ (uϵ )∇uϵ ) − ∇ · (uϵ Sϵ (x, uϵ , vϵ ) · ∇vϵ ), x ∈ Ω, t > 0,
vϵt = ∆vϵ + wϵ zϵ , x ∈ Ω, t > 0,




 wϵt = −wϵ zϵ , x ∈ Ω, t > 0,
zϵt = ∆zϵ − zϵ + uϵ , x ∈ Ω, t > 0, (2.3)

 ∂uϵ ∂vϵ ∂zϵ

 ∂ν = ∂ν = ∂ν = 0, x ∈ ∂Ω, t > 0,

DM

 u (x, 0) = u (x), v (x, 0) = v (x),

 ϵ 0 ϵ 0

wϵ (x, 0) = w0 (x), zϵ (x, 0) = z0 (x) x ∈ Ω.
By means of a fixed point argument inspired by Refs. 26 and 56, in Appendix A we
shall prove the following statement on local existence of classical solutions to (2.3).
Lemma 2.1. Let n ≥ 1, Ω ⊂ Rn be a bounded domain with a smooth boundary

and assume that D(u) and S(x, u, v) satisfy (1.6)-(1.9). Then for any initial data
(u0 , v0 , w0 , z0 ) fulfilling (1.5), there exists a maximal existence time Tmax,ϵ ∈ (0, ∞]
such that model (2.3) possesses a unique solution
TE
uϵ ∈ C(Ω × [0, Tmax,ϵ )) ∩ C 2,1 (Ω × (0, Tmax,ϵ )),

vϵ ∈ C(Ω × [0, Tmax,ϵ )) ∩ C 2,1 (Ω × (0, Tmax,ϵ )) ∩ L∞
loc ([0, Tmax,ϵ ); W
1,∞
(Ω)),
wϵ ∈ C(Ω × (0, Tmax,ϵ )) ∩ C 0,1 (Ω × (0, Tmax,ϵ )) and
zϵ ∈ C(Ω × (0, Tmax,ϵ )) ∩ C 2,1 (Ω × (0, Tmax,ϵ )).
Moreover, the solution (uϵ , vϵ , wϵ , zϵ ) satisfies
EP
uϵ ≥ 0, vϵ ≥ 0, zϵ ≥ 0 and 0 < wϵ ≤ ||w0 ||L∞ (Ω) for all (x, t) ∈ Ω × [0, Tmax,ϵ ).
(2.4)
Furthermore, if Tmax,ϵ < ∞, then
||uϵ (·, t)||L∞ (Ω) + ||vϵ (·, t)||W 1,∞ (Ω) + ||zϵ (·, t)||L∞ (Ω) → ∞ as t → Tmax,ϵ . (2.5)
Some elementary but crucial regularity properties of the solutions to (2.3) can
C
be summarized as follows.
AC
T
IP
CR
Lemma 2.2. For each ϵ ∈ (0, 1), the solution (uϵ , vϵ , wϵ , zϵ ) has the following prop-
erties.
(i) The uϵ −component has the mass conservation:
∫ ∫
US
uϵ (·, t) = u0 for all t ∈ (0, Tmax,ϵ ) (2.6)
Ω Ω
(ii) The vϵ − and wϵ −components have the mass conservation that

∫ ∫ ∫ ∫
vϵ (·, t) + wϵ (·, t) = v0 + w0 for all t ∈ (0, Tmax,ϵ ) (2.7)
Ω Ω Ω Ω
(iii) The zϵ −component satisfies the identify:

Ω
AN ∫
zϵ (·, t) = ( z0 −
Ω
∫
−t
u0 )e +
Ω
∫
u0
Ω
for all t ∈ (0, Tmax,ϵ ).
Proof. The identify (2.6) directly results upon integrating the uϵ −equation in (2.3)
(2.8)
over Ω. Thereupon, we add the vϵ −equation to the wϵ −equation in (2.3) and inte-
grate with respect to x ∈ Ω to obtain
∫ ∫
d
(vϵ + wϵ ) = ∆vϵ = 0 for all t ∈ (0, Tmax,ϵ ),
DM
dt Ω Ω
where we use the homogeneous Neumann boundary conditions. A combination of

(2.6) and the zϵ −equation in (2.3) directly yields (2.8) upon an ODE comparison
argument.
Our next two results reveal an interesting functional relation among the cell
density uϵ , the matrix degrading enzymes zϵ and the active extracellular matrix
(ECM*) concentration vϵ , the two lemmas give precise information on how r de-
pends on k and q such that the boundedness of ||uϵ (·, t)||Lk (Ω) can guarantee the
boundedness of ||∇vϵ (·, t)||Lr (Ω) . This forms a basic starting point of our consider-
TE
ations in this work.
Lemma 2.3. (see Ref. 30). Let k ≥ 1 and

{ nk n
q ∈ [1, n−2k ) if k ≤ 2,
n (2.9)
q ∈ [1, ∞] if k > 2.
EP
If for any M > 0, we have
||uϵ (·, t)||Lk (Ω) ≤ M for all t ∈ (0, T )
holds, then there exists Czϵ (k, q, M ) > 0 such that
||zϵ (·, t)||Lq (Ω) ≤ Czϵ (k, q, M ) for all t ∈ (0, T ), (2.10)
C
where T ∈ (0, Tmax,ϵ ).

AC
T
IP
CR
10 D. Li et al.
Proof. Since zϵt = ∆zϵ −zϵ +uϵ in Ω×(0, Tmax ), by means of an associate variation-
of-constants formula, we can represent zϵ (·, t) for each t ∈ (0, T ) according to
∫ t
zϵ (·, t) = et(∆−1) z0 + e(t−s)(∆−1) uϵ (·, s)ds. (2.11)
0
US
Therefore, in view of the Hölder inequality, we may clearly assume that q > k. Then
standard Lk − Lq estimates for the Neumann heat semigroup (et∆ )t≥0 (cf. Ref. 71)
provides c1 > 0 such that
( n 1 1
)
||eτ ∆ φ2 ||Lq (Ω) ≤ c1 1 + τ − 2 ( k − q ) · ||φ2 ||Lk (Ω) for all τ > 0 and any φ2 ∈ Lk (Ω),
(2.12)
fulfilling AN
and using the maximum principle for the heat equation, we can obtain c2 > 0
||eτ ∆ φ2 ||Lq (Ω) ≤ c2 ||φ2 ||L∞ (Ω) for all τ > 0 and arbitrary φ2 ∈ L∞ (Ω), (2.13)
In view of (2.12)- (2.13), from the identity (2.11) we can conclude that
∫ t
−t t∆
||zϵ (·, t)||Lq (Ω) ≤ e ||e z0 ||Lq (Ω) + e−(t−s) ||e(t−s)∆ uϵ (·, s)||Lq (Ω) ds
0
DM
∫ t ( )
n 1 1
−t
≤ C1 e · ||z0 ||L∞ (Ω) + C2 M e−(t−s) · 1 + (t − s)− 2 ( k − q ) ds
0
(2.14)
with Ci > 0∫ (i = 1, 2) for all t ∈ (0, T ), where the assumption (2.9) on q warrants
∞ n 1 1
that C3 := 0 (1 + ϱ− 2 ( k − q ) ) · e−ϱ dϱ is finite. Hence we infer from (2.14) that
||zϵ (·, t)||Lq (Ω) ≤ C1 ||z0 ||L∞ (Ω) + C2 C3 M
for all t ∈ (0, T ), this clearly implies (2.10).

TE
Lemma 2.4. Let q ≥ 1 and

{
nq
r ∈ [1, n−q ) if q ≤ n,
r ∈ [1, ∞] if q > n.
Then for all M > 0 there exists Cvϵ (q, r, M ) > 0 with the property that if t ∈
(0, Tmax,ϵ ) is such that
EP
||zϵ (·, t)||Lq (Ω) ≤ M for all t ∈ (0, T ),
then
||∇vϵ (·, t)||Lr (Ω) ≤ Cvϵ (q, r, M ) for all t ∈ (0, T ). (2.15)
Proof. The proof of this lemma is completely similar to Lemma 4.3 in Ref. 30, so
C
we omit it here.
AC
T
IP
CR
As an important tool, the Gagliardo-Nirenberg inequality will be frequently used

in the forth-coming proofs. The proof this lemma can be found in Refs. 20 and 28.
Lemma 2.5. Let r ∈ (0, a) and ϕ ∈ W 1,2 (Ω) ∩ Lr (Ω). Then there exists a constant
CGN > 0 such that
US
( ∗ ∗
)
||ϕ||Lα (Ω) ≤ CGN ||∇ϕ||λL2 (Ω) ||ϕ||1−λ
r
L (Ω) + ||ϕ||L r (Ω) (2.16)
holds with λ∗ ∈ (0, 1) satisfies

n n
−
λ∗ = r
n
α
n .
1− 2 + r
3. A priori estimatesAN
In this section, we will establish some suitable ϵ−independent bounds for the solu-
tions of (2.3).
3.1. Standard testing procedures

The main step is to establish a uniform bound of uϵ (x, t) in (2.3) with respect to
DM
the norm in Lp (Ω) for certain p ∈ (1, ∞). Let us fix n ∈ {2, 3, 4, 5} and the initial
date fulfills (1.5), we proceed to establish the main step towards our boundedness
proof.
Lemma 3.1. Let p > 1. Then for all ϵ ∈ (0, 1)

∫ ∫ ∫
d p p(p − 1)CD m+p−3 2 p(p − 1)CS2
u + uϵ |∇uϵ | ≤ up+1−m−2a |∇vϵ |2
dt Ω ϵ 2 Ω 2CD Ω
ϵ
(3.1)
for all t ∈ (0, Tmax,ϵ ), where CD and CS are as in (1.7) and (1.9).
TE
Proof. We multiply the uϵ −equation in (2.3) by up−1 ϵ and integrate by parts over
Ω. Since Sϵ (x, uϵ , vϵ ) vanishes whenever x ∈ ∂Ω according to (2.3), this yields
∫ ∫ ( )
1 d
upϵ = up−1
ϵ ∇ · (D (u
ϵ ϵ )∇u ϵ ) − ∇ · (u S
ϵ ϵ (x, u ,
ϵ ϵv ) · ∇vϵ )
p dt Ω Ω
∫
= −(p − 1) up−2 Dϵ (uϵ )|∇uϵ |2 (3.2)
EP
ϵ
Ω
∫
+ (p − 1) uϵp−1 Sϵ (x, uϵ , vϵ )∇uϵ · ∇vϵ
Ω
for all t ∈ (0, Tmax,ϵ ). It follows from the definition of Dϵ and (1.7) that for each
ϵ ∈ (0, 1)
∫ ∫
C
−(p − 1) uϵp−2 Dϵ (uϵ )|∇uϵ |2 ≤ −(p − 1)CD um+p−3

ϵ |∇uϵ |2 (3.3)
Ω Ω
AC
T
IP
CR
12 D. Li et al.
for all t ∈ (0, Tmax,ϵ ). Also, in light of (1.9) we apply the Young inequality to deal
with the second term on the right side of (3.2) as follows:
∫
(p − 1) uϵp−1 ∇uϵ · (Sϵ (x, uϵ , vϵ ) · ∇vϵ )
Ω
∫
US
≤ (p − 1)CS uϵp−α−1 |∇uϵ ||∇vϵ | (3.4)
Ω
∫ ∫
(p − 1)CD (p − 1)CS2
≤ uϵp+m−3 |∇uϵ |2 + up+1−m−2a
ϵ |∇vϵ |2
2 Ω 2CD Ω
for all t ∈ (0, Tmax,ϵ ). Substituting (3.3)-(3.4) into (3.2), we get

∫ ∫ ∫
1 d p (p − 1)CD m+p−3 2 (p − 1)CS2
up+1−m−2a |∇vϵ |2
u + uϵ |∇uϵ | ≤
p dt Ω ϵ 2
AN Ω 2CD Ω
ϵ
for all t ∈ (0, Tmax,ϵ ). Consequently, the differential inequality (3.1) results from the
above inequality.
3.2. Estimating the right-hand side in (3.1)

Our next first purpose will be to improve the regularity information on the chemo-
tactic gradient vϵ from Lemma 2.3 and Lemma 2.4. As a preliminary step toward
DM
this, this following lemma provides a criterion for Lq boundedness of this quantity
in dependence of a supposedly know spatial Lk bound for uϵ . Performing that pro-
cedure, we find that the dimension n must be less that 6 in order to match the
involving Hölder exponent below. Here we make use of the regularity information
on the chemotactic gradient vϵ and the Gagliardo-Nirenberg interpolation inequal-
ity to bound the first integral in the right-hand side of (3.1) in higher dimensional
case.
4 1
Lemma 3.2. Let m + α ≥ 3 − n (n = 2, 3) and suppose that p > 1 satisfies
2
TE
p > m + 2α − . (3.5)
3
Then for all η1 > 0 there exists C7 := C7 (p, η1 ) > 0 such that for all ϵ ∈ (0, 1)
∫ ∫
p+1−m−2α 2
uϵ |∇vϵ | ≤ η1 um+p−3
ϵ |∇uϵ |2 + C7 (3.6)
Ω Ω

EP
Proof. From the Hölder inequality with the exponents 13 and 32 , we have
∫ (∫ ) 13 ( ∫ ) 23
p+1−m−2a 2 3(p−m−2a+1) 3 (3.7)
uϵ |∇vϵ | ≤ uϵ |∇vϵ | .
Ω Ω Ω
Case 1. If n = 2, Lemma 2.2 (i) implies that ||zϵ (·, t)||Lq (Ω) ≤ C1 with some
constants C1 > 0 independent of ϵ ∈ (0, 1) for all t ∈ (0, Tmax,ϵ ) and q ∈ [1, ∞]
C
by Lemma 2.3, then there exists a q > 2 such that for all r ∈ [1, ∞], we have
AC
T
IP
CR
||∇vϵ (·, t)||Lr (Ω) ≤ C2 with some constants C2 > 0 independent of ϵ ∈ (0, 1) for all
t ∈ (0, Tmax,ϵ ) by Lemma 2.4.
Case 2. If n = 3, we can make use of Lemma 2.3 to obtain ||zϵ (·, t)||Lq (Ω) ≤ C3 with
US
some constants C3 > 0 independent of ϵ ∈ (0, 1) for all t ∈ [0, T ) and q ∈ [1, 3),
where T ∈ [0, Tmax,ϵ ) on the basis of L1 −boundedness of the cell density uϵ in
Lemma 2.2 (i). Hence, we deduce as in Lemma 2.4 that ||∇vϵ (·, t)||Lr (Ω) ≤ C4 with
some constants C4 > 0 independent of ϵ ∈ (0, 1) for all r ∈ [1, ∞].
Combining the above two cases, we derive that there exists a constant C5 > 0
independent of ϵ ∈ (0, 1) such that
∫
AN ||∇vϵ ||L3 (Ω) ≤ C5 for all t ∈ (0, Tmax,ϵ ).
This coupled with (3.7) yields that
uϵp+1−m−2a |∇vϵ |2 ≤ C5
(∫
u3(p−m−2a+1)
) 31
for all t ∈ (0, Tmax,ϵ ). (3.8)
ϵ
Ω Ω
4 1
Since m + α ≥ 3 − n and p ≥ m + 2α − 23 , we have
DM
2 6(p + 1 − m − 2α) 2n
≤ ≤ . (3.9)
p+m−1 p+m−1 n−2
p+m−1
Now, applying the Gagliardo-Nirenberg inequality (2.16) with ω = uϵ 2 and the
L1 −boundedness of the cell density uϵ (see Lemma 2.2), we conclude with some
C6 > 0 independent of ϵ ∈ (0, 1) that
(∫ ) 13
p+m−1 2(p+1−m−2α)
u3(p−m−2a+1)
ϵ = ||uϵ 2
|| p+m−1
6(p+1−m−2α)
Ω L p+m−1 (Ω)
(
p+m−1
2(p−m−2a+1) 2(p−m−2a+1)
p+m−1 λ1 p+m−1 p+m−1 (1−λ1 )
TE
≤ CG ∇uϵ 2 2 · uϵ 2 2
L (Ω) p+m−1 L (Ω)
)
p+m−1 2(p−m−2a+1)
p+m−1
+ uϵ 2 2
L p+m−1 (Ω)
( )
p+m−1
2(p−m−2a+1)
p+m−1 λ1
≤ C6 ∇uϵ 2
2 +1
L (Ω)
EP
(3.10)
n(p+m−1) n(p+m−1)
2 − 6(p+1−m−2α)
for all t ∈ (0, Tmax,ϵ ), where λ1 = n n(p+m−1) ∈ [0, 1] and
1− 2 + 2
n(p−m−2α+1)
(p − m − 2a + 1) 2 − n6
λ1 = n(p+m−1)
p+m−1 1− n (3.11)
2 +
C
2
≤ 1.
AC
T
IP
CR
14 D. Li et al.
Applied to (3.8), this yields that

∫ ∫
up+1−m−2a
ϵ |∇v ϵ |2
≤ η1 uϵm+p−3 |∇uϵ |2 + C7 for all t ∈ (0, Tmax,ϵ ) (3.12)
Ω Ω
with some constants C7 = C7 (p, η1 ) > 0.
US
Next in quite a similar manner, we can also estimate the first term on the right
hand of (3.1) for the case n = 4, 5 as follows:
{ }
Lemma 3.3. Assume that m ≥ max 17 1 12n−24
12 − n − α, 7n−12 (1 − α) . If
{ 5}
7n − 12 12n − 24 7n − 12
max 1, m + 2α − ≤p≤ m+ α− , (3.13)
6 5n − 12 5n − 12 5n − 12
∫
up+1−m−2α
ϵ
Ω
AN
then for all η2 > 0 there exists C12 := C12 (p, η2 ) > 0 such that for all ϵ ∈ (0, 1)
|∇vϵ | 2
≤ η2
∫
um+p−3
ϵ
Ω
|∇uϵ |2 + C12 (3.14)
Proof. Picking 16 and 56 as exponents, we employ the Hölder inequality once more
and then
DM
∫ (∫ ) 16 ( ∫ ) 56
12
uϵp+1−m−2a |∇vϵ |2 ≤ u6(p−m−2a+1)
ϵ |∇vϵ | 5 (3.15)
Ω Ω Ω
for all t ∈ (0, Tmax,ϵ ). Since p ≥ m + 2α − 56 , it is not difficult to verify that

12(p + 1 − m − 2α) 2
> . (3.16)
p+m−1 p+m−1
The right inequality of (3.13) asserts that
12(p + 1 − m − 2α) 2n
≤ . (3.17)
p+m−1 n−2
TE
Therefore, in light of (2.6), we can derive C8 = C8 (p) > 0 and C9 = C9 (p) > 0 from
the Gagliardo-Nirenberg inequality asserted by Lemma 2.5 such that
(∫ ) 16
p+m−1 2(p+1−m−2α)
u6(p−m−2a+1)
ϵ = ||uϵ 2
|| p+m−1
12(p+1−m−2α)
Ω L p+m−1 (Ω)
(
p+m−1
2(p−m−2a+1) 2(p−m−2a+1)
EP
p+m−1 λ2 p+m−1 p+m−1 (1−λ2 )

≤ C8 ∇uϵ 2 2 · uϵ 2 2
L (Ω) p+m−1L (Ω)
)
p+m−1 2(p−m−2a+1)
p+m−1
+ uϵ 2 2
p+m−1
L (Ω)
( )
p+m−1
2(p−m−2a+1)
p+m−1 λ2
≤ C9 ∇uϵ 2
2 +1 ,
C
L (Ω)
(3.18)
AC
T
IP
CR
where λ2 ∈ (0, 1) is determined by the relation

n(m + p − 1) n n(m + p − 1)
= ( − 1)λ2 + (1 − λ2 ). (3.19)
12(p − m − 2α + 1) 2 2
Thus
US
n(p+m−1) n(p+m−1)
2 − 12(p+1−m−2α)
λ2 = . (3.20)
n n(p+m−1)
1− 2 + 2
17
Since m + α ≥ 12 − n1 , we can conclude that
n(p−m−2a+1) n
(p − m − 2a + 1) − 12
2
λ2 = n(p+m−1)
p+m−1 1− n (3.21)
2 +
AN ≤ 1.
Similar to the argument in Case 2, it follows from Lemma 2.3 and Lemma 2.4
that there exist C10 > 0 such that ||∇vϵ || 12
L 5
2
≤ C10 for all t ∈ (0, Tmax,ϵ ). The

boundedness of ||∇vϵ || 12 along with (3.18) yields that
5 L
∫ (∫ ) 16
up+1−m−2a
ϵ |∇vϵ |2 ≤ C11 u6(p−m−2a+1)
ϵ
DM
Ω Ω (3.22)
∫
≤ η2 um+p−3
ϵ |∇uϵ |2 + C12 for all t ∈ (0, Tmax,ϵ )
Ω
with some constants Ci = Ci (p, η2 ) > 0 (i = 11, 12) for any η2 > 0. The claimed
inequality (3.14) thus results from (3.22).
{ }
Lemma 3.4. Assume that m ≥ 1 − n2 and p > max 1, n(1−m) 2 (n = 2, 3, 4, 5).
Then for all η3 > 0, we can find a constant C17 := C17 (p, η3 ) > 0 such that
∫ ∫ m+p−1
upϵ ≤ η3 |∇uϵ 2 |2 + C17 for all t ∈ (0, Tmax,ϵ ). (3.23)
TE
Ω Ω
{ }
Proof. Since p > max 1, n(1−m)
2 and m ≥ 1 − n2 , we have
2 2p 2n
≤ ≤ , (3.24)
p+m−1 p+m−1 n−2
and thus we can see from the fractional Gagliardo-Nirenberg inequality (2.16) and
Lemma 2.2 (i) that
EP
∫ p+m−1 2p
upϵ = ||uϵ 2 || p+m−1

2p
Ω L p+m−1 (Ω)
( p+m−1 p+m−1 2 ) p+m−1
2p
λ3
≤ C13 ∇uϵ 2 L2 (Ω) ||uϵ 2 ||1−λ32 + ||uϵp+m−1 ||L2 (Ω)
L p+m−1 (Ω)
p+m−1 2p
λ3
≤ C14 ∇uϵ 2 Lp+m−1 + C15
C
2 (Ω)
(3.25)
AC
T
IP
CR
16 D. Li et al.
with some constants Ci > 0 (i = 13, 14, 15) for all t ∈ (0, Tmax,ϵ ), where λ3 =
p+m−1
2 − p+m−1
2p 2
p+m−1
+n1
− 12
∈ [0, 1]. Since m ≥ 1 − n and a direct calculation shows that
2
p+m−1
p p 2 − p+m−1
2p
λ3 = ·
US
p+m−1
p+m−1 p+m−1 + n − 12
1
2 (3.26)
n(p − 1)
= < 1.
2 + n(p + m − 2)
Hence, by (3.25), (3.26) and using the Young’s inequality we can find a constant
C16 = C16 (p, η3 ) > 0 such that (3.23) holds.
AN
3.3. Combining previous estimates
Based on the estimates established previously, we can derive a boundedness for the
functional ||uϵ (·, t)||Lp (Ω) .
Lemma 3.5. Let Ω ⊂ Rn (n = 2, 3, 4, 5) be a bounded domain with smooth bound-

ary. Furthermore, assume that D and S satisfy (1.6)-(1.10) with m ≥ 1 − n2 . Then
for all large number p > 1 as provided by Lemmas 3.2- 3.4, there exists a constant
DM
C > 0 such that for all ϵ ∈ (0, 1)
||uϵ (·, t)||Lp (Ω) ≤ C for all t ∈ (0, Tmax,ϵ ). (3.27)

{ }
Proof. (i) If n = 2, 3, according to m > max 43 − n1 − α, 1 − n2 , we can choose
{ }
sufficiently large p ≥ 1 such that p > max 1, m + 2α − 23 .
2
(ii) If n = 4, 5, we first observe that the assumption m ≥ 1 − n asserts that
n(1−m)
2 ≤ 1 and
7n − 12 17 1
1− m≥ − − m. (3.28)
TE
12n − 24 12 n
{ }
Thus the fact m ≥ max 12n−24
7n−12 (1−α), 1− 2
n makes it possible to choose sufficiently
large p ≥ 1 such that
{ 5} 7n − 12 12n − 24 7n − 12
max 1, m + 2α − ≤p≤ m+ α− . (3.29)
6 5n − 12 5n − 12 5n − 12
EP
Now choosing suitable η1 in Lemma 3.2 or η2 in Lemma 3.2 satisfying

{ p(p − 1)C 2 p(p − 1)CS2 } p(p − 1)CD
S (3.30)
max η1 , η2 ≤ ,
2CD 2CD 2
and substituting these inequalities into (3.1), we can obtain that for all ϵ ∈ (0, 1)
∫ ∫ ∫ ∫
d p p p(p − 1)CD p+m−1
2
u + uϵ + |∇uϵ 2
| ≤ upϵ + C1 for all t ∈ (0, Tmax,ϵ )
dt Ω ϵ (p − m + 1)2 Ω
C
Ω Ω
(3.31)
AC
T
IP
CR
with some constant C1 > 0. Moreover, as a consequence of Lemma 3.4, there exists
a constant C2 > 0 such that for all ϵ ∈ (0, 1)
∫ ∫
p(p − 1)CD p+m−1
upϵ ≤ 2
|∇uϵ 2 |2 + C2 for all t ∈ (0, Tmax,ϵ ). (3.32)
Ω (p − m + 1) Ω
US
Therefore, we collect (3.31) and (3.32) to obtain that for all ϵ ∈ (0, 1)
∫ ∫
d
upϵ + upϵ ≤ C3 for all t ∈ (0, Tmax,ϵ )
dt Ω Ω
with some constants C3 > 0. Thus a standard∫ ordinary differential equation com-
parison argument ensures the boundedness of Ω upϵ for all t ∈ (0, Tmax,ϵ ).
AN
By means of a Moser-type iteration in conjunction with Lemma 2.3 and using
Lemmas 3.3-3.5, we can obtain the following boundedness results.
Lemma 3.6. Suppose that the hypotheses of Theorem 1.1 are valid. Then one can
find C > 0 independent of ϵ ∈ (0, 1) such that the solutions of (2.3) fulfill
||uϵ (·, t)||L∞ (Ω) ≤ C for all t > 0 (3.33)
||vϵ (·, t)||W 1,∞ (Ω) ≤ C for all t > 0 (3.34)

DM
and
||wϵ (·, t)||L∞ (Ω) ≤ C for all t > 0 (3.35)
as well as
||zϵ (·, t)||W 1,∞ (Ω) ≤ C for all t > 0. (3.36)
Proof. By Lemmas 3.2 and 3.3 and using parabolic regularity theory to the
vϵ −equation and the zϵ −equation in (2.3), there exist some constants Ci > 0
TE
(i = 5, 6) such that for all l ∈ (1, +∞)
||zϵ (·, t)||W 1,l (Ω) ≤ C5 for all t ∈ (0, Tmax,ϵ ). (3.37)
and
||vϵ (·, t)||W 1,l (Ω) ≤ C6 for all t ∈ (0, Tmax,ϵ ) (3.38)
EP
Then we may invoke Lemma A.1 in Ref. 57 (see also Ref. 1) which by means of a
Moser-type iteration applied to the first equation in (2.3) establishes
||uϵ (·, t)||L∞ (Ω) ≤ C7 for all t ∈ (0, Tmax,ϵ ) (3.39)
with some constants C7 > 0. Finally, the boundedness of ||vϵ (·, t)||W 1,∞ (Ω) and
||zϵ (·, t)||W 1,∞ (Ω) can be easily obtained from (3.39), Lemma 2.3 and Lemma
2.4 by applying the standard parabolic theory. Clearly, we can derive that
C
||vϵ (·, t)||W 1,∞ (Ω) ≤ C8 and ||zϵ (·, t)||W 1,∞ (Ω) ≤ C9 for all t ∈ (0, Tmax,ϵ ). By virtue of
AC
T
IP
CR
18 D. Li et al.
Lemma 2.2 and (3.38)-(3.39), the local solution can be extend to the global-in-time
solutions.
In order to prepare our arguments concerning the large time behavior of so-
US
lutions, let us briefly note that Lemma 3.6 implies the following uniform Hölder
regularity properties of vϵ , ∇vϵ , zϵ and ∇zϵ .
Lemma 3.7. Let n ∈ {2, 3, 4, 5} and suppose D and S satisfy (1.6)-(1.10) with
m ≥ 1 − n2 . Then one can find ϑ ∈ (0, 1) such that for some C > 0 we have
||vϵ || ϑ ≤ C for all t ≥ 0
C ϑ, 2 (Ω×[t,t+1])
and
AN
||zϵ || ϑ
C ϑ, 2 (Ω×[t,t+1])
and such that for each τ > 0 we can find C(τ ) > 0 such that
≤ C for all t ≥ 0,
||∇vϵ || ϑ ≤ C for all t ≥ τ

C ϑ, 2 (Ω×[t,t+1])
and
DM
||∇zϵ || ϑ ≤ C for all t ≥ τ.
C ϑ, 2 (Ω×[t,t+1])
Proof. We write the vϵ −equation and the zϵ −equation in (2.3) in the form
vϵt = ∆vϵ + fϵ (x, t), x ∈ Ω, t > 0
and
zϵt = ∆zϵ + gϵ (x, t), x ∈ Ω, t > 0
with fϵ (x, t) := wϵ zϵ and gϵ (x, t) = −zϵ + uϵ , we immediately obtain among esti-

mates (3.33), (3.34), (3.35) and (3.36) e.g. standard parabolic regularity theory 35 ,
TE
since (fϵ )ϵ∈(0,1) and (gϵ )ϵ∈(0,1) are bounded in L∞ (Ω × (0, ∞)) by Lemma 3.6.
3.4. Some temporally global integrability properties

In order to pass to the limit in the first equation in (2.3), we shall make full use of a
priori bounds derived so far to obtain some regularity properties of time derivatives
of certain powers of uϵ and ∇vϵ .
EP
Lemma 3.8. The solution of (2.3) established in Theorem 1.1 has the property that
∫ ∞∫
wϵ (x, t)zϵ (x, t)dxdt < C3 (3.40)
0 Ω
and
∫ ∞ ∫
C
|∇vϵ (x, t)|2 dxdt < C4 (3.41)

0 Ω
AC
T
IP
CR
with some Ci > 0 (i = 3, 4) for each ϵ ∈ (0, 1).
Proof. Integrating the wϵ −equation in (2.3) over Ω × (0, t), we obtain

∫ t∫ ∫ ∫
US
wϵ (x, s)zϵ (x, s)dxds = w0 (x)dx − wϵ (x, t)dx (3.42)
0 Ω Ω Ω
for arbitrary t > 0, which along with the nonnegative of wϵ implies (3.40).
Furthermore, we integrate the vϵ −equation in (2.3) with respect to x ∈ Ω to
obtain
∫ ∫ ∫
1 d
vϵ2 (·, t)dx + |∇vϵ (·, t)|2 dx =
vϵ (·, t)wϵ (·, t)zϵ (·, t)dx (3.43)

2 dt Ω Ω Ω
AN
for all t ∈ (0, Tmax,ϵ ). Integrating this equality from 0 to t, we conclude from the
boundedness of vϵ (x, t) that
∫
2
vϵ (·, t)dx + 2
∫ t∫
|∇vϵ (·, s)|2 dxds
Ω 0 Ω
∫ ∫ t∫
= v02 dx + 2 vϵ (·, s)wϵ (·, s)zϵ (·, s)dxds (3.44)
Ω 0 Ω
∫ ∫ t∫
DM
≤ v02 dx + C1 wϵ (·, s)zϵ (·, s)dxds

Ω 0 Ω
for arbitrary t > 0 with some C1 > 0. A substitution of (3.40) into (3.44) gives rise
to
∫ t∫ ∫ ∫ t∫
|∇vϵ (·, s)|2 dxds ≤ v02 dx + C1 wϵ (·, s)zϵ (·, s)dxds
0 Ω Ω 0 Ω (3.45)
≤ C2
for arbitrary t > 0 with some C2 > 0. Thereupon, inequality (3.41) results from
(3.45).
TE
A corresponding spatio-temporal integrability property of ∇uϵ can be obtained

from Lemma 3.1 upon using Lemma 3.8 along with the L∞ bound for uϵ from
Lemma 3.6.
Lemma 3.9. Assume that D and S satisfy (1.6)-(1.10) with m ≥ 1 − n2 , and that
p > 1 is such that p ≥ m + 2a − 1. Then there exists C6 > 0 independent of t with
EP
the property that

∫ ∞∫ p+m−1
|∇uϵ 2 |2 dxdt ≤ C6 for all t > 0 (3.46)
0 Ω
for all ϵ ∈ (0, 1).
Proof. In light of Lemma 3.6, there exists C5 > 0 such that for all ϵ ∈ (0, 1) we
C
have uϵ ≤ C5 in Ω × (0, ∞). Integrating the inequality (3.1) from 0 to t and using
AC
T
IP
CR
20 D. Li et al.
the fact p ≥ m + 2a − 1, we conclude

∫ ∫
2p(p − 1)CD t p+m−1
2
|∇uϵ 2 |2 dxds
(p + m − 1) 0 Ω
∫ ∫ t∫ (3.47)
p p(p − 1)CS2 p−m−2a+1
US
≤ u0 dx + · C5 |∇vϵ |2 dxds
Ω 2CD 0 Ω
for any such t and ϵ. This joined with (3.41) implies (3.46).
3.5. Regularity properties of time derivatives

Next we shall need an appropriate boundedness property of the time derivatives of

certain powers of uϵ in order to pass to the limit in the uϵ −equation in (2.3), which
AN
can be obtained in a straightforward way by making use of a priori bounds on time
intervals of a fixed finite length.
Lemma 3.10. Suppose D and S satisfy (1.6)-(1.10) with m ≥ 1− n2 , and let γ > m
satisfy γ ≥ 2(m − 1 + α). Then for all T > 0 there exists C(T ) > 0 such that
∫ T
||∂t uγϵ (·, t)||((W ς,2 (Ω))⋆ ) dt ≤ C(T ) for all ϵ ∈ (0, 1). (3.48)
0
0
DM
Proof. In order to estimate the integrals of (3.51) below on the right appropriately,
we first apply Lemma 3.6 to fix positive constants C1 and C2 such that
uϵ ≤ C1 and |∇vϵ | ≤ C2 in Ω × (0, ∞) for all ϵ ∈ (0, 1), (3.49)
whence due to the fact that Dϵ ≤ D + 2ϵ in Ω × (0, ∞), we also have
Dϵ (uϵ ) ≤ C3 := ||D0 ||L∞ (0,C1 ) + 2 in Ω × (0, ∞) for all ϵ ∈ (0, 1). (3.50)
For any fixed ψ ∈ C0∞ (Ω), we test the uϵ −equation in (2.3) by uγ−1 ϵ ψ and then get
∫ ∫ ( )
1
TE
∂t uγϵ (·, t) · ψ = uγ−1

ϵ · ∇ · (Dϵ (uϵ )∇uϵ ) − ∇ · (uϵ Sϵ (x, uϵ , vϵ ) · ∇vϵ ) · ψ
γ Ω Ω
∫ ∫
= −(γ − 1) uϵγ−2 Dϵ (uϵ )|∇uϵ |2 ψ − uγ−1
ϵ Dϵ (uϵ )∇uϵ · ∇ψ
Ω Ω
∫
( )
+ (γ − 1) uγ−1
ϵ ∇uϵ · Sϵ (x, uϵ , vϵ ) · ∇vϵ ψ
Ω
∫
γ
( )
EP
+ uϵ Sϵ (x, uϵ , vϵ ) · ∇vϵ · ∇ψ for all t > 0.

Ω
(3.51)
Moreover, since γ > m and γ ≥ 2(m − 1 + α), the number p := γ − m + 1 satisfies
p > 1 and p ≥ m − 1 + 2α, so that Lemma 3.9 becomes applicable so as to yield
C4 > 0 fulfilling
∫ ∫ ∞∫
C
uγ−2
ϵ |∇u ϵ | 2
= up+m−3
ϵ |∇uϵ |2 ≤ C4 for all ϵ ∈ (0, 1). (3.52)
Ω 0 Ω
AC
T
IP
CR
Then we apply (3.49), (3.50) and Young’s inequality to estimate

∫ (∫ )

− (γ − 1) u γ−2
D (u )|∇u | 2
ψ ≤ (γ − 1)C · u γ−2
|∇u | 2
· ||ψ||L∞ (Ω)
ϵ ϵ ϵ ϵ 3 ϵ ϵ
Ω Ω
US
and
∫ (∫ )

− u γ−1
D (u )∇u · ∇ψ ≤ C · u γ−1
|∇u | · ||∇ψ||L∞ (Ω)
ϵ ϵ ϵ ϵ 3 ϵ ϵ
Ω Ω
(∫ ∫ )
≤ C5 · uγ−2 |∇u | 2
+ u γ
ϵ · ||∇ψ||L∞ (Ω)
ϵ ϵ
Ω Ω
( ∫ )
as well as, similarly,

∫
AN ≤ C5
(
uγ−2
ϵ |∇uϵ |2 + C5 C1γ |Ω| · ||∇ψ||L∞ (Ω)
Ω
)
(γ − 1) uϵ ∇uϵ · Sϵ (x, uϵ , vϵ ) · ∇vϵ ψ
γ−1

Ω
(∫ )
≤ (γ − 1) · uγ−1
ϵ |∇uϵ | · CS C2 ||ψ||L∞ (Ω) (3.53)
Ω
(∫
DM
)
≤ (γ − 1)CS C2 · uγ−2
ϵ |∇u ϵ | 2
+ C γ
|Ω| · ψ
1 L∞ (Ω)
Ω
for all t ∈ (0, Tmax,ϵ ), whereas (3.49)-(3.50) and the definition of Sϵ applied to the
last term on the right side of (3.51) shows
∫ ( )

uϵ Sϵ (x, uϵ , vϵ ) · ∇vϵ · ∇ψ ≤ C1γ CS C2 |Ω|∇ψ L∞ (Ω)
γ
(3.54)

Ω
for all ϵ ∈ (0, 1). As in the considered higher-dimensional setting we have W0ς,2 (Ω) ,→
W 1,∞ (Ω), collecting the above inequalities and choosing ς ∈ N large enough to
TE
satisfy ς > n+22 we infer the existence of C6 > 0 such that

∫ T ∫
γ
∂t uϵ (·, t) = sup γ
L1 ((0,T );(W0ς,2 (Ω))⋆ ) ∞
(uϵ (·, t))t ψ
0 ψ∈C0 (Ω),||ψ||W ς,2 (Ω) ≤1 Ω
(∫ )
γ−2 2
(3.55)
≤ C6 · uϵ |∇uϵ | + 1
Ω
EP
≤ C4 C6 + C6 T
for each T > 0 and any ϵ ∈ (0, 1) and obtain the required estimate (3.48).
In proving that the limit function u gained below approaches its spatial mean
not only along certain sequences of times but in fact along the entire net t → ∞,
we will rely on an additional regularity estimate for ∂t uϵ which, in contrast to that
C
in Lemma 3.10, is uniform with respect to time.

AC
T
IP
CR
22 D. Li et al.
Lemma 3.11. Under the assumptions of Theorem 1.1, one can find some C > 0
such that
||∂t uϵ (·, t)||(W 2,2 (Ω))⋆ ≤ C for all t > 0 and ϵ ∈ (0, 1). (3.56)
0
US
In particular,
||uϵ (·, t) − uϵ (·, s)||(W 2,2 (Ω))⋆ ≤ C|t − s| for all t, s ≥ 0 and ϵ ∈ (0, 1). (3.57)
0
Proof. We multiply the uϵ −equation in (2.3) by an arbitrary ψ ∈ C0∞ (Ω) to see

that
∫ ∫ ∫
( )
∂t uϵ (·, t)ψ = ∇ · (Dϵ (uϵ )∇uϵ )ψ − ∇ · uϵ Sϵ (x, uϵ , vϵ ) · ∇vϵ ψ
=
∫Ω
AN
Hϵ (uϵ )∆ψ +
Ω
∫ (
Ω
)
uϵ Sϵ (x, uϵ , vϵ ) · ∇vϵ · ∇ψ
Ω
∫s
for all t > 0, where we have set Hϵ (s) := 0 Dϵ (ρ)dρ for s ≥ 0. Since Lemma 3.6 also
warrants that there exist C1 > 0 such that uϵ ≤ C1 in Ω × (0, ∞) for all ϵ ∈ (0, 1),
recalling that Dϵ ≤ C2 := D + 2ϵ on (0, ∞) we can estimate
( )
Hϵ (uϵ ) ≤ C4 := C3 · ||D||L∞ (0,C1 ) + 2 in Ω × (0, ∞) for all ϵ ∈ (0, 1). (3.58)
DM
Here thanks to Lemma 3.6 we can pick C5 > 0 to obtain that
|∇vϵ | ≤ C5 in Ω × (0, ∞) for all ϵ ∈ (0, 1), (3.59)
then in combination with (3.58)-(3.59) we can obtain the inequality

∫ ∫ ∫

∂ u (·, t) · ψ ≤ C4 |∆ψ| + C1 C5 CS |∇ψ|
Ω t ϵ Ω Ω
in Ω × (0, ∞) for all ϵ ∈ (0, 1), which entails (3.56) and thereby also (3.57).
TE
4. Passing to the limit. Proof of Theorem 1.1

In the sequel, we shall refer to the following natural concept of weak solvability in
(1.1), (1.3) and (1.4):
Definition 4.1. Suppose that (u0 , v0 , w0 , z0 ) satisfies (1.5), and let T > 0. Then
by a weak solution of (1.1) in Ω × (0, T ) we mean a of function
EP
u ∈ L1loc (Ω × [0, T )),

v ∈ L∞ 1
loc (Ω × [0, T )) ∩ Lloc ([0, T ); W
1,1
(Ω)),
(4.1)
w ∈ L∞ ∞
loc ([0, T ); L (Ω)),
z ∈ L∞ 1
loc (Ω × [0, T )) ∩ Lloc ([0, T ); W
1,1
(Ω))
such that u ≥ 0, v ≥ 0, w ≥ 0 and z ≥ 0 in Ω × (0, T ) and
C
H(u), u|∇v| belong to L1loc (Ω × (0, T )), (4.2)

AC
T
IP
CR
and such that

∫ T∫ ∫ ∫ T ∫ ∫ T ∫ ( )
− uφt − u0 φ(·, 0) = H(u)∆φ + u S(x, u, v) · ∇v · ∇φ
0 Ω Ω 0 Ω 0 Ω
(4.3)
US
for all φ ∈ C0∞ (Ω × [0, T )) fulfilling ∂φ
∂ν = 0 on ∂Ω × (0, T ), that
∫ T∫ ∫ ∫ T∫ ∫ T∫
− vφt − v0 φ(·, 0) = − ∇v · ∇φ + wzφ (4.4)
0 Ω Ω 0 Ω 0 Ω
for all φ ∈ C0∞ (Ω × [0, T )), and that

∫ T∫ ∫ ∫ T ∫
− wφt − w0 φ(·, 0) = − (4.5)
− zφt −
AN 0
z0 φ(·, 0) = −
Ω
for all φ ∈ C0∞ (Ω × [0, T )), as well as

∫ T∫ ∫ ∫ T∫
∇z · ∇φ −
∫
Ω 0
T ∫
Ω
wzφ
zφ +
∫ T ∫
uφ (4.6)
0 Ω Ω 0 Ω 0 Ω 0 Ω
for all φ ∈ C0∞ (Ω × [0, T )), where we have set

∫ s
H(s) := D(ρ)dρ for s ≥ 0. (4.7)
DM
If (u, v, w, z) is a weak solution of (1.1) in Ω × (0, T ) for all T > 0, then we call
(u, v, w, z) is a global weak solution of (1.1).
In light of Definition 4.1, we can verify that (1.1) is indeed globally solvable by
an application of the estimates established before and a standard manner of passing
to the limit.
Lemma 4.1. Let the basic assumptions be as in Theorem 1.1. Then one can find
(ϵj )j∈N ⊂ (0, 1) such that ϵj ↘ 0 as j → ∞ and that
TE
0
vϵ → v in Cloc (Ω × [0, ∞)), (4.8)
0
∇vϵ → ∇v in Cloc (Ω × [0, ∞)), (4.9)
⋆
∇vϵ ⇀ ∇v in L∞ (Ω × (0, ∞)), (4.10)
EP
0
wϵ → w in Cloc (Ω × [0, ∞)), (4.11)
⋆
wϵ ⇀ w in L∞ (Ω × (0, ∞)), (4.12)
0
zϵ → z in Cloc (Ω × [0, ∞)), (4.13)
C
0
∇zϵ → ∇z in Cloc (Ω × [0, ∞)), (4.14)
AC
T
IP
CR
24 D. Li et al.
⋆
∇zϵ ⇀ ∇z in L∞ (Ω × (0, ∞)), (4.15)
uϵ → u a.e. in Ω × (0, ∞), (4.16)
US
⋆
uϵ ⇀ u in L∞ (Ω × (0, ∞)), (4.17)
([
0
uϵ → u in Cloc 0, ∞); (W02,2 (Ω))⋆ ), (4.18)
where the limit function (u, v, w, z) is global weak solution of (1.1) in the sense of
Definition 4.1. Furthermore, u fulfills
AN 0
u ∈ Cw −⋆ ([0, ∞); L
∞
(Ω)).
Proof. According to Lemma 3.7, an application of the Arzelà-Ascoli theorem pro-

vides a sequence (ϵj )j∈N ⊂ (0, 1) with ϵj ↘ 0 as j → ∞ such that (4.8), (4.9),
(4.19)
(4.11), (4.13) and (4.14) hold with some limit functions v, w and z belonging to the
indicated spaces. Passing to a subsequence if necessary, we can obtain that (4.10),
(4.12), (4.15) and (4.17) hold for some u ∈ L∞ (Ω × (0, T )) by means of Lemma 3.6.
Next we fix γ > m such that γ ≥ 2(m − 1 + α) for p := 2γ − m + 1 to
DM
see
∫ T ∫that for each T > 0, Lemma 3.9 ensures that there is C1 > 0 such that
γ 2
0 Ω
|∇u ϵ | ≤ C1 for any ϵ ∈ (0, 1) and we infer that (uγϵ )ϵ∈(0,1) is bounded
in L ((0, T ); W(1,2 (Ω)). Furthermore,
2
) Lemma 3.10 implies that ((uγϵ )t )ϵ∈(0,1) is
⋆
bounded )in L1 (0, T ); (W ς,2 (Ω) ). Then the embedding W 1,2 ,→,→ L2 (Ω) ,→
⋆
(W ς,2 (Ω) and the Aubin-Lions compactness Lemma 28 yield that (uγϵ )ϵ∈(0,1) is
a relatively compact subset of the space L2 (Ω × (0, T )), whence along a suitable
subsequence we have uγϵ → uγ and hence uϵ → ζ1 a.e. in Ω × (0, T ) for some
nonnegative measurable ζ1 : Ω × (0, T ) → R. By Egorov’s theorem, we know that
necessarily ζ1 = u, so that (4.16) follows.
Finally, as the embedding L∞ (Ω) ,→ (W02,2 (Ω)) is compact, the Arzelà-Ascoli
TE
once more applies to say that the equicontinuity property (3.57) together with the
boundedness of (uϵ )ϵ∈(0,1) in C 0 ([0, ∞); L∞ (Ω)) ensures that (4.18) holds after a
further extraction of an adequate subsequence.
The additional regularity property (4.19) thereafter is a consequence of (4.18)
and the fact that C1 := ||u||L∞ (Ω×(0,T )) is finite: first, from the latter property it
follows that there exists a null set N ∈ [0, ∞) such that for all t ∈ [0, ∞)\N we
EP
have u(·, t) ∈ L∞ (Ω) with ||u(·, t)||L∞ (Ω) ≤ C1 . As [0, ∞)\N is dense in [0, ∞),
for an arbitrary t0 ∈ [0, ∞) we can find (tj )j∈N such that tj → t0 as j → ∞,
⋆
and extracting a subsequence if necessary we can also obtain that u(·, tj ) ⇀ u e in
L∞ (Ω) as j → ∞ with some u e ∈ L∞ (Ω) satisfying ||e u||L∞ (Ω) ≤ C1 . Since (4.18)
asserts that moreover u(·, tj ) → u(·, t0 ) in (W 2,2 (Ω))⋆ as j → ∞, this allows us
to identify u e = u(·, t0 ) and to conclude that thus actually u(·, t) ∈ L∞ (Ω) for all
t ∈ [0, ∞), with ||u(·, t)||L∞ (Ω) ≤ C1 for all t ≥ 0. Finally, we can verify the property
C
(4.19) by partially repeating this argument: given any t0 ≥ 0 and (tj )j∈N ⊂ [0, ∞)
AC
T
IP
CR
such that tj → t0 as j → ∞ we know that (u(·, tj∫))j∈N is bounded ∫ in L∞ (Ω),

and (4.18) implies that for all ψ ∈ C0∞ (Ω) we have Ω u(·, tj )ψ → Ω u(·, t0 )ψ as
j → ∞. Consequently, the density property of C0∞ (Ω) in L1 (Ω) ensures that indeed
⋆
u(·, tj ) ⇀ u(·, t0 ) in L∞ (Ω) as j → ∞.
US
Now the verification of the claimed weak solution property of (u, v, w, z) is
straightforward: whereas the nonnegativity of u, v, w and z and the integrabil-
ity requirements in (4.1) and (4.2) are immediate from (4.6), (4.7), (4.9), (4.11)
and (4.12). Therefore, we select φ ∈ C0∞ (Ω × [0, T )) for all T ∈ (0, ∞). Multiplying
the first, second, third and fourth equations of (2.3) by φ, respectively, and then
integrating by part, we see that (uϵ , vϵ , wϵ , zϵ ) satisfies
∫ T∫ ∫ ∫ T∫ ∫ T∫ ( )
−
0
−
uϵ φ t −
Ω
∫ T
u0ϵ φ(·, 0) =
∫
Ω
AN
vϵ φt −
Hϵ (uϵ )∆φ +
∫
uϵ Sϵ (x, uϵ , vϵ ) · ∇vϵ · ∇φ
0
v0ϵ φ(·, 0) = −
Ω
∫ T ∫
0
∇vϵ · ∇φ +
Ω
∫ T ∫
wϵ zϵ φ
(4.20)
(4.21)
0 Ω Ω 0 Ω 0 Ω
and
∫ T ∫ ∫ ∫ T ∫
− w ϵ φt − w0ϵ φ(·, 0) = − wϵ zϵ φ (4.22)
DM
0 Ω Ω 0 Ω
as well as
∫ T∫ ∫ ∫ T ∫ ∫ T ∫ ∫ T ∫
− zϵ φt − zϵ0 φ(·, 0) = − ∇zϵ · ∇φ − zϵ φ + uϵ φ.
0 Ω Ω 0 Ω 0 Ω 0 Ω
(4.23)
By using (4.8)-(4.17) in passing to the limit in each term of the identities (4.20)-
(4.23), we obtain
∫ T∫ ∫ ∫ T∫ ∫ T∫ ( )
− uφt − u0 φ(·, 0) = H(u)∆φ + u S(x, u, v) · ∇v · ∇φ
TE
0 Ω Ω 0 Ω 0 Ω
(4.24)
∫ T ∫ ∫ ∫ T ∫ ∫ T ∫
− vφt − v0 φ(·, 0) = − ∇v · ∇φ + wzφ (4.25)
0 Ω Ω 0 Ω 0 Ω
and
∫ T ∫ ∫ ∫ T ∫
− wφt − w0 φ(·, 0) = − (4.26)
EP
wzφ
0 Ω Ω 0 Ω
as well as
∫ T∫ ∫ ∫ T ∫ ∫ T ∫ ∫ T ∫
− zφt − z0 φ(·, 0) = − ∇z · ∇φ − zφ + uφ. (4.27)
0 Ω Ω 0 Ω 0 Ω 0 Ω
Hence, it is easy to see that (u, v, w, z) is a global weak solution for (1.1). Finally, the
boundedness statement is a straightforward consequence of the proof of Theorem
C
1.1.
AC
T
IP
CR
26 D. Li et al.
Proof of Theorem 1.1 A combination of Lemma 4.1 and Lemma 3.6 directly
leads to our desired result.
5. Large time behavior. Proof of Theorem 1.2
US
To prove stabilization of u, we will require a comparatively subtle reasoning. On
the basis of the compactness properties of (u(·, t))t>0 and of temporal continuity
features of u which is rather limited. The core of the Lemma 5.5 argument lies in
an appropriate combination of the decay information implied by Lemma 3.7 with
the continuity property contained in Lemma 3.9. The nonlinearity of diffusion in
the first equation in (1.1), reflected in the appearance of a nontrivial function of

u in the integral. With the above preparation on the third component w of (1.1)
AN
and the global boundedness of (1.1), we now can investigate the large time of the
solution of (1.1) as follows:
Lemma 5.1. Let (uϵ , vϵ , wϵ , zϵ ) be the solution of (2.3), then there exists a ζ > 0
such that
zϵ (x, t) ≥ ζ (5.1)
holds for all x ∈ Ω, t ≥ t0 .
DM
Proof. We use a known result for the Neumann heat semigroup et∆ . In the same
way as in the proof of Ref. 17, we can obtain the pointwise estimate from below
∫
t∆ 1 −
(diamΩ)2
e g(x) ≥ n e
4t · g > 0 (x ∈ Ω, t > 0) for all nonnegative g ∈ C 0 (Ω),
(4πt) 2 Ω
(5.2)
where diamΩ := maxx,y∈Ω |x − y|. In view of the positivity of z0 > 0 in Ω, the
maximum principle for parabolic equations applied to (A.8) below imply that
zϵ (t) ≥ min z0 (x) · e−t > 0 for all t ≥ 0. (5.3)
TE
x∈Ω
Now fix τ > 0. Then it follows that
zϵ (t) ≥ min z0 (x) · e−t =: ζ1 > 0 for all t ∈ [0, τ ]. (5.4)
x∈Ω
Next, by means of the variation-of-constants representation of zϵ , the maximal prin-
ciple and (2.6) we see that
∫ t
EP
t(∆−1)
zϵ (t) = e z0 + e(t−s)(∆−1) uϵ (s)ds
0
∫ t (∫ )
1 (diamΩ)2
−((t−s)+ 4(t−s) )
≥ n e · uϵ (x, s)dx ds
0 (4π(t − s)) 2 Ω
∫ t (5.5)
1 −(r+
(diamΩ)2
)
= ||u0 ||L1 (Ω) · n e
4r dr
0 (4πr) 2
∫ τ
C
1 −(r+
(diamΩ)2
)
≥ ||u0 ||L1 (Ω) · n e
4r dr =: ζ2 > 0 for all t ∈ [τ, ∞).
0 (4πr) 2
AC
T
IP
CR
{ }
Setting ζ := min ζ1 , ζ2 , we readily obtain the required estimate.
Lemma 5.2. The component wϵ of the global classical and bounded solution
(uϵ , vϵ , wϵ , zϵ ) of (2.3) has the following convergence property that
US
||wϵ (·, t)||L∞ (Ω) ≤ ||w0 ||L∞ (Ω) e−ζ(t−t0 ) for all t ≥ t0 . (5.6)
Proof. Integrating the wϵ −equation in (2.3) with respect to the time variable, in
view of Lemma 2.5 and Lemma 5.1 we infer that
∫t
− zϵ (x,s)ds
wϵ (x, t) = wϵ (x, t0 ) · e t0
≤ ||wϵ (x, t0 )||L∞ (Ω) e−ζ(t−t0 )

AN
for all x ∈ Ω and t > t0 . This along with the boundedness of wϵ yields the claim.
Lemma 5.3. The component vϵ of the global classical and bounded solution
(uϵ , vϵ , wϵ , zϵ ) of (2.3) has the following decay rate:
||vϵ (·, t) − vϵ ||L2 (Ω) ≤ C6 e−λ(t−t0 ) for all t ≥ t0 , (5.7)
where C6 > 0 independent of t.

DM
Proof. From the vϵ −equation in (2.3), we get
(vϵ − vϵ )t = ∆(vϵ − vϵ ) + wϵ zϵ − wϵ zϵ , (5.8)

d
where dt vϵ = wϵ zϵ . Then we can multiply (5.8) by vϵ − vϵ and integrate by parts
over x ∈ Ω to obtain
∫ ∫ ∫ ( )
d 2 2
(vϵ − v ϵ ) + 2 |∇vϵ | = 2 wϵ zϵ − wϵ zϵ (vϵ − vϵ ) for all t ≥ t0 . (5.9)
dt Ω Ω Ω
Here we recall that the Poincaré inequality provides C3 > 0 fulfilling

TE
||ϕ1 ||L2 (Ω) ≤ C3 ||∇ϕ1 ||L2 (Ω) for all ϕ1 ∈ W01,2 (Ω) (5.10)
In view of (5.10), we make use of Lemma 3.6 and the decay property of wϵ asserted
by Lemma 5.2 to obtain some constants Ci > 0 (i = 4, 5) fulfilling
∫ ∫
d
(vϵ − vϵ )2 + C4 (vϵ − vϵ )2 ≤ C5 e−ζ(t−t0 ) for all t ≥ t0 . (5.11)
dt Ω
EP
Solving this Gronwall type differential inequality, we can easily derive the desired
decay property (5.7).
Lemma 5.4. Under the assumptions of Theorem 1.1, it holds that
||v(·, t) − L||L∞ (Ω) → 0 as t → ∞, (5.12)

C
where L := v0 + w0 .
AC
T
IP
CR
28 D. Li et al.
Proof. According to Lemma 3.6, we can find some constants C6 > 0 such that
||v(·, t) − v(t)||W 1,∞ (Ω) ≤ C6 for all t ≥ t0 . (5.13)

0
Since as ϵ = ϵj ↘ 0 we have vϵ → v in Cloc (Ω × [0, ∞)), by means of Fatou’s lemma
US
we may take ϵ = ϵj ↘ 0 in Lemma 5.3 to infer that
||v(·, t) − v(t)||L2 (Ω) ≤ C6 e−λ(t−t0 ) for all t ≥ t0 . (5.14)
Hence we can apply the Gagliardo-Nirenberg interpolation inequality to obtain that

n 2
n+2 n+2
||v(·, t) − v(t)||L∞ (Ω) ≤ ||v(·, t) − v(t)||W 1,∞ (Ω) ||v(·, t) − v(t)||L2 (Ω)
(5.15)
→ 0 as t → ∞.
directly yield that

AN
Furthermore, the mass conservation of vϵ + wϵ in Lemma 2.2 (ii) and Lemma 5.2
||vϵ (t) − (v 0 + w0 )||L∞ (Ω) = || − wϵ (t)||L∞ (Ω)

(5.16)
≤ ||wϵ (·, t)||L∞ (Ω) ≤ ||w0 ||L∞ (Ω) e−ζ(t−t0 )
for all t > t0 . Passing to limit as ϵ → 0 in (5.16), we discover
DM
||v(t) − (v 0 + w0 )||L∞ (Ω) → 0 as t → ∞ (5.17)
by Lemma 4.1 and so the triangle inequality gives the desired result as follows:
||v(·, t) − (v 0 + w0 )||L∞ (Ω) ≤ ||v(·, t) − v(t)||L∞ (Ω)
+ ||v(t) − (v 0 + w0 )||L∞ (Ω) (5.18)
→ 0 as t → ∞,
as desired.
Next, we shall illustrate that u stabilizes to the

∫ unique spatially homogeneous
TE
equilibrium corresponding to the bacterial mass Ω∫u0 ∫in the large time, provided
∞
that u0 is nontrivial. The uniform boundedness of 0 Ω |∇uγϵ |2 dxdt for all γ > 1
asserted by Lemma 3.9 is essential in our subsequent analysis which rely on the
decay rate of ∇vϵ with respect to L2 −norm (see the proof of Lemma 5.1 in Ref. 70
for details).
Lemma 5.5. Let the assumptions of Theorem 1.1 hold. Then with (u, v, w, z) as
EP
given by Theorem 1.1, we have

⋆
u(·, t) ⇀ u0 in L∞ (Ω) as t → ∞. (5.19)
Proof. Let us assume that the conclusion of the lemma does not hold. Then there
e ∈ L1 (Ω)
exists a sequence (ti )i∈N such that ti → ∞ as i → ∞, and that for some φ
∫
( )
C
e ≥ C1 for all i ∈ N
u(x, ti ) − u0 φdx (5.20)
Ω
AC
T
IP
CR
with some C1 > 0. From Lemma 3.6, we can find some constants C2 > 0 to fulfill
u(x, t) ≤ C2 for a.e. (x, t) ∈ Ω × (0, ∞). (5.21)
Due to the density of C0∞ (Ω) in L1 (Ω), we can pick a φ ∈ C0∞ (Ω) such that ||φ −
C1
US
e L1 (Ω) ≤ 2C
φ|| 2
. Thus it follows from (5.21) that
∫ ∫
( ) ) ( )
u(x, ti ) − u0 φdx ≥ (u(x, ti ) − u0 φdx e − ||u(·, ti )||L1 (Ω) + u0 ||φ − φ||
e L1 (Ω)
Ω Ω
C1
≥ for all i ∈ N.
2
(5.22)
Now since by Lemma 3.11 there exists a constant C3 > 0 such that for all ϵ ∈ (0, 1)
we have AN
||uϵ (·, t) − uϵ (·, s)||(W 2,2 (Ω))∗ ≤ C3 |t − s| for all t ∈ [0, ∞), s ∈ [0, ∞),
0
which along with the convergence property (4.18) from Lemma 4.1 yields that
||u(·, t) − u(·, s)||(W 2,2 (Ω))∗ ≤ C3 |t − s| for all t ∈ [0, ∞) and s ∈ [0, ∞).
0
In particular, this implies that if we let τ ∈ (0, 1) be such that

DM
C1
τ≤ , (5.23)
4C3 ||φ||W 2,2 (Ω)
0
then for all t ∈ (ti , ti + τ ) with i ∈ N we obtain

∫ ∫

u(x, ti )φ(x)dx − u(x, t)φ(x)dx ≤ ||u(·, ti ) − u(·, t)||(W 2,2 (Ω))∗ ||φ||W 2,2 (Ω)
Ω Ω 0 0
≤ C3 |ti − t| · ||φ||W 2,2 (Ω)

0
C1
≤ for all t ∈ (ti , ti + τ ) with i ∈ N,
4
TE
(5.24)
which combined with (5.22) entails that
∫ ∫
u(x, t)φ(x)dx − u0 φ(x)dx
Ω Ω
∫ ∫ ∫
( )
(5.25)
≥ u(x, ti ) − u0 φdx − u(x, ti )φ(x)dx − u(x, t)φ(x)dx

EP
Ω Ω Ω
C1
≥ for all t ∈ (ti , ti + τ ) and each i ∈ N.
4
To see that this contradicts Lemma 3.9, we fix any p > 1 such that p ≥ m − 1
and p > 3 − m, and abbreviate γ := p+m−1 2 > 1. Then taking a Poincaré constant
C4 > 0 such that
∫ ∫
C
|ϕ2 (x) − ϕ2 |2 dx ≤ C4 |∇ϕ2 |2 for all ϕ2 ∈ W 1,2 (Ω), (5.26)

Ω Ω
AC
T
IP
CR
30 D. Li et al.
1
∫
where ϕ2 := |Ω| ϕ . According to (5.26) and Lemma 3.9, one can find some
Ω 2
constants C5 > 0 to
∫ ∞∫ ∫ ∞∫
γ 2
γ
uϵ (x, s) − αϵ (t) dxdt ≤ C4 |∇uγϵ |2 dxdt
0 Ω 0 Ω (5.27)
US
≤ C5 for all ϵ ∈ (0, 1),
( )1 ( ∫ ) γ1
where we have set aϵ (t) := uγϵ (·, t) γ = |Ω| 1
uγ (x, t)dx
Ω ϵ
for t > 0 and
ϵ ∈ (0, 1). From Lemma 4.1 and the Tonelli theorem, we deduce that for a.e. t > 0
we have uϵ (·, t) → u(·, t) a.e. in Ω as ϵ = ϵi ↘ 0, which combined with the uni-
form boundedness of (uϵ )ϵ∈(0,1) in L∞ (Ω × (0, ∞)) and the dominated convergence
theorem guarantees
as ϵ = ϵi ↘ 0, where
AN
(
aϵ (t) → a(t) for a.e. t > 0
)1 ( 1 ∫ ) γ1
(5.28)
a(t) := uγ (·, t) γ = uγ (x, t)dx for t > 0. (5.29)

|Ω| Ω
Since as ϵ = ϵi ↘ 0, uϵ → u a.e. in Ω × (0, ∞), by means of Fatou’s lemma we can

DM
derive from (5.27) and (5.29) that
∫ ∞∫
|uγ (x, t) − aγ (t)|2 dxdt ≤ C6 . (5.30)
0 Ω
Since the validity of the elementary inequality
xγ − y γ
≥ y γ−1 for all x ≥ 0 and y ≥ 0 such that x ̸= y (5.31)
x−y
holds for any γ > 1. Now, applying Hölder’s inequality, we derive from (2.6) and
(5.29) that
∫ ∫
1 1 ( ) γ1 γ−1
uγ (x, t)dx
TE
u0 = u(x, t)dx ≤ · · |Ω| γ = a(t) for a.e. t > 0.

|Ω| Ω |Ω| Ω
(5.32)
In addition, we can estimate (5.30) as follows:
∫ ∫
|uγ (x, t) − aγ (t)|2 dx ≥ a2γ−2 (t) · |u(x, t) − a(t)|2 dx
Ω Ω
∫ (5.33)
EP
2γ−2
≥ u0 · |u(x, t) − a(t)|2 dx for a.e. t > 0.
Ω
Therefore, we can obtain the crucial estimate for u:
∫ ∞∫
C6
|u(x, t) − a(t)|2 dxdt ≤ C7 := .
0 Ω u0 2γ−2
Now introducing
C
ui (x, s) := u(x, ti + s), (x, s) ∈ Ω × (0, τ )

AC
T
IP
CR
and
ai (s) := a(ti + s), s ∈ (0, τ ) (5.34)

for i ∈ N, we can obtain that
∫ τ∫ ∫ ∫
US
ti +τ
|ui (x, s) − ai (s)|2 dxds = |u(x, t) − a(t)|2 dxdt
0 Ω ti Ω
→ 0 as i → ∞,
it means that
gi (x, s) := ui (x, s) − ai (s), (x, s) ∈ Ω × (0, τ ), i ∈ N

satisfies
AN gi → 0 in L2 (Ω × (0, τ )) as i → ∞.
Again by (5.21), it follows from (5.29) and (5.34) that (ai )i∈N is bounded in
(5.35)
L2 ((0, τ )), whence passing to a subsequence if necessary we may assume that for
some nonnegative a∞ ∈ L2 ((0, τ )) we have
ai ⇀ a∞ in L2 ((0, τ )) as i → ∞. (5.36)
DM
Therefore, the L1 −boundedness of the cell density uϵ (see Lemma 2.2) gives
∫ τ∫ ∫ τ∫ ( )
gi (x, s)dxds = ui (x, s) − ai (s) dxds
0 Ω 0 Ω
∫ τ
= τ |Ω|u0 − |Ω| · ai (s)ds
∫0 τ
→ τ |Ω|u0 − |Ω| · a∞ (s)ds as i → ∞,
0
which combined∫ τ with (5.35) allows us to determine the integral of the limit in (5.36)
according to 0 a∞ (s)ds = τ u0 . Furthermore, rewriting (5.25) in terms of ui and
TE
integrating in time we see that

∫ τ∫ ∫ τ∫
Cτ
≤ ui (x, s)φ(x)dxds − u0 φ(x)dxds
4
∫0 τ ∫Ω 0 Ω
∫ (5.37)
= ui (x, s)φ(x)dxds − τ u0 · φ(x)dx for all i ∈ N.
0 Ω Ω
In conjunction with (5.35) and (5.36), this means that
EP
∫ τ∫ ∫ τ∫ ∫ τ∫
ui (x, s)φ(x)dxds = gi (x, s)φ(x)dxds + ai (s)φ(x)dxds
0 Ω
∫0 τ ∫Ω 0
∫
( τ
Ω
) (∫ )
= gi (x, s)φ(x)dxds + ai (s)ds · φ(x)dx
0 Ω 0 Ω
(∫ τ ) (∫ )
→ a∞ (s)ds · φ(x)dx as i → ∞.
C
0 Ω
(5.38)
AC
T
IP
CR
32 D. Li et al.
Taking i → ∞ in (5.37) we thus obtain the conclusion that

C1 τ (∫ τ ) (∫ ) ∫
≤ a∞ (s)ds · φ(x)dx − τ u0 · φ(x)dx. (5.39)
4 0 Ω Ω
∫τ
Along with 0 a∞ (s)ds = τ u0 implies (5.39) is absurd and we obtain the desired
US
result.
According to Lemma 2.2, Lemma 4.1 and the Arzelà-Ascoli theorem, we can
obtain the convergence property of z as time tends to infinity.
Lemma 5.6. The component z of the solution established in Theorem 1.1 fulfills
z(·, t) → u0 in L∞ (Ω) as t → ∞. (5.40)

AN
Proof. Assume that (5.40) does not hold. Then we can find (ti )i∈N and C1 > 0
such that ti → ∞ as i → ∞ and

z(·, ti ) − u0 ∞
L (Ω)
≥ C1 for all i ∈ N. (5.41)
Lemma 3.7 allows us to apply the Arzelà-Ascoli theorem, which provides a subse-
quence from (z(·, ti ))i∈N such that
z(·, ti ) → z∞ in L∞ (Ω) as i → ∞ (5.42)
DM
with a nonnegative function z∞ ∈ C 0 (Ω), where we still denote the subsequence

by (z(·, ti ))i∈N . Furthermore, Lemma 2.1(iii) and the convergence property zϵ → z
a.e. in Ω × (0, ∞) guaranteed by (4.13) imply that z(·, t) → u0 in L1 (Ω) as t →
∞, thereby necessarily z∞ ≡ u0 . Apparently, this is incompatible with (5.41) and
whence (5.40) holds.
We can now easily prove Theorem 1.2.
Proof of Theorem 1.2. The claimed convergence properties are precisely ob-
TE
tained by combining Lemmas 4.1, 5.3 and 5.5-5.6.
Appendix A. Appendice
Proof of Lemma 2.1. The proof of local existence proceeds along with the idea of
the arguments of Lemma 2.1 in Refs. 26 and 56. Let T > 0 be small, ci (i ∈ N+ ) be
positive constants and X = L∞ (Ω × (0, T )). We define the following closed bounded
EP
convex subset of X
{ }

ℑ := uϵ ∈ X 0 ≤ uϵ ≤ R + 1 a.e. in Ω × (0, T ) (A.1)
with R := ||u0 ||L∞ (Ω) , and consider a fixed problem Φuϵ ≡ uϵ , where uϵ is the
solution of

 uϵt = ∇ · (D b ϵ (uϵ )∇uϵ ) − ∇ · (uϵ Sbϵ (x, uϵ , vϵ ) · ∇vϵ ), x ∈ Ω, t > 0,
∂uϵ
=0 x ∈ ∂Ω, t > 0, (A.2)
C
 ∂ν
uϵ (x, 0) = u0 (x), x ∈ Ω,
AC
T
IP
CR
where

 Dϵ (0) if ρ < 0,
b ϵ (ρ) := Dϵ (ρ)
D if 0 ≤ ρ ≤ R + 1, (A.3)

Dϵ (R + 1) if ρ > R + 1
US
and

 Sϵ (x, 0, vϵ ) if ρ < 0,
Sbϵ (x, ρ, vϵ ) := Sϵ (x, ρ, vϵ ) if 0 ≤ ρ ≤ R + 1, (A.4)

Sϵ (x, R + 1, vϵ ) if ρ > R + 1.
In view of (1.9), (2.3) and the definition of Sϵ , this yields that
|Sϵ | = |ρϵ S| ≤ CS (1 + uϵ )−α ≤ CS ,

AN
with vϵ being the solution of

 vϵt = ∆vϵ + wϵ zϵ , x ∈ Ω, t > 0,
∂vϵ
= 0, x ∈ ∂Ω, t > 0,
(A.5)
(A.6)
 ∂ν
vϵ (x, 0) = v0 (x), x ∈ Ω,
and wϵ defined the solutions of
{
DM
wϵt = −wϵ zϵ , x ∈ Ω, t > 0,
(A.7)
wϵ (x, 0) = w0 (x), x ∈ Ω,
as well as zϵ is the solution to

 zϵt = ∆zϵ − zϵ + u bϵ , x ∈ Ω, t > 0,
∂zϵ
= 0, x ∈ ∂Ω, t > 0, (A.8)
 ∂ν
zϵ (x, 0) = z0 (x), x ∈ Ω,
with
{
uϵ (x, t) if x ∈ Ω and t ∈ (0, T ),
ubϵ (x, t) := (A.9)
0 if x ∈ Ω and t > T.
TE
In the following we will use the Schauder parabolic theory to get the globally weak
solution (uϵ , vϵ , wϵ , zϵ ) for this decoupled system. Moreover, it follows from the equa-
tion in (A.8), the well-known estimates for the Neumann heat semigroup (et∆ )t≥0
(see Lemma 1.3 in Ref. 71) and the fact that ||et(∆−1) z0 ||L∞ (Ω) ≤ ||z0 ||L∞ (Ω) that
∫ t
t(∆−1)
||zϵ ||L∞ (Ω) ≤ ||e z0 ||L∞ (Ω) + ||e(t−s)(∆−1) uϵ (s)||L∞ (Ω) ds
EP
0
∫ t
≤ c1 ||z0 ||L∞ (Ω) + c2 e−(t−s) ||e(t−s)∆ uϵ (s)||L∞ (Ω) ds (A.10)
0
∫ t
≤ c4 := c1 ||z0 ||L∞ (Ω) + c2 c3 e−(t−s) ds
0
for all t > 0. We solve (A.7) and then get

C
∫t
wϵ (x, t) = w0 (x) · e− 0
zϵ (x,s)ds
, x ∈ Ω, t > 0. (A.11)
AC
T
IP
CR
34 D. Li et al.
This combined with (1.5) yields that ||wϵ ||L∞ (Ω×(0,T )) ≤ c5 . Following a standard
argument (see e.g. Ref. 71), by means of the Neumann heat semigroup (eτ ∆ )τ ≥0
on Ω we represent ∇vϵ according to
∫ t
(∆−1)t
∇vϵ (·, t) = ∇e v0 − ∇e(∆−1)(t−s) wϵ (·, s)zϵ (·, s)ds. (A.12)
US
0
and recall known regularization properties (eτ ∆ )τ ≥0 (see Ref. 70) to find ci > 0
(i = 5, 6, 7, 8) such that
∫ t
t(∆−1)
||∇vϵ (t)||L∞ (Ω) ≤ ||∇e v0 ||L∞ (Ω) + ||∇e(∆−1)(t−s) wϵ (·, s)zϵ (·, s)||L∞ (Ω) ds
0
∫ t
e−(t−s) ||e(t−s)∆ wϵ (·, s)zϵ (·, s)||L∞ (Ω) ds
≤ c6 ||v0 ||L∞ (Ω) +
+ c7
AN
≤ c6 ||v0 ||L∞ (Ω)
∫ t
0
(
0
1
)
e−(t−s) 1 + (t − s)− 2 ||wϵ (·, s)||L∞ (Ω) ||zϵ (·, s)||L∞ (Ω) ds
∫ t ( )
1
≤ c6 ||v0 ||L∞ (Ω) + c7 c5 c4 e−(t−s) 1 + (t − s)− 2 ds
0
≤ c8
DM
for all t > 0. Furthermore, our assumption (A.10) warrants that

||Sϵ ∇vϵ ||L∞ (Ω) ≤ CS ||∇vϵ ||L∞ (Ω) ≤ C(Sϵ , ||v0 ||W 1,∞ (Ω) , T ) for all t ∈ [0, T ].
(A.13)
Next we can rewrite the uϵ −equation in (2.3) as
( )
b ϵ )∇uϵ ) + h(x, t) , x ∈ Ω, t > 0
uϵt = ∇ · (D(u (A.14)
with ||h||L∞ (Ω×(0,T )) ≤ c9 . Hence, Theorem V.2.1 and Theorem V.1.1 in Ref. 35
ensure that there exist ci > 0 (i = 10, 11, 12) such that ||uϵ ||L∞ (Ω×(0,T )) ≤ c10
and ||uϵ || ϑ, ϑ2 ≤ c11 with ϑ ∈ (0, 1), which implies that ||uϵ (t)||L∞ (Ω) ≤
TE
C (Ω×(0,T ))
ϑ
||u0 ||L∞ (Ω) + c12 t 2 for all t ∈ (0, T ). Therefore, ||uϵ (t)||L∞ (Ω) ≤ R + 1 if T is
ϑ
chosen sufficiently small enough such that c12 T 2 ≤ 1. For such T , Φ maps ℑ into
itself. Also, the continuity of M and compactness of Φ(ℑ) in X can be obtained by
a straightforward reasoning. Therefore, the Schauder fixed point theorem ensures
the existence of a fixed point uϵ ∈ ℑ of M . It follows from (A.3)-(A.9) and the
parabolic regularity that uϵ , together with the corresponding solutions vϵ , wϵ and
EP
zϵ of (A.3), (A.7) and (A.8), is a classical solution of (2.3). In addition, (2.6) follows
from the parabolic comparison principle and (A.11). Meanwhile, we can get (2.5)
by a standard extensibility argument.
Acknowledgment
The authors are very grateful to the anonymous reviewers for their carefully reading
C
and valuable suggestions, which greatly improved the manuscript. The first author is
AC
T
IP
CR
partially supported by graduate research and innovation foundation of Chongqing,

China (Grant No. CYB 17040). The second author is partially supported by NSFC
(Grant No. 11771062, 11571062) and the Basic and Advanced Research Project of
CQC-STC (Grant No. cstc2015jcyjBX0007). The third author is partially supported
US
by National Science Foundation of China (Grant Nos. 11601053, 11526042).
References
1. N. D. Alikakos, Lp bounds of solutions of reaction-diffusion equations, Comm. Partial
Differential Equations 4 (1979) 827-868.
2. S. Aznavoorian, M. L. Stracke, H. Krutzsch, E. Schiffmann and L. A. Liotta, Signal
transduction for chemotaxis and haptotaxis by matrix molecules in tumor cells, J.

AN
Cell Biol 110 (1990) 1427-1438.
3. N. Bellomo, N. Li and P. K. Maini, On the foundations of cancer modelling: selected
topics, speculations, and perspectives, Math. Models Methods Appl. Sci. 18 (04) 593-
646.
4. N. Bellomo, A. Bellouquid, Y. Tao and M. Winkler, Toward a mathematical theory of
Keller-Segel models of pattern formation in biological tissues, Math. Models Methods
Appl. Sci. 25 (2015) 1663-1763.
5. H. Byrne and M. Chaplain, Mathematicals models for tumor angiogenesis-numerical
simulations and nonlinear-wave equations, Bull. Math. Biol. 57 (1995) 461-485.
6. X. Cao and S. Ishida, Global-in-time bounded weak solutions to a degenerate quasi-
DM
linear Keller-Segel system with rotation, Nonlinearity 27 (2014) 1899-1913.

7. X. Cao, Global bounded solutions of the higher-dimensional Keller-Segel system under
smallness conditions in optimal spaces, Discrete Contin. Dyn. Syst. 35 (2015) 1891-
1904.
8. V. Calvez and J. A. Carrillo, Volume effects in the Keller-Segel model: energy estimates
preventing blow-up, J. Math. Pures Appl. 86 (2006) 155-175.
9. T. Cieślak and M. Winkler, Finite-time blow-up in a quasilinear system of chemoatxis,
Nonlinearity 21 (2008) 1057-1076.
10. T. Cieślak and C. Stinner, Finite-time blowup and global-in-time unbounded solu-
tions to a parabolic-parabolic quasilinear Keller-Segel system in higher dimensions, J.
TE
11. T. Cieślak and C. Stinner, New critical exponents in a fully parabolic quasilinear
system Keller-Segel system and applications to volume filling models, J. Differnetial
Equations 258 (2015) 2080-2113.
12. M. Chaplain and A. R. Anderson, Mathematical modelling of tissue invasion. Cancer
modelling and simulation, pages 269-297,2003.
13. M. Chaplain and G. Lolas, Mathematical modelling of cancer invasion of tis-
sue:dynamic heterogeneity, NHM. 1(2006) 399-439.
14. M. Chaplain and G. Lolas, Mathematical modelling of cancer invasion of tissue: the
EP
role of the urokinase plasminogen activation system, Math. Models Methods Appl. Sci.
15 (2005) 1685-1734.
15. M. Chaplain and A. Anderson, Mathematical Modelling of Tissue Invasion, Cancer
Modelling and Simulation (Chapman & Hall/ CRC Mathematical Biology Series)
(Boca Raton, FL: Chapman & Hall) p 269 (2003).
16. E. Espejo and T. Suzuki, Reaction terms avoiding aggregation in slow fluids, Nonlinear
Anal. Real World Appl. 21 (2015) 110-126.
C
17. K. Fujie, Boundedness in a fully parabolic chemotaxis system with singular sensitivity,
J. Math. Anal. Appl. 424 (2015) 675-684.
AC
T
IP
CR
36 D. Li et al.
18. K. Fujie, A Ito and T. Yokota, Existence and uniqueness of local classical solutions
to modified tumor invasion models of Chaplain-Anderson type, Adv. Math. Sci. Appl.
24 (2014) 67-84.
19. K. T. Fujie, A. Ito and M. Winkler, Stabilization in a chemotaxis model for tumor
invasion, Discrete Contin. Dyn. Syst. 36 (2016) 151-69.
US
20. A. Friedman, Partial Differential Equations, Holt-Rinehart-Winston,1969.
21. R. A. Gatenby and E. T. Gawlinski, A reaction-diffusion model of cancer invasion,
Cancer research 56 (1996) 5745-5753.
22. T. Hillen and K. J. Painter, Global existence for a parabolic chemotaxis model with
prevention of overcrowding, Adv. Appl. Math. 26 (2001) 280-301.
23. T. Hillen and K. J. Painter, A user’s guide to PDE models for chemotaxis, J. Math.
Biol. 58 (2009) 183-217.
24. T. Hillen and A. Potapov, The one-dimensional chemotaxis model: global existence
AN
and asymptotic profile, Math. Methods Appl. Sci. 27 (2004) 1783-801.
25. M. A. Herrero and J. J. L. Velázquez, A blow-up mechanism for a chemotaxis model,
Ann. Sc. Norm. Super. Pisa Cl. 24 (1997) 633-683.
26. D. Horstmann and M. Winkler, Boundedness vs. blow-up in a chemotaxis system, J.
27. D. Horstmann and G. Wang, Blow-up in a chemotaxis model without symmetry as-
sumptions, European J. Appl. Math. 12 (2001) 159-177.
28. R. Temam, Navier-Stokes Equations. Theory and Numerical Analysis. Studies in
Mathematics and its Applications, vol. 2. North-Holland, Amsterdam (1977).
DM
29. W. Jäger and S. Luckhaus, On explosions of solutions to a system of partial differential

equations modeling chemotaxis, Trans. Am. Math. Soc. 329 (1992) 819-824.
30. H. Y. Jin and T. Xiang, Boundedness and exponentially convergence in a chemotaxis
model for tumor invasion, Nonlinearity. 29 (2016) 3579-3596.
31. E. F. Keller and L. A. Segel, Initiation of slime mold aggregation viewed as an insta-
bility, J. Theoret. Biol. 26 (1970) 399-415.
32. E. F. Keller and L. A. Segel, Model for chemotaxis, J. Theoret. Biol. 30 (1971) 225-
234.
33. R. Kowalczyk, Preventing blow-up in a chemotaxis model, J. Math. Anal. Appl. 305
(2005) 566-585.
34. R. Kowalczyk and Z. Szymańska, On the global existence of solutions to an aggregation
model, J. Math. Anal. Appl. 343 (2008) 379-398.
TE
35. O. A. Ladyzenskaja, V. A. Solonnikov and N. N. Ural’ceva, Linear and Quasi-Linear

Equations of Parabolic Type, Amer. Math. Soc. Transl., Vol. 23, Providence, RI, 1968.
36. J. S. Lowengrub, H. B. Frieboes, F. Jin, Y.-L. Chuang, X. Li, P. Macklin, S. M. Wise
and V. Cristini, Nonlinear modelling of cancer: bridging the gap between cells and
tumors, Nonlinearity. 23 (2010) R1-R91.
37. H. A. Levine and B. D. Sleeman, A system of reaction-diffusion equations arising in
the theory of reinforced randomw walks, SIAM J. Appl. Math. 57 (1997) 683-730.
38. T. Li, A. Suen, M. Winkler and C. Xue, Global small-data solutions of a two-
EP
dimensional chemotaxis system with rotational flux terms, Math. Models Methods
Appl. Sci. 25 (2015) 721-746.
39. G. Liţcanu and C. Morales-Rodrigo, Asymptotic behaviour of global solutions to a
model of cell invasion, Math. Mod. Meth. Appl. Sci. 20 (2010) 1721-1758.
40. A. Marciniak-Czochra and M. Ptashnyk, Boundedness of solutions of a haptotaxis
model, Math. Models Methods Appl. Sci. 20 (2010) 449-476.
41. N. Mizoguchi and M. Winkler, Blow-up in the two-dimensional Keller-Segel system,
C
preprint.
AC
T
IP
CR
42. C. Morciniak-Czochra, Local existence and uniqueness of regular solutions in a model

of tissue invasion by solid tumors, Math. Comput. Modelling 47 (2008) 604-613.
43. T. Nagai, T. Senba and K. Yoshida, Application of the Trudinger-Moser inequality to
a parabolic system of chemotaxis, Funkc. Ekvacioj. Ser. Int. 40 (1997) 411-433.
44. T. Nagai, Blow-up of nonradial solutions to parabolic-elliptic systems modeling chemo-
US
taxis in two-dimensional domains, J. Inequal. Appl. 6 (2001) 37-55.
45. T. Nagai, Blow-up of radially symmetric solutions to a chemotaxis system, Adv. Math.
Sci. Appl. 5 (1995) 581-601.
46. K. Osaki and A. Yagi, Finite dimensional attractor for one-dimensional Keller-Segel
equations, Funkcialaj Ekvacioj 44 (2001) 441-469.
47. K. Osaki, T. Tsujikawa, A. Yagi and M. Mimura, Exponential attractor for a
chemotaxis-growth system of equations, Nonlinear Anal. 51 (2002) 119-144.
48. K. Painter and T. Hillen, Volume-filling and quorum-sensing in models for chemosen-
AN
sitive movement, Canad. Appl. Math. Quart. 10 (2002) 501-543.
49. K. Painter, H. Othmer and P. Maini, Stripe formation in juvenile Pomacanthus via
chemotactic response to a reaction-diffusion mechanism, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
96 (1999) 5549-5554.
50. A. Perumpanani and H. Byrne, Extracellular matrix concentration exerts selection
pressure on invasion cells, European J. Cancer 35 (1999) 1274-1280.
51. T. Senba and T. Suzuki, Parabolic system of chemotaxis: blowup in a finite and the
infinite time, Methods Appl. Anal. 8 (2001) 349-367.
52. Z. Szymańska, C. Morales-Rodrigo, M. Lachowicz and M. A. J. Chaplain, Mathemat-
DM
ical modelling of cancer invasion of tissue: the role and effect of nonlocal interactions,
Math. Models Methods Appl. Sci. 19 (2009) 257-281.
53. Y. Tao, Global existence of classical solutions to a combined chemotaxis-haptotaxis
model with logistic source, J. Math. Anal. Appl. 354 (2009) 60-69.
54. Y. Tao, Boundedness in a two-dimensional chemotaxis-haptotaxis system, arXiv: 1407.
7382, 2014.
55. Y. Tao, Global existence for a haptotaxis model of cancer invasion with tissue remod-
eling, Nonlinear Anal. Real World Appl. 12 (2011) 418-435.
56. Y. Tao and M. Wang, A combined chemotaxis-haptotaxis system: the role of logistic
source, SIAM J. Math. Anal. 41 (2009) 1533-1558.
57. Y. Tao and M. Winkler, Boundedness in a quasilinear parabolic-parabolic Keller-Segel
system with subcritical sensitivity, J. Differential Equations 252 (2012) 692-715.
TE
58. Y. Tao and M. Winkler, Energy-type and global solvability in a two-dimensional

chemotaxis-haptotaxis model with remodeling of non-diffusible attractant, J. Differ-
ential Equations 257 (2014) 784-815.
59. Y. Tao and M. Winkler, Dominance of chemotaxis in a chemotaxis-haptotaxis model,
Nonlinearity 27 (2014) 1225-1239.
60. Y. Tao and M. Winkler, Boundedness and stabilization in a multi-dimensional
chemotaxis-haptotaxis model, Proc. Roy. Soc. Edinburgh Sect. A 144 (2014) 1067-
1084.
EP
61. Y. Tao and M. Winkler, Large time behavior in a multidimensional chemotaxis-

haptotaxis model with slow signal diffusion, SIAM J. Math. Anal. 47(2015) 4229-
4250.
62. Y. Tao and G. Zhu, Global solution to a model of tumor invasion, Appl. Math. Sci.
(Ruse) 1 (2007) 2385-2398.
63. I. Tuval, L. Cisneros, C. Dombrowski, et al., Bacterial swimming and oxygen transport
near contact lines, Proc. Natl. Acad, Sci. USA 102 (2005) 2277-2282.
C
64. R. Tyson, S. Lubin and J. Murray, A minimum mechanism for bacterial pattern
AC
T
IP
CR
38 D. Li et al.
formation, Proc. R. Soc. Lond. Ser. B 266 (1999) 299-304.

65. R. Tyson, S. Lubin and J. Murray, Models and analysis of chemotactic bacterial
patterns in a liquid medium, J. Math. Biol. 38 (1999) 359-375.
66. C. Walker and G. F. Webb, Global existence of classical solutions for a haptotaxis
model, SIAM J. Math. Anal. 38 (2007) 1694-1713.
US
67. Y. F. Wang, Boundedness in the higher-dimensional chemotaxis-haptotaxis model
with nonlinear diffusion, J. Differential Equations 260 (2016) 1975-1989.
68. Y. F. Wang and Y. Y. Ke, Large time behavior of solution to a fully parabolic
chemotaxis-haptotaxis model in higher dimensions, J. Differential Equations 260
(2016) 6960-6988.
69. M. Winkler and K. C. Djie, Boundedness and finite-time collapse in a chemotaxis
system with volume-filling effect, Nonlinear Anal. 73 (2010) 1044-1064.
70. M. Winkler, Boundedness and large time behavior in a three-dimensional chemotaxis-

AN
Stokes system with nonlinear diffusion and general sensitivity, Calc. Var. Partial Dif-
ferential Equations 54 (2015) 3789-3828.
71. M. Winkler, Aggregation vs. global diffusive behavior in the higher-dimensional Keller-
Segel model, J. Differential Equations 248 (2010) 2889-2905.
72. M. Winkler, Finite-time blow-up in the higher-dimensional parabolic-parabolic Keller-
Segel system, J. Math. Pures Appl. 100 (2013) 748-767.
73. M. Winkler, Absence of collapse in a parabolic chemotaxis system with signal-
dependent sensitivity, Math. Nachr. 283 (2010) 1664-1673.
74. D. Wrzosek, Global attractor for a chemotaxis model with prevention of overcrowding,
DM
Nonlinear Anal. 59 (2004) 1293-1310.

75. C. Xue, Macroscopic equations for bacterial chemotaxis: integration of detailed bio-
chemistry of cell signalling, J. Math. Biol. 70 (2015) 1-44.
76. C. Xue and H. G. Othmer, Multiscale models of taxis-driven patterning in bacterial
population, SIAM J. Appl. Math. 70 (2009) 133-167.
TE
C EP
AC

BOUNDEDNESS AND LARGE TIME BEHAVIOR

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

BOUNDEDNESS AND LARGE TIME BEHAVIOR

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Accepted manuscript to appear in M3AS

Article Title: Boundedness and Large Time Behavior in a Quasilinear Chemotaxis

Author(s): Dan Li, Chunlai Mu, Pan Zheng

Received: 17 November 2017

Accepted: 26 February 2018

Link to final version: https://doi.org/10.1142/S0218202518500380

February 11, 2018 13:18 WSPC/INSTRUCTION FILE LiMuZheng-m3as

Chongqing 401331, P. R. China

Chongqing University of Posts and Telecommunications,

Received (Day Month Year)

under homogenous Neumann boundary conditions in a smoothly convex bounded domain

Keywords: Chemotaxis; Tumor invasion; Boundedness; Asymptotic behavior.

AMS Subject Classiﬁcation: 35B35; 35B34; 35K55; 92C17

February 11, 2018 13:18 WSPC/INSTRUCTION FILE LiMuZheng-m3as

degrading enzymes (MDEs) such as urokinase plasminogen activator (uPA) secreted

of ∂Ω. In this framework, u = u(x, t) denotes the tumor cells density on Ω ⊂ Rn

degrading enzymes (MDE), respectively. Besides diﬀusing randomly, tumor cells

February 11, 2018 13:18 WSPC/INSTRUCTION FILE LiMuZheng-m3as

partially orient their movement toward increasing concentrations of the diﬀusible

in response to the chemical cyclic adenosine monophosphate (cAMP) in mathemat-

of chemotaxis sensitivities: the signal-dependent sensitivity S(u, v) = CvS or (1+δv)CS

can prevent ﬁnite-time blow-up.

February 11, 2018 13:18 WSPC/INSTRUCTION FILE LiMuZheng-m3as

u(x, 0) = u0 (x), v(x, 0) = v0 (x), w(x, 0) = w0 (x) and z(x, 0) = z0 (x), x ∈ Ω

D(u) ≥ CD um−1 for all u > 0 (1.7)

February 11, 2018 13:18 WSPC/INSTRUCTION FILE LiMuZheng-m3as

Apart from this, we shall merely suppose that

S ∈ C 2 (Ω × [0, ∞) × [0, ∞); Rn×n ) (1.8)

Theorem 1.1. Let n ∈ {2, 3, 4, 5} and Ω ⊂ Rn be a bounded convex domain with

with some positive constant C independent of t. In addition, v, w and z are contin-

February 11, 2018 13:18 WSPC/INSTRUCTION FILE LiMuZheng-m3as

sion and general sensitivity

February 11, 2018 13:18 WSPC/INSTRUCTION FILE LiMuZheng-m3as

gravitational potential ϕ. Oxygen is consumed by bacteria rather than produced by

2. Local existence and basic properties

below vanishes near the lateral boundary.

February 11, 2018 13:18 WSPC/INSTRUCTION FILE LiMuZheng-m3as

Next we approximate the diﬀusion coeﬃcient function in (1.1) by a family

Sϵ (x, u, v) = ρϵ (x) · S(x, u, v), x ∈ Ω, u ≥ 0, v ≥ 0 (2.2)

Lemma 2.1. Let n ≥ 1, Ω ⊂ Rn be a bounded domain with a smooth boundary

uϵ ∈ C(Ω × [0, Tmax,ϵ )) ∩ C 2,1 (Ω × (0, Tmax,ϵ )),

February 11, 2018 13:18 WSPC/INSTRUCTION FILE LiMuZheng-m3as

(ii) The vϵ − and wϵ −components have the mass conservation that

(iii) The zϵ −component satisfies the identify:

where we use the homogeneous Neumann boundary conditions. A combination of

ations in this work.

Lemma 2.3. (see Ref. 30). Let k ≥ 1 and

If for any M > 0, we have

||uϵ (·, t)||Lk (Ω) ≤ M for all t ∈ (0, T )

holds, then there exists Czϵ (k, q, M ) > 0 such that

where T ∈ (0, Tmax,ϵ ).

February 11, 2018 13:18 WSPC/INSTRUCTION FILE LiMuZheng-m3as

||zϵ (·, t)||Lq (Ω) ≤ C1 ||z0 ||L∞ (Ω) + C2 C3 M

for all t ∈ (0, T ), this clearly implies (2.10).

Lemma 2.4. Let q ≥ 1 and

||zϵ (·, t)||Lq (Ω) ≤ M for all t ∈ (0, T ),

February 11, 2018 13:18 WSPC/INSTRUCTION FILE LiMuZheng-m3as

As an important tool, the Gagliardo-Nirenberg inequality will be frequently used

holds with λ∗ ∈ (0, 1) satisfies

3.1. Standard testing procedures

Lemma 3.1. Let p > 1. Then for all ϵ ∈ (0, 1)

−(p − 1) uϵp−2 Dϵ (uϵ )|∇uϵ |2 ≤ −(p − 1)CD um+p−3

February 11, 2018 13:18 WSPC/INSTRUCTION FILE LiMuZheng-m3as