Loading [MathJax]/jax/element/mml/optable/BasicLatin.js
Mini review Special Issues

Exploring endophytes for in vitro synthesis of bioactive compounds similar to metabolites produced in vivo by host plants

  • Received: 04 February 2021 Accepted: 19 May 2021 Published: 26 May 2021
  • Endophytes represent microorganisms residing within plant tissues without typically causing any adverse effect to the plants for considerable part of their life cycle and are primarily known for their beneficial role to their host-plant. These microorganisms can in vitro synthesize secondary metabolites similar to metabolites produced in vivo by their host plants. If microorganisms are isolated from certain plants, there is undoubtedly a strong possibility of obtaining beneficial endophytes strains producing host-specific secondary metabolites for their potential applications in sustainable agriculture, pharmaceuticals and other industrial sectors. Few products derived from endophytes are being used for cultivating resilient crops and developing non-toxic feeds for livestock. Our better understanding of the complex relationship between endophytes and their host will immensely improve the possibility to explore their unlimited functionalities. Successful production of host-secondary metabolites by endophytes at commercial scale might progressively eliminate our direct dependence on high-valued vulnerable plants, thus paving a viable way for utilizing plant resources in a sustainable way.

    Citation: Hemant Sharma, Arun Kumar Rai, Divakar Dahiya, Rajen Chettri, Poonam Singh Nigam. Exploring endophytes for in vitro synthesis of bioactive compounds similar to metabolites produced in vivo by host plants[J]. AIMS Microbiology, 2021, 7(2): 175-199. doi: 10.3934/microbiol.2021012

    Related Papers:

    [1] Antonio Iannizzotto, Giovanni Porru . Optimization problems in rearrangement classes for fractional p-Laplacian equations. Mathematics in Engineering, 2025, 7(1): 13-34. doi: 10.3934/mine.2025002
    [2] Catharine W. K. Lo, José Francisco Rodrigues . On an anisotropic fractional Stefan-type problem with Dirichlet boundary conditions. Mathematics in Engineering, 2023, 5(3): 1-38. doi: 10.3934/mine.2023047
    [3] Pier Domenico Lamberti, Michele Zaccaron . Spectral stability of the curlcurl operator via uniform Gaffney inequalities on perturbed electromagnetic cavities. Mathematics in Engineering, 2023, 5(1): 1-31. doi: 10.3934/mine.2023018
    [4] David Arcoya, Lucio Boccardo, Luigi Orsina . Hardy potential versus lower order terms in Dirichlet problems: regularizing effects. Mathematics in Engineering, 2023, 5(1): 1-14. doi: 10.3934/mine.2023004
    [5] Hugo Tavares, Alessandro Zilio . Regularity of all minimizers of a class of spectral partition problems. Mathematics in Engineering, 2021, 3(1): 1-31. doi: 10.3934/mine.2021002
    [6] Gennaro Ciampa, Gianluca Crippa, Stefano Spirito . Propagation of logarithmic regularity and inviscid limit for the 2D Euler equations. Mathematics in Engineering, 2024, 6(4): 494-509. doi: 10.3934/mine.2024020
    [7] Lorenzo Brasco . Convex duality for principal frequencies. Mathematics in Engineering, 2022, 4(4): 1-28. doi: 10.3934/mine.2022032
    [8] Youchan Kim, Seungjin Ryu, Pilsoo Shin . Approximation of elliptic and parabolic equations with Dirichlet boundary conditions. Mathematics in Engineering, 2023, 5(4): 1-43. doi: 10.3934/mine.2023079
    [9] Filippo Gazzola, Gianmarco Sperone . Remarks on radial symmetry and monotonicity for solutions of semilinear higher order elliptic equations. Mathematics in Engineering, 2022, 4(5): 1-24. doi: 10.3934/mine.2022040
    [10] Boumediene Abdellaoui, Pablo Ochoa, Ireneo Peral . A note on quasilinear equations with fractional diffusion. Mathematics in Engineering, 2021, 3(2): 1-28. doi: 10.3934/mine.2021018
  • Endophytes represent microorganisms residing within plant tissues without typically causing any adverse effect to the plants for considerable part of their life cycle and are primarily known for their beneficial role to their host-plant. These microorganisms can in vitro synthesize secondary metabolites similar to metabolites produced in vivo by their host plants. If microorganisms are isolated from certain plants, there is undoubtedly a strong possibility of obtaining beneficial endophytes strains producing host-specific secondary metabolites for their potential applications in sustainable agriculture, pharmaceuticals and other industrial sectors. Few products derived from endophytes are being used for cultivating resilient crops and developing non-toxic feeds for livestock. Our better understanding of the complex relationship between endophytes and their host will immensely improve the possibility to explore their unlimited functionalities. Successful production of host-secondary metabolites by endophytes at commercial scale might progressively eliminate our direct dependence on high-valued vulnerable plants, thus paving a viable way for utilizing plant resources in a sustainable way.



    Boundary value problems for fractional-order pseudodifferential operators P, in particular where P is a generalization of the fractional Laplacian (Δ)a (0<a<1), have currently received much interest in applications, such as in financial theory and probability (but also in mathematical physics and differential geometry), and many methods have been used, most often probabilistic or potential-theoretic methods.

    The author has studied such problems by pseudodifferential methods in [8,9,10,11,12,13], under the assumption that the operators satisfy a μ-transmission condition at the boundary of the domain ΩRn, which allows to show regularity results for solutions of the Dirichlet problem in elliptic cases, to show integration by parts formulas, and much else.

    In the present paper we consider translation-invariant pseudodifferential operators (ψdo's) P=Op(p(ξ)) of order 2a>0 with homogeneous symbol p(ξ), which are only taken to satisfy the top-order equation in the μ-transmission condition (relative to the domain Ω=Rn+), we call this the principal μ-transmission condition. It is shown that they retain some of the features: The solution spaces for the homogeneous Dirichlet problem in the elliptic case equal the μ-transmission spaces from [8] (in a setting of low-order Sobolev spaces), having a factor xμn. The integration by parts formula holds (even when P is not elliptic):

    Rn+Punˉudx+Rn+nu¯Pudx=Γ(μ+1)Γ(μ+1)Rn1s0γ0(u/xμn)γ0(ˉu/xμn)dx,

    when u and u are in xμnC(¯Rn+) resp. xˉμnC(¯Rn+) (μ=2aμ) and compactly supported.

    We also treat nonhomogeneous local Dirichlet problems with Dirichlet trace γ0(u/xμ1n), and show how the above formula implies a "halfways" Green's formula where one factor has nonzero Dirichlet trace. P can be of any positive order, and μ can be complex.

    The results apply in particular to the operator L=Op(A(ξ)+iB(ξ)) with A real, positive and even in ξ, B real and odd in ξ, which satisfies the principal μ-transmission equation for a suitable real μ. Hereby we can compensate for an error made in the recent publication [13] (see also [14]), where it was overlooked that L may not satisfy the full μ-transmission condition when B0 (it does so for B=0). The general L are now covered by the present work. They were treated earlier by Dipierro, Ros-Oton, Serrra and Valdinoci [5] under some hypotheses on a and μ; they come up in applications as infinitesimal generators of α-stable n-dimensional Lévy processes, see [5]. (The calculations in [13] are valid when applied to operators satisfying the full μ-transmission condition.)

    The study of x-independent ψdo's P on the half-space Rn+ serves as a model case for operators on domains ΩRn with curved boundary and possible x-dependence, and can be expected to be a useful ingredient in the general treatment, as carried out for the operator L in [5].

    Plan of the paper: In Section 2 we give an overview of the aims and results of the paper with only few technicalities. Section 3 introduces the principal transmission condition in detail for homogeneous ψdo symbols. In Section 4, the Wiener-Hopf method is applied to derive basic decomposition and factorization formulas for such symbols. This is used in Section 5 to establish mapping properties for the operators, and regularity properties for solutions of the homogeneous Dirichlet problem in strongly elliptic cases; here μ-transmission spaces (known from [8]) defined in an L2-framework play an important role. Section 6 gives the proof of the above-mentioned integration by parts formula on Rn+. Section 7 treats nonhomogeneous local Dirichlet conditions, and a halfways Green's formula is established.

    The study is concerned with the so-called model case, where the pseudodifferential operators have x-independent symbols, hence act as simple multiplication operators in the Fourier transformed space (this frees us from using the deeper composition rules needed for x-dependent symbols), and the considered open subset Ω of Rn is simplest possible, namely Ω=Rn+={xRnxn>0}. We assume n2 and denote x=(x1,,xn)=(x,xn), x=(x1,,xn1). Recall the formulas for the Fourier transform F and the operator P=Op(p(ξ)):

    Fu=ˆu(ξ)=Rneixξu(x)dx,F1v=(2π)nRneixξv(ξ)dξ,Pu=Op(p(ξ))u=F1(p(ξ)(Fu)(ξ)). (2.1)

    We work in L2(Rn) and L2(Rn+) and their derived L2-Sobolev spaces (the reader is urged to consult (5.1) below for notation). On L2(Rn), the Plancherel theorem

    uL2(Rn)=cˆuL2(Rn),c=(2π)n/2, (2.2)

    makes norm estimates of operators easy. (There is more on Fourier transforms and distribution theory e.g., in [7].) The model case serves both as a simplified special case, and as a proof ingredient for more general cases of domains with curved boundaries, and possibly x-dependent symbols.

    The symbols p(ξ) we shall consider are scalar and homogeneous of degree m=2a>0 in ξ, i.e., p(tξ)=tmp(ξ) for t>0, and are C1 for ξ0, defining operators P=Op(p).

    A typical example is the squareroot Laplacian with drift:

    L1=(Δ)12+bb,withsymbolL1(ξ)=|ξ|+ibbξ, (2.3)

    where bb=(b1,,bn) is a real vector. Here m=1, a=12. It satisfies the condition for strong ellipticity, which is:

    Rep(ξ)c0|ξ|mwithc0>0,allξRn; (2.4)

    this is important in regularity discussions. Some results are obtained without the ellipticity hypothesis; as an example we can take the operator L2 with symbol

    L2(ξ)=|ξ1++ξn|+ibbξ, (2.5)

    whose real part is zero e.g., when ξ=(1,1,0,,0).

    The operators are well-defined on the Sobolev spaces over Rn: When p is homogeneous of degree m0, there is an inequality

    |p(ξ)|C|ξ|mCξm,ξ=(1+|ξ|2)12

    (we say that p is of order m); then

    PuL2(Rn)=cp(ξ)ˆu(ξ)L2(Rn)cCξmˆuL2(Rn)=CuHm(Rn), (2.6)

    so P maps Hm(Rn) continuously into L2(Rn). Similarly, it maps Hs+m(Rn) continuously into Hs(Rn) for all sR.

    But for these pseudodifferential operators it is not obvious how to define them relative to the subset Rn+, since they are not defined pointwise like differential operators, but by integrals (they are nonlocal). The convention is here to let them act on suitable linear subsets of L2(Rn+), where we identify L2(Rn+) with the set of uL2(Rn) that are zero on Rn, i.e., have their support suppu¯Rn+. (The support suppu of a function or distribution u is the complement of the largest open set where u=0. The operator that extends functions on Rn+ by zero on Rn is denoted e+.) Then we apply P and restrict to Rn+ afterwards; this is the operator r+P. (r+ stands for restriction from Rn to Rn+.)

    Aiming for the integration by parts formula mentioned in the start, we have to clarify for which functions u,u the integrals make sense. It can be expected from earlier studies ([5,10,20]) that the integral will be meaningful for solutions of the so-called homogeneous Dirichlet problem on Rn+, namely the problem

    r+Pu=fonRn+,u=0onRn (2.7)

    (where the latter condition can also be written suppu¯Rn+). This raises the question of where r+P lands; which f can be prescribed? Or, if f is given in certain space, where should u lie in order to hit the space where f lies?

    Altogether, we address the following three questions on P:

    (1) Forward mapping properties. From which spaces does r+P map into an Hs-space for f?

    (2) Regularity properties. If u solves (2.7) with f in an Hs-space for a high s, will u then belong to a space with a similar high regularity?

    (3) Integration by parts formula for functions in spaces where r+P is well-defined.

    It turns out that the answers to all three points depend profoundly on the introduction of so-called μ-transmission spaces. To explain their importance, we turn for a moment to the fractional Laplacian which has a well-established treatment:

    For the case of (Δ)a, 0<a<1, it was shown in [8] that the following space is relevant:

    Ea(¯Rn+)=e+xanC(¯Rn+). (2.8)

    It has the property that (Δ)a maps it to C(¯Rn+); more precisely,

    r+(Δ)amapsEa(¯Rn+)E(Rn)intoC(¯Rn+). (2.9)

    Here E(Rn) is the space of distributions with compact support, so the intersection with this space means that we consider functions in Ea that are zero outside a compact set.

    For Sobolev spaces, it was found in [8] that the good space for u is the so-called a-transmission space Ha(t)(¯Rn+); here

    r+(Δ)amapsHa(t)(¯Rn+)E(Rn)into¯Ht2a(Rn+), (2.10)

    for all ta (say). Ea(¯Rn+)E(Rn) is a dense subset of Ha(t)(¯Rn+). The definition of the space Ha(t)(¯Rn+) is recalled below in (2.15) and in more detail in Section 5.3; let us for the moment just mention that it is the sum of the space ˙Ht(¯Rn+) and a certain subspace of xan¯Hta(Rn+). This also holds when a is replaced by a more general μ.

    For (Δ)a, the a-transmission spaces provide the right answers to question (1), and they are likewise right for question (2) (both facts established in [8]), and there are integration by parts formulas for (Δ)a applied to elements of these spaces, [10,11].

    The key to the proofs is the so-called a-transmission condition that (Δ)a satisfies; it is an infinite list of equations for p(ξ) and its derivatives, linking the values on the interior normal to Rn+ with the values on the exterior normal. We formulate it below with a replaced by a general μ.

    Definition 2.1. Let μC, and let p(ξ) be homogeneous of degree m. Denote the interior resp. exterior normal to the boundary of Rn+ by (0,±1)={(ξ,ξn)ξ=0,ξn=±1}.

    1 p (and P=Op(p)) is said to satisfy the principal μ-transmission condition at Rn+ if

    p(0,1)=eiπ(m2μ)p(0,1). (2.11)

    2 p (and P=Op(p)) is said to satisfy the μ-transmission condition at Rn+ if

    αξp(0,1)=eiπ(m2μ|α|)αξp(0,1),forallαNn0. (2.12)

    Note that μ is determined from p in (2.11) up to addition of an integer, when p(0,1)0.

    The operators considered on smooth domains Ω in [8] were assumed to satisfy (2.12) (for the top-order term p0 in the symbol) at all boundary points x0Ω, with (0,1) replaced by the interior normal ν at x0, and (0,1) replaced by ν. The lower-order terms pj in the symbol, homogeneous of degree mj, should then satisfy analogous rules with mj instead of m.

    The principal μ-transmission condition (2.11) is of course much less demanding than the full μ-transmission condition (2.12). What we show in the present paper is that when (2.11) holds, the μ-transmission spaces are still relevant, and provide the appropriate answers to both questions (1) and (2), however just for t (the regularity parameter) in a limited range. This range is large enough that integration by parts formulas can be established, answering (3).

    By simple geometric considerations one finds:

    Proposition 2.2. 1 When p(ξ) is homogeneous of degree m, there is a μC, uniquely determined modulo Z if p(0,1)0, such that (2.11) holds.

    2 If moreover, p is strongly elliptic (2.4) and m=2a>0, μ can be chosen uniquely to satisfy μ=a+δ with |Reδ|<12.

    This is shown in Section 3. From here on we work under two slightly different assumptions. The symbol p(ξ) is in both cases taken homogeneous of degree m=2a>0 and C1 for ξ0. We pose Assumption 3.1 requiring that p is strongly elliptic and μ is chosen as in Proposition 2.2 2. We pose Assumption 3.2 just requiring that μ is defined according to Proposition 2.2 1. In all cases we write μ=a+δ, and define μ=aδ=2aμ.

    Example 2.3. Consider L1=|ξ|+ibbξ defined in (2.3). The order is 1=m=2a, so a=12. Here L1(0,1)=1+ibn and L1(0,1)=1ibn. The angle θ in C=R2 between the positive real axis and 1+ibn is θ=Arctanbn. Set δ=θ/π, then

    L1(0,1)=eiπδ|L1(0,1)|=eiπδ(1+|bb|2)12, similarly L1(0,1)=eiπδ|L1(0,1)|=eiπδ(1+|bb|2)12.

    Moreover,

    L1(0,1)/L1(0,1)=e2iπδ=eiπ(2a2(a+δ)), when a=12,

    so (2.11) holds with m=2a=1, μ=12+δ, where δ=1πArctanbn, and Assumption 3.1 is satisfied. Note that δ]12,12[.

    For L2 in (2.5), the values at (0,1) and (0,1) are the same as the values for L1, so (2.11) holds with the same values, and Assumption 3.2 is satisfied. But not Assumption 3.1 since L2 is not strongly elliptic.

    When bn0, hence δ0, neither of these symbols satisfy the full μ-transmission condition Definition 2.1 2, since second derivatives remove the (ibbξ)-term so that the resulting symbol is even (with μ=a+δ replaced by μ=a). $

    Our answer to (1) is now the following (achieved in Section 5.4):

    Theorem 2.4. Let P satisfy Assumption 3.2. For Reμ12<t<Reμ+32, r+P defines a continuous linear mapping

    r+P:Hμ(t)(¯Rn+)¯Ht2a(Rn+). (2.13)

    It is important to note that r+P then also makes good sense on subsets of Hμ(t)(¯Rn+). In particular, since Eμ(¯Rn+)E(Rn) is a subset of Hμ(t)(¯Rn+) for all t, the operator r+P is well-defined on Eμ(¯Rn+)E(Rn), mapping it into t<Reμ+32¯Ht2a(Rn+)¯HReδ+32aε(Rn+), any ε>0, by (2.13). When Reδ>12 (always true under Assumption 3.1), this is assured to be contained in ¯H1a(Rn+).

    Our answer to (2) is (cf. Section 5.4):

    Theorem 2.5. Let P satisfy Assumption 3.1. Then P=ˆP+P, where P is of order 2a1, and r+ˆP is a bijection from Hμ(t)(¯Rn+) to ¯Ht2a(Rn+) for Reμ12<t<Reμ+32. In other words, there is unique solvability of (2.7) with P replaced by ˆP, in the mentioned spaces.

    For r+P itself, there holds the regularity property: Let Reμ12<t<Reμ+32, let f¯Ht2a(Rn+), and let u˙Hσ(¯Rn+) (for some σ>Reμ12) solve the homogeneous Dirichlet problem (2.7). Then uHμ(t)(¯Rn+).

    The last statement shows a lifting of the regularity of u in the elliptic case, namely if it solves (2.7) lying in a low-order space ˙Hσ(¯Rn+), then it is in the best possible μ-transmission space according to Theorem 2.4, mapping into the given range space ¯Ht2a(¯Rn+). In other words, the domain of the homogeneous Dirichlet problem with range in ¯Ht2a(¯Rn+) equals Hμ(t)(¯Rn+).

    The strategy for both theorems is, briefly expressed, as follows: The first step is to replace P=Op(p(ξ)) by ˆP=Op(ˆp(ξ)), where ˆp(ξ) is better controlled at ξ=0 and p(ξ)=p(ξ)ˆp(ξ) is O(|ξ|2a1) for |ξ|. The second step is to reduce ˆP to order 0 by composition with "plus/minus order-reducing operators" Ξt±=Op((ξ±iξn)t) ((3.11), (5.2)) geared to the value μ (recall μ=2aμ):

    ˆQ=ΞμˆPΞμ+. (2.14)

    Then the homogeneous symbol q associated with ˆQ satisfies the principal 0-transmission condition. The third step is to decompose ˆQ into a sum (when Assumption 3.2 holds) or a product (when Assumption 3.1 holds) of operators whose action relative to the usual Sobolev spaces ˙Hs(¯Rn+) and ¯Hs(Rn+) can be well understood, so that we can show forward mapping properties and (in the strongly elliptic case) bijectiveness properties for ˆQ. The fourth step is to carry this over to forward mapping properties and (in the strongly elliptic case) bijectiveness properties for ˆP. The fifth and last step is to take P=PˆP back into the picture and deduce the forward mapping resp. regularity properties for the original operator P.

    It is the right-hand factor Ξμ+ in (2.14) that is the reason why the μ-transmission spaces, defined by

    Hμ(t)(¯Rn+)=Ξμ+e+¯HtReμ(Rn+), (2.15)

    enter. Here e+¯HtReμ(Rn+) has a jump at xn=0 when t>Reμ+12, and then the coefficient xμn appears.

    The analysis of ˆQ is based on a Wiener-Hopf technique (cf. Section 4) explained in Eskin's book [6], instead of the involvement of the extensive Boutet de Monvel calculus used in [8].

    An interesting feature of the results is that the μ-transmission spaces have a universal role, depending only on μ and not on the exact form of P.

    Finally, we answer (3) by showing an integration by parts formula, based just on Assumption 3.2.

    Theorem 2.6. Let P satisfy Assumption 3.2, and assume moreover that Reμ>1, Reμ>1. For uEμ(¯Rn+)E(Rn), uEˉμ(¯Rn+)E(Rn), there holds

    Rn+Punˉudx+Rn+nu¯Pudx=Γ(μ+1)Γ(μ+1)Rn1s0γ0(u/xμn)γ0(ˉu/xμn)dx, (2.16)

    where s0=eiπδp(0,1). The formula extends to uHμ(t)(¯Rn+), uHˉμ(t)(¯Rn+), for t>Reμ+12, t>Reμ+12.

    The integrals over Rn+ in (2.16) are interpreted as dualities when needed. The basic step in the proof is the treatment of one order-reducing operator in Proposition 6.1, by an argument shown in detail in [10,Th. 3.1,Rem. 3.2], and recalled in [13,Th. 4.1].

    In the proof of (2.16) in Section 6, the formula is first shown for the nicer operator ˆP, and thereafter extended to P. (The formula (2.16) for (Δ)a in Ros-Oton and Serra [20,Th. 1.9] should have a minus sign on the boundary contribution; this has been corrected by Ros-Oton in the survey [19,p. 350].)

    The theory will be carried further, to include "large" solutions of a nonhomogeneous local Dirichlet problem, and to show regularity results and a "halfways Green's formula", see Section 7, but we shall leave those aspects out of this preview.

    The example L1 in (2.3) is a special case of the operator L=Op(L(ξ)), where L(ξ)=A(ξ)+iB(ξ) with A(ξ) real, even in ξ and positive, and B(ξ) real and odd in ξ. There are more details below in (3.5)ff. (this stands for (3.5) and the near following text) and Examples 5.9, 6.5, 7.4. L was first studied in [5] (under certain restrictions on a and μ), and our results apply to it. Theorem 2.6 gives an alternative proof for the same integration by parts formula, established in [5,Prop. 1.4] by extensive real function-theoretic methods.

    The result on the integral over Rn+ is combined in [5] with localization techniques to get an interesting result for curved domains, and it is our hope that the present results for more general strongly elliptic operators can be used in a similar way.

    Let p(ξ) be a complex function on Rn that is homogeneous of degree m in ξ, and let νRn be a unit vector. For a complex number μ, we shall say that p satisfies the principal μ-transmission condition in the direction ν, when

    p(ν)=eiπ(m2μ)p(ν). (3.1)

    When p(ν)0, we can rewrite (3.1) as

    eiπ(m2μ)=p(ν)p(ν),i.e.,μ=m212πilogp(ν)p(ν),

    where log is a complex logaritm. This determines the possible μ up to addition of an integer.

    The (full) μ-transmission property defined in [8] demands much more, namely that

    αξp(ν)=eiπ(m2μ|α|)αξp(ν),allαNn0. (3.2)

    Besides assuming infinite differentiability, this is a stronger condition than (3.1) in particular because of the requirements it puts on derivatives of p transversal to ν.

    To analyse this we observe that when a (sufficiently smooth) function f(t) on R{0} is homogeneous of degree mR, then it has the form, for some c1,c2C,

    f(t)={c1tmfort>0,c2(t)mfort<0,

    and its derivative outside t=0 is a function homogeneous of degree m1 satisfying

    tf(t)={c1mtm1fort>0,c2m(t)m1fort<0.

    In particular, if c10, m0,

    f(1)/f(1)=c2/c1,tf(1)/tf(1)=c2/c1.

    In the case m=0, f is constant for t>0 and t<0, and the derivative is zero there.

    Thus, when p(ξ) is a (sufficiently smooth) function on Rn{0} that is homogeneous of degree m0, and we consider it on a two-sided ray {tνtR} where ν is a unit vector and p(ν)0, then

    p(ν)=c0p(ν)tp(tν)|t=1=c0tp(tν)|t=1. (3.3)

    So for example, when ν is the inward normal (0,1)={(ξ,ξn)ξ=0,ξn=1} to Rn+,

    p(0,1)=c0p(0,1)ξnp(0,1)=c0ξnp(0,1).

    For p(ξ) satisfying (3.1), this means that when p(ν)0, it will also satisfy

    tp(tν)|t=1=eiπ(m2μ1)tp(tν)|t=1,

    in view of (3.3). This argument can be repeated, showing that

    ktp(tν)|t=1=eiπ(m2μk)ktp(tν)|t=1, (3.4)

    as long as the derivatives at t=1 do not vanish. That can happen when m is a nonnegative integer (namely from the (m+1)'st step on); then (3.4) is trivially satisfied. On the other hand, we cannot infer that derivatives of αξp for arbitrary α have the property (3.2); this will be illustrated in examples below.

    In general, μ takes different values for different ν. When Ω is a sufficiently smooth subset of Rn with interior normal ν(x) at boundary points xΩ, we say that p satisfies the principal μ-transmission condition at Ω if μ(x) is a function on Ω such that (3.1) holds with this μ(x) at boundary points xΩ. For Ω=Rn+, the normal ν equals (0,1) at all boundary points and μ is a constant; this is the situation considered in the present paper.

    In [13] we have studied a special class of symbols first considered by Dipierro, Ros-Oton, Serra and Valdinoci in [5]:

    L(ξ)=A(ξ)+iB(ξ), (3.5)

    the functions being C for ξ0 and homogeneous in ξ of degree 2a>0 (a<1), and where A(ξ) is real and even in ξ (i.e., A(ξ)=A(ξ)), B(ξ) is real and odd in ξ (i.e., B(ξ)=B(ξ)), and L is strongly elliptic (i.e., A(ξ)>0 for ξ0). As shown in [13,Sect. 2], L satisfies (3.1) on each unit vector ν, for m=2a and

    μ(ν)=a+δ(ν),withδ(ν)=1πArctanb,b=B(ν)/A(ν); (3.6)

    this follows straightforwardly (as in Example 2.3) from the observation that L(ν)/L(ν)=(1ib)/(1+ib), b=B(ν)/A(ν). It then also satisfies (3.4) with this μ.

    But the full μ-transmission condition need not hold. For example, the symbol L1(ξ)=|ξ|+ibbξ in (2.3) (with bbRn) satisfies the principal μ-transmission condition for ν=(0,1) with μ=12+δ, δ0 if bn0, whereas

    2ξ1L1=(ξ22++ξ2n)/|ξ|3

    and its derivatives satisfy the conditions in (3.2) for ν=(0,1) with μ replaced by 12.

    The statement in [13,Th. 3.1] that solutions of the homogeneous Dirichlet problem have a structure with the factor xμn, was quoted from [8] based on the full μ-transmision condition, and therefore applies to L=Op(L) when B=0 (a case belonging to [8]), but not in general when B0. Likewise, the integration by parts formulas for L derived in [13] using details from the Boutet de Monvel calculus are justified when B=0 or when other operators P satisfying the full μ-transmission condition are inserted, but not in general when B0. Fortunately, there are cruder methods that do lead to such results, on the basis of the principal μ-transmission condition alone, and that is what we show in this paper.

    The treatment of L will be incorporated in a treatment of general strongly elliptic homogeneous symbols in the following. This requires that we allow complex values of μ.

    Let P=Op(p(ξ)) be defined by (2.1) from a symbol p(ξ) that is C1 for ξ0, homogeneous of order m=2a>0, and now also strongly elliptic (2.4). To fix the ideas, we shall consider the operator relative to the set Rn+, with interior normal ν=(0,1). Denote p(ξ)|ξ|2a=p1(ξ); it is homogeneous of degree 0. Both p and p1 take values in a closed subsector of {zCReξn>0}{0}. For any ξRn1, one has for +1 and 1 respectively,

    limξn±p1(ξ,ξn)=limξn±p1(ξ/|ξn|,±1)=p1(0,±1)=p(0,±1).

    With the logarithm logz defined to be positive for real z>1, with a cut along the negative real axis, denote logp(0,±1)=α±; here Reα±=log|p(0,±1)| and Imα± is the argument of p(0,±1). With this notation,

    p(0,1)/p(0,1)=eα/eα+=eαα+,

    so (3.1) for m=2a holds with ν=(0,1) when αα+=iπ(2a2μ), i.e.,

    μ=a+δwithδ=(α+α)/2πi; (3.7)

    this μ is the factorization index. These calculations were given in [8,Sect. 3] (with m=2a), and are in principle consistent with the determination of the factorization index by Eskin in [6,Ex. 6.1] (which has different plus/minus conventions because of a different definition of the Fourier transform).

    Since p(ξ) takes values in {Rez>0} for ξ0, both p(0,1) and p(0,1) lie there and the difference between their arguments is less than π, so |Im(α+α)/2π|<12; in other words

    |Reδ|<12. (3.8)

    Note that δ is real in the case (3.5).

    We collect the information on P in the following description:

    Assumption 3.1. The operator P=Op(p(ξ)) is defined from a symbol p(ξ) that is C1 for ξ0, homogeneous of order m=2a>0, and strongly elliptic (2.4). It satisfies the principal μ-transmission condition in the direction (0,1):

    p(0,1)=eiπ(m2μ)p(0,1),

    with μ equal to the factorization index μ=a+δ derived around (3.7), and |Reδ|<12. Denote μ=2aμ=aδ.

    In Eskin's book [6], the case of constant-coefficient pseudodifferential operators considered on Rn+ is studied in §§–17, and the calculations rely on the principal transmission condition up to and including §. From § on, additional conditions on transversal derivatives are required (the symbol class D(0)α+iβ seems to correspond to our full 0-transmission condition, giving operators preserving smoothness up to the boundary). In the following, we draw on some of the points made in §§–7 there.

    For an operator A defined from a homogeneous symbol a(ξ), the behavior at zero can be problematic to deal with. In [6,§7], there is introduced a technique that leads to a nicer operator, in the context of operators relative to Rn+: One eliminates the singularity at ξ=0 by replacing the homogeneous symbol a(ξ,ξn) by

    ˆa(ξ,ξn)=a(ξξ/|ξ|,ξn), (3.9)

    the corresponding operator denoted ˆA. (In comparison with [6] we have replaced the factor 1+|ξ| used there by ξ=(1+|ξ|2)12.) It is shown there that when a(ξ) is homogeneous of degree α+iβ, then

    a(ξ)=a(ξ)ˆa(ξ)isO(|ξ|α1)for|ξ|2, (3.10)

    hence is of lower order in a certain sense. Many results with Sobolev estimates are then shown primarily for the "hatted" version ˆA=Op(ˆa), and supplied afterwards with information on A=Op(a). Indeed, we shall see that the results we are after for our operators P=Op(p), can be obtained in a manageable way for ˆP=Op(ˆp), and then extended to P by a supplementing analysis of P. The important thing is that special properties with respect to ξn, such as holomorphic extendability into C+ or C, are not disturbed when a is replaced by ˆa.

    Some of the results that we shall show do not require ellipticity of P. We therefore introduce also a weaker assumption:

    Assumption 3.2. The operator P=Op(p(ξ)) is defined from a symbol p(ξ) that is C1 for ξ0, homogeneous of order m=2a>0, and satisfies the principal μ-transmission condition in the direction (0,1) with μ=a+δ for some δC. Denote aδ=μ.

    For the symbols p considered in the rest of the paper, we assume at least that Assumption 3.2 holds. As noted earlier, when P satisfies (3.1) for some μ, it also does so with μ replaced by μ+k, kZ. The precision in Assumption 3.1, that μ should equal the factorization index, is needed for elliptic solvability statements.

    Consider the symbols of "order-reducing" operators (more on them in Section 5):

    χt0,±(ξ)=(|ξ|±iξn)t;consequentlyˆχt0,±(ξ)=(|ξξ/|ξ||±iξn)t=(ξ±iξn)t=χt±(ξ); (3.11)

    the last entry is the usual notation. Together with our symbol p(ξ) of order 2a, we shall consider its reduction to a symbol q of order 0 defined by:

    q(ξ)=χμ0,p(ξ)χμ0,+,herebyp(ξ)=χμ0,q(ξ)χμ0,+. (3.12)

    The "hatted" version is:

    ˆq(ξ)=χμˆp(ξ)χμ+,herebyˆp(ξ)=χμˆq(ξ)χμ+. (3.13)

    Here q is continuous and homogeneous of degree 0 for ξ0; it is C1 in ξn there, and C1 in ξ for ξ0 with bounded first derivatives on |ξ|=1. Since i=eiπ/2,

    q(0,1)=(i)μ2ap(0,1)iμ=i2a2μp(0,1)=eiπ(aμ)p(0,1),q(0,1)=(+i)μ2ap(0,1)(i)μ=i2μ2aeiπ(2a2μ)p(0,1)=eiπ(aμ)p(0,1)=q(0,1),

    so q satisfies the principal 0-transmission condition in the direction ν=(0,1):

    q(0,1)=q(0,1). (3.14)

    In view of (3.1)–(3.4), we have moreover when p(0,1)0 that

    ξnq(0,1)=ξnq(0,1). (3.15)

    Note that since μa=δ, q(0,1)=eiπδp(0,1). We shall denote

    s0=q(0,1)=eiπδp(0,1). (3.16)

    In the case p=L in (3.5)–(3.6), L(0,1)=eiπδ|L(0,1)| with δ real, so

    s0=eiπδL(0,1)=|L(0,1)|=(A(0,1)2+B(0,1)2)12then. (3.17)

    Since p(ξ) is only assumed to satisfy the principal μ-transmission condition, q(ξ) will in general only satisfy the principal 0-transmission condition, not the full one, so the techniques of the Boutet de Monvel calculus brought forward in [8] are not available. Instead we go back to a more elementary application of the original Wiener-Hopf method [22].

    When b(ξn) is a function on R, denote

    b+(ξn+iτ)=i2πRb(ηn)ηnξniτdηnforτ<0,b(ξn+iτ)=i2πRb(ηn)ηnξniτdηnforτ>0, (4.1)

    when the integrals have a sense. When b is suitably nice, b+ is holomorphic in ξn+iτ for τ<0 and extends to a continuous function on ¯C (also denoted b+), b has these properties relative to ¯C+, and b(ξn)=b+(ξn)+b(ξn) on R. With the notation of spaces H, H± introduced by Boutet de Monvel in [4], denoted H, H± in our subsequent works, the decomposition holds for bH with b±H± on R. Since we are presently dealing with functions with cruder properties, we shall instead apply a useful lemma shown in [6,Lemma 6.1]:

    Lemma 4.1. Suppose that b(ξ,ξn) is homogeneous of degree 0 in ξ, is C1 for ξ0, and satisfies

    |b(ξ,ξn)|C|ξ||ξ|1,|jb(ξ,ξn)|C|ξ|1forjn1. (4.2)

    Then the function defined for τ<0 by

    b+(ξ,ξn+iτ)=i2πRb(ξ,ηn)ηnξniτdηn (4.3)

    is holomorphic with respect to ξn+iτ in C, is homogeneous of degree 0, extends by continuity with respect to (ξ,ξn+iτ)¯C for |ξ|+|τ|>0, τ0, and satisfies the estimate

    |b+(ξ,ξn+iτ)|Cε|ξ|1ε(|ξ|+|τ|)ε1,anyε>0. (4.4)

    There is an analogous statement for b with C replaced by C+.

    The symbol q derived from p by (3.12) satisfies

    q(ξ)=s0+f(ξ),

    where f is likewise homogeneous of degree 0, and has f(0,1)=f(0,1)=0. We make two applications of Lemma 4.1. One is, under Assumption 3.2, to apply it directly to f to get a sum decomposition f=f++f where the terms extend holomorphically to C resp. C+ with respect to ξn; this will be convenient in establishing the forward mapping properties and integration by parts formula for the present operators. The other is, under Assumption 3.1, to apply the lemma to the function b(ξ)=logq(ξ) to get a sum decomposition of b and hence a factorization of q; this is used to show that P has appropriate solvability properties (the solutions exhibiting a singularity xμn at the boundary).

    We show that f has the properties required for Lemma 4.1 as follows: To see that (4.2) is verified by f, note that the second inequality follows since jf is bounded on the unit sphere {|ξ|=1} and homogeneous of degree 1. For the first inequality we have, when ξn>|ξ| (hence |ξ/ξn|<1),

    |f(ξ,ξn)|=|q(ξξn,1)q(0,1)|j<n|ξjξn|sup|η|1|jq(η,1)|C|ξ||ξn|C|ξ||ξ|, (4.5)

    using the mean value theorem and the fact that |ξn||ξ| when |ξn||ξ|. A similar estimate is found for ξn<|ξ|. For |ξn||ξ|, we use that q is bounded, so that |q(ξ)s0||ξ|/|ξ|c|q(ξ)s0||ξ|/|ξ|c. We have obtained:

    Proposition 4.2. When p satisfies Assumption 3.2 and q is derived from p by (3.12), then there is a sum decomposition of f=qs0:

    q(ξ)s0=f+(ξ)+f(ξ),

    where f+(ξ,ξn) is holomorphic with respect to ξn+iτ in C, and continuous with respect to (ξ,ξn+iτ)¯C for |ξ|+|τ|>0, τ0, and satisfies estimates

    |f+(ξ,ξn+iτ)|Cε|ξ|1ε(|ξ|+|τ|)ε1,anyε>0, (4.6)

    and f has the analogous properties with C replaced by C+.

    For the corresponding hatted symbol, we then have ˆq=s0+ˆf++ˆf, with ˆf± defined from f±. They have similar holomorphy properties, and satisfy estimates as in (4.6) with |ξ| replaced by ξ.

    In order to obtain a factorization for symbols satisfying Assumption 3.1, we shall study logq. By the strong ellipticity, q(ξ)0 for ξ0. Moreover, p(ξ)|ξ|2a=χa0,p(ξ)χa0,+ takes values in a subsector of {zCRez>0} and the multiplication by χδ0, and χδ0,+ gives the function q taking values in the sector {zC|argz|π(12+|Reδ|)} disjoint from the negative real axis. So the logarithm is well-defined with inverse exp.

    Assume first that s0=1; this can simply be obtained by dividing out q(0,1). The function b(ξ)=logq(ξ) is homogeneous of degree 0 and has b(0,1)=b(0,1)=0 and the appropriate continuity properties, and bounds on first derivatives, so the same proof as for f applies to b to give the decomposition b=b++b. Then we define q±=exp(b±), they are homogeneous of degree 0. For example,

    q+=1+g+,whereg+=k1(b+)k.

    Here |b+(ξ)|Cε|ξ|1ε|ξ|1+ε, and there is a constant Cε such that Cε|ξ|1ε|ξ|1+ε12 for |ξn|Cε|ξ|. On this set the series for g+ converges with |g+||b+|, hence g+ satisfies an estimate of the form (4.4) there. It likewise does so on the set |ξn|Cε|ξ| since |ξ||ξ| there. There are similar results for q=exp(b)=1+g with C replaced by C+. This shows:

    Proposition 4.3. When p satisfies Assumption 3.1 and q is derived from p by (3.12) and satisfies s0=1, then there is a factorization of q:

    q(ξ)=q(ξ)q+(ξ),

    where q+(ξ,ξn) is holomorphic with respect to ξn+iτ in C, and continuous with respect to (ξ,ξn+iτ)¯C for |ξ|+|τ|>0, τ0. Moreover, g+=q+1 satisfies estimates

    |g+(ξ,ξn+iτ)|Cε|ξ|1ε(|ξ|+|τ|)ε1,allε>0, (4.7)

    and q, g=q1 have the analogous properties with C replaced by C+. The symbols are homogeneous of degree 0, and q+ and q are elliptic.

    For general s0, we apply the factorization to q0=s10q, so that q0=q0q+0; then q=qq+ with q=s0q0=s0(1+g) and q+=q+0=1+g+.

    The ellipticity follows from the construction as exp(b±), or one can observe that the product q+q=q is elliptic (i.e., nonzero for ξ0).

    The notation with upper index ± is chosen here to avoid confusion with the lower + used later to indicate truncation, P+=r+Pe+.

    Turning to the corresponding hatted symbols, we have obtained ˆq=ˆqˆq+, with ˆq±, ˆg± defined from q±, g±, respectively. They have similar holomorphy properties, the ˆq± are elliptic, and the ˆg± satisfy estimates as in (4.7) with |ξ| replaced by ξ:

    |ˆg+(ξ,ξn+iτ)|Cεξ1ε(ξ+|τ|)ε1,allε>0. (4.8)

    First recall some terminology: E(Rn) is the space of distributions on Rn with compact support, S(Rn) is the Schwartz space of C-functions f on Rn such that xβDαf is bounded for all α,β, and S(Rn) is its dual space of temperate distributions. ξ stands for (1+|ξ|2)12. We denote by r+ the operator restricting distributions on Rn to distributions on Rn+, and by e+ the operator extending functions on Rn+ by zero on RnRn+. Then r+S(Rn) is denoted S(¯Rn+). The following notation for L2-Sobolev spaces will be used, for sR:

    Hs(Rn)={uS(Rn)ξsFuL2(Rn)},¯Hs(Rn+)=r+Hs(Rn),therestrictedspace,˙Hs(¯Rn+)={uHs(Rn)suppu¯Rn+},thesupportedspace, (5.1)

    as in our earlier papers on fractional-order operators. An elaborate presentation of Lp-based spaces was given in [8]. (The notation with dots and overlines stems from Hörmander [17,App. B.2] and is practical in formulas where both types of spaces occur. There are other notations without the overline, and where the dot is replaced by a ring or twiddle.)

    Here ¯Hs(Rn+) identifies with the dual space of ˙Hs(¯Rn+) for all sR (the duality extending the L2(Rn+) scalar product). When |s|<12, there is an identification of ˙Hs(¯Rn+) with ¯Hs(Rn+) (more precisely with e+¯Hs(Rn+)). The trace operator γ0:ulimxn0+u(x,xn) extends to a continuous mapping γ0:¯Hs(Rn+)Hs12(Rn1) for s>12.

    The order-reducing operators Ξt± are defined for tC by Ξt±=Op(χt±), where χt±=(ξ±iξn)t, cf. (3.11). These operators have the homeomorphism properties:

    Ξt+:˙Hs(¯Rn+)˙HsRet(¯Rn+),r+Ξte+:¯Hs(Rn+)¯HsRet(Rn+),allsR,tC; (5.2)

    r+Ξte+ is often denoted Ξt,+ for short. For each tC, the operators Ξt+ and Ξ¯t,+ identify with each other's adjoints over ¯Rn+ (more comments on this in [8,Rem. 1.1]). Recall also the simple composition rules (as noted e.g., in [15,Th. 1.2]):

    Ξs+Ξt+=Ξs+t+,Ξs,+Ξt,+=Ξs+t,+fors,tC.

    We define

    Eμ(¯Rn+)=e+xμnC(¯Rn+)whenReμ>1, (5.3)

    and Eμ(¯Rn+) is defined successively as the linear hull of first-order derivatives of elements of Eμ+1(¯Rn+) when Reμ1 (then distributions supported in the boundary can occur). The spaces were introduced in Hörmander's unpublished lecture notes [16] and are presented in [8] (and with a different notation in [17,Sect. 18.2]), and they satisfy for all μ (cf. [8,Props. 1.7,4.1]):

    Eμ(¯Rn+)E(Rn)Ξμ+e+s¯Hs(¯Rn+). (5.4)

    A sharper statement follows from [13,Lemma 6.1] (when Reμ>1):

    e+xμnS(¯Rn+)=Ξμ+e+S(¯Rn+). (5.5)

    Let P satisfy Assumption 3.1, and consider ˆQ±=Op(ˆq±), defined from the symbols q±(ξ) introduced in Proposition 4.3. Since ˆq± are bounded symbols with bounded inverses, and extend holomorphically in ξn into C resp. C+,

    ˆQ+:˙Hs(¯Rn+)˙Hs(¯Rn+)andˆQ+=r+ˆQe+:¯Hs(Rn+)¯Hs(Rn+),forallsR; (5.6)

    the latter follows since r+ˆQe+ is the adjoint of Op(¯ˆq) over Rn+, where Op(¯ˆq) defines homeomorphisms in ˙Hs(¯Rn+) (since ¯ˆq has similar properties as ˆq+). The inverses (ˆQ±)1=Op((ˆq±)1) have similar homeomorphism properties. Since ¯Hs(Rn+)=˙Hs(¯Rn+) for |s|<12, it follows that we also have for |s|<12:

    ˆQ++=r+ˆQ+e+:¯Hs(Rn+)¯Hs(Rn+),ˆQ+ˆQ++:¯Hs(Rn+)¯Hs(Rn+).

    If q satisfies the full 0-transmission condition, we are in the case studied in [8], and the bijectiveness in ¯Hs(Rn+) can be lifted to all higher s by use of elements of the Boutet de Monvel calculus, as accounted for in the proof of [8,Th. 4.4]. The symbol q presently considered is only known to satisfy the principal 0-transmission condition (and possibly a few more identities). We shall here show that a lifting is possible in general up to s<32.

    Proposition 5.1. Let P satisfy Assumption 3.1, and consider ˆQ+=Op(ˆq+) derived from it in Section 4.

    For any 12<s<32, ˆQ++=r+ˆQ+e+ is continuous

    r+ˆQ+e+:¯Hs(Rn+)¯Hs(Rn+), (5.7)

    and the same holds for the operator ((ˆQ+)1)+ defined from its inverse (ˆQ+)1.

    In fact, (5.7) is a homeomorphism, and the inverse of ˆQ++ is ((ˆQ+)1)+.

    Proof. We already have the mapping property (5.7) for |s|<12, because ˆq+ is a bounded symbol, and e+¯Hs(Rn+) identifies with ˙Hs(¯Rn+) then. Now let s=32ε for a small ε>0. Here we need to show that when u¯H32ε(Rn+), then r+jˆQ+e+u¯H12ε(Rn+) for j=1,,n. For j<n, this follows simply because j can be commuted through r+, ˆQ+ and e+ so that we can use that ju¯H12ε(Rn+). For j=n, we proceed as follows:

    Since u¯H32ε(Rn+), the extension by zero e+u has a jump at xn=0, and a rule for distributions applies:

    ne+u=e+nu+(γ0u)(x)δ(xn),γ0uH1ε(Rn1). (5.8)

    (The rule is obvious when uC(¯Rn+), and extends by continuity to Sobolev spaces.) Therefore, since ˆQ+=I+ˆG+ where ˆG+=Op(ˆg+(ξ)) from Proposition 4.3,

    nˆQ+e+u=ˆQ+ne+u=ˆQ+e+nu+(I+ˆG+)(γ0uδ(xn)).

    In the restriction to Rn+, r+I(γ0uδ(xn)) drops out, so we are left with

    r+nˆQ+e+u=r+ˆQ+ne+u=r+ˆQ+e+nu+Kˆg+γ0u,Kˆg+φ=r+ˆG+(φ(x)δ(xn)).

    Here Kˆg+ is a potential operator (in the terminology of Eskin [6] and Rempel-Schulze [18], generalizing the concept of Poisson operator of Boutet de Monvel [3,4]), which acts as follows:

    Kˆg+φ=r+F1[ˆg+(ξ)ˆφ(ξ)].

    By (4.8),

    |ˆg+(ξ)|Cξ1ε/2ξε/21,

    hence

    Kˆg+φ2¯H12ε(Rn+)ˆG+(φδ)2H12ε(Rn)=cRn|ˆg(ξ)|2|ˆφ(ξ)|2ξ12εdξCRn|ˆφ(ξ)|2ξ12ε2+εξ2εdξ=CRn|ˆφ(ξ)|2ξ1εξ2εdξ=CRn1|ˆφ(ξ)|2ξ22εdξ=C"φ2H1ε(Rn1),

    since Rξ1εdξn=ξεRηn1εdηn. Inserting φ=γ0u, we thus have

    Kˆg+γ0u¯H12ε(Rn+)C1γ0uH1ε(Rn1)C2u¯H32ε(Rn+).

    Thus

    r+nˆQ+e+u¯H12εr+ˆQ+e+nu¯H12ε+Kˆg+γ0u¯H12εC3u¯H32ε.

    Altogether, this shows the desired mapping property for s=32ε, and the property for general 12s<32 follows by interpolation with the case s=0.

    The mapping property (5.7) holds for the inverse (ˆQ+)1, since its symbol (q+)1 equals 1+k1(b+)k with essentially the same structure.

    The identity ((ˆQ+)1)+ˆQ++=I=ˆQ++((ˆQ+)1)+ valid on L2(Rn+), holds a fortiori on ¯Hs(Rn+) for 0<s<32, and extends by continuity to ¯Hs(Rn+) for 12<s<0.

    When P merely satisfies Assumption 3.2, we can still show a useful forward mapping property of ˆQ, based on the decomposition in Proposition 4.2.

    Proposition 5.2. Let P satisfy Assumption 3.2, and consider ˆQ and ˆF±=Op(ˆf±) derived from it in Section 4.

    The operator ˆF+,+=r+ˆF+e+ is continuous

    r+ˆF+e+:¯Hs(Rn+)¯Hs(Rn+)forany12<s<32. (5.9)

    The operator ˆF,+=r+ˆFe+ is continuous from ¯Hs(Rn+) to ¯Hs(Rn+) for any sR.

    The operator ˆQ+=r+ˆQe+ is continuous

    r+ˆQe+:¯Hs(Rn+)¯Hs(Rn+)forany12<s<32. (5.10)

    Proof. Since ˆF+ has bounded symbol, it maps ˙Hs(¯Rn+) into Hs(Rn) for all s, so for |s|<12, (5.9) follows since ˙Hs(¯Rn+)=e+¯Hs(Rn+) then. For 12<s<32, we proceed as in the proof of Proposition 5.1, using that

    r+nˆF+e+u=r+ˆF+ne+u=r+ˆF+e+nu+Kˆf+γ0u,Kˆf+φ=r+ˆF+(φ(x)δ(xn)),

    where Kˆf+ satisfies similar estimates as Kˆg+ by Proposition 4.2.

    For r+ˆFe+, the statement follows since it is on Rn+ the adjoint of Op(¯ˆf), which preserves support in ¯Rn+ and therefore maps ˙Hs(¯Rn+) into itself for all sR. For ˆQ, the statement now follows since it equals s0+ˆF+ˆF+.

    This is as far as we get by applying Lemma 4.1 to f. To obtain the mapping property for higher s would require a control over the potential operators

    φr+Op(ξjnˆf+(ξ))(φ(x)δ(xn))

    for j1 as well. At any rate, the property shown in Proposition 5.2 will be sufficient for the integration by parts formulas we are aiming for.

    In the elliptic case, we conclude from Proposition 5.1 for the operator ˆQ:

    Corollary 5.3. Let P satisfy Assumption 3.1, and consider the operators ˆQ, ˆQ+, ˆQ with symbols ˆq, ˆq+, ˆq derived from it in Section 4. The operator ˆQ+r+ˆQe+ acts like r+ˆQe+r+ˆQ+e+=ˆQ+ˆQ++, mapping continuously and bijectively

    (5.11)

    and the inverse (continuous in the opposite direction) equals

    (5.12)

    Proof. We have for , , that

    since ; this identity is also valid on the subspaces with . Combining the homeomorphism property of shown in Proposition 5.1 with the known homeomorphism property of on -spaces (cf. (5.6)), we get (5.11). The inverse is pinned down by using that has inverse on for all , and has inverse on for in view of Proposition 5.1.

    Now turn the attention to , which is related to by

    (5.13)

    cf. (3.12)–(3.13).

    We shall describe the solutions of the homogeneous Dirichlet problem (in the strongly elliptic case)

    (5.14)

    with given in a space , and assumed a priori to lie in a space for low , e.g., with .

    First we observe for that

    (5.15)

    since, as accounted for in [8,Rem. 1.1,(1.13)], the action of is independent of how is extended into . Thus, in view of the mapping properties (5.2) of ,

    (5.16)

    Composing the equation in (5.14) with to the left, we can therefore write it as

    (5.17)

    Next, we shall also replace . Because of the right-hand factor in the expression for in (5.13), we need to introduce the -transmission spaces

    (5.18)

    defined in [8]; they are Hilbert spaces. (For , the convention is to take , but this is rarely used.) The following properties were shown in [8]:

    Theorem 5.4. [8] Let .

    The mapping is a homeomorphism of onto with inverse .

    For , .

    Assume and . Then

    (5.19)

    where is replaced by if . Moreover, the trace of is well-defined on and satisfies

    (5.20)

    Rule is shown in [8,Prop. 1.7]. Rule , shown in [8,(1.26)], holds because of the mapping property (5.2) for and the identification of with when . Rule is shown in [8,Th. 5.1,Cor. 5.3,Th. 5.4]; it deals with a higher , where has a jump at , and the coefficient appears. Let us just mention the key formula

    which indicates how is connected with the factor . Besides in [8,Sect. 5], explicit calculations are carried out e.g., in [12,Lemma 3.3] (and [9,Appendix]).

    We note in passing that in the definition (5.18), one can equivalently replace the order-reducing operator family by , or by , as defined in [8].

    Now continue the discussion of (5.17): In view of Theorem 5.4 , we can set , where , and hereby

    Then the Eq (5.17) reduces to an equivalent equation

    with given in and a priori taken in . We shall denote , so . The equation was solved in Corollary 5.3 and we find for :

    Theorem 5.5. Let satisfy Assumption . For , defines a homeomorphism (continuous bijective operator with continuous inverse)

    (5.21)

    Furthermore, if is in for some (this includes the value ) and solves with , then .

    Here since and , so the rules in Theorem 5.4 apply.

    Proof. In view of (5.15) and (5.16), and the mapping property of established in Corollary 5.3, has the forward mapping property in (5.21).

    To solve (5.14), let for a small , set and . Then (5.14) reduces to solving

    (5.22)

    with given in and a priori lying in . By Corollary 5.3, (5.22) has a unique solution , so must lie in , and the mapping (5.21) is bijective.

    Remark 5.6.This theorem differs from the strategy pursued in [6], and gives a new insight. The technique in [6,Th. 7.3] for showing solvability in a higher-order Sobolev space, say with , given in , is to supplement with a potential operator constructed from such that the solutions are of the form with , a generalized trace derived from . Our aim is to show that there is a universal description of the space of solutions of (5.14) with right-hand side in , that depends only on , and applies to any of the given type. The -transmission spaces (5.18) serve this purpose. In [8], they are shown to have this role for arbitrarily high when the full -transmission condition holds. $

    One more important property of -transmision spaces is that the spaces with -ingredients and are dense subsets of for all , (cf. [8,Prop. 4.1] and [13,Lemma 7.1]). Recall also (5.5), which makes the statement for rather evident, since is dense in for all . Hence applies nicely to these spaces.

    When merely satisfies Assumption 3.2, we have at least the forward mapping part of (5.21):

    Theorem 5.7. Let satisfy Assumption . For , maps continuously

    (5.23)

    Proof. This follows as in the preceding proof, now using the mapping property of established in Proposition 5.2.

    The following consequences can be drawn for the original operator :

    Theorem 5.8. Let satisfy Assumption . Then , where is defined by and is of order . For , maps continuously

    (5.24)

    Let satisfy Assumption . Then in the decomposition , is invertible, as described in Theorem .

    Let , let , and let (for some ) solve the homogeneous Dirichlet problem

    (5.25)

    Then .

    Proof. The original operator equals with homogeneous on of degree ; in particular it is continuous at 0. It is decomposed into

    (5.26)

    where is for by (3.10) and continuous, hence

    This implies that maps continuously into for all , and hence

    (5.27)

    . The forward mapping property (5.23) holds for by Theorem 5.7. To show that it holds for , let .

    If , then , and by (5.27), matching the mapping property of .

    If , we use the definition of to see that for small ,

    also matching the mapping property of .

    Now (5.24) follows by adding the statements for and . This shows .

    . The first statement registers what we already know about . Proof of the regularity statement: With and as defined there, denote ; here . Then

    If , , and we conclude from Theorem 5.5 that .

    If , ; here Theorem 5.5 applies to give the intermediate information that . From this follows that

    for any . Then . Choosing so small that , we have that ; hence , so it follows from Theorem 5.5 that . This ends the proof of .

    Example 5.9. Theorem 5.8 applies to the operator described in (3.5)ff., showing that it maps to for , and that solutions of the homogeneous Dirichlet problem with are in for these . The appearance of the factor (cf. (5.19)) is consistent with the regularity shown in terms of Hölder spaces in [5].

    In particular, the result provides a valid basis for applying to or , mapping these spaces into . $

    Remark 5.10. The domain spaces entering in Theorem 5.8 can be precisely described: For , we already know from Theorem 5.4 that . For , we have by [12,Lemma 3.3] that if and only if

    here is the Poisson operator solving the Dirichlet problem for ,

    with . For , we have the information . As a concrete example, the elements of are the functions , where and for some ; this equals . $

    It will now be shown that the operators satisfying merely the principal -transmission condition (Assumption 3.2) have an integration by parts formula over , involving traces . The study will cover the special operator in Example 5.9 (regardless of whether a full -transmission condition might hold, as assumed in [13]). It also covers more general strongly elliptic operators, and it covers operators that are not necessarily elliptic.

    The basic observation is:

    Proposition 6.1. Let . Let , and let . Denote ; correspondingly in view of Theorem 5.4 . Then

    (6.1)

    The left-hand side is interpreted as in below when .

    The formula extends to and with (for small ), using the representation .

    Proof. This was proved in [10,Th. 3.1] for (see also Remark 3.2 there with the elementary case ), and in [13,Th. 4.1] for real , so the main task is to check that the larger range of complex is allowed. We write as for short.

    Note that when , is different from , e.g., since has absolute value 1 and is for , but oscillates when .

    By the mapping properties of (cf. (5.2)), , hence is integrable. When , the function is and compactly supported, so the left-hand side of (6.1) makes sense as an integral of an -function. When is general, we observe that for any small ,

    so the integral makes sense as the duality

    (6.2)

    Since the adjoint of equals , is by transposition turned into

    Note that satisfies an equation like (5.8), which fits in here since the space contains distributions of the form . The expression is analysed as in [10,Th. 3.1] (and [13,Th. 4.1]), leading to

    (6.3)

    which shows (6.1).

    For the whole analysis, it suffices that with , since then. For , it then suffices that with (assuming ), since

    then, so that the duality in (6.2) is well-defined.

    We shall now show:

    Theorem 6.2. Let satisfy Assumption ; it is of order and satisfies the principal -transmission condition in the direction for some , and we denote . Assume moreover that , . Consider , as defined by . For , , there holds

    (6.4)

    where . The formula extends to , , for , .

    The integrals over are interpreted as dualities (as in Proposition ) when or , and when extended to general .

    Proof. Since integration over in itself indicates that the functions behind the integration sign are restricted to , we can leave out the explicit mention of . Recall that

    cf. (3.13). The adjoint is . Recall from Proposition 4.2 that

    where extend holomorphically in into resp. , estimated as in (4.8).

    Accordingly, splits up in three terms

    (6.5)

    Consider the contribution from :

    Recall that by (3.16); this constant is left out of the next calculations.

    When , then . Similarly as in (5.15), , which equals , hence lies in by (5.2). An application of Proposition 6.1 with replaced by gives:

    where .

    We can apply the analogous argument to show that the conjugate of satisfies

    here and are the same as the functions defined in the treatment of the first integral.

    It follows by addition that

    in the last step we used that . Insertion of (cf. (5.20)), and similarly , gives (6.4) with replaced by (using also that ).

    As for extension of the formula to larger spaces, we note that by Proposition 6.1, the calculations for the first integral allow , corresponding to with , and with . With the analogous conditions for the calculations of the second integral, we find altogether that , , is allowed.

    The contributions from and will be treated by variants of this proof, where we show that their boundary integrals give zero.

    Consider . As in (5.15), we have:

    where . Set

    (6.6)

    Here when , , and when , . For we have since (by Theorem 5.4 ), that

    when , by the mapping property for established in Proposition 5.2.

    We can then apply Proposition 6.1 to the first integral for , with replaced by , giving when :

    (6.7)

    There is a general formula for the trace, entering in Vishik and Eskin's calculus as well as that of Boutet de Monvel,

    where the integral over is read either as an ordinary integral or, if necessary, as the integral defined e.g., in [7,(10.85)] (also recalled in [11,(A.1),(A.15)]). Applying this to , we find:

    (6.8)

    This integral gives 0 for the following reason: It suffices to take in the dense subspace of of compactly supported functions in . Both and are holomorphic in as functions of , being and being on , whereby the integrand is there (and is in on ); then the integral over can be transformed to a closed contour in and gives 0.

    We can then conclude:

    (6.9)

    The other contribution from is, in conjugated form,

    where we used Proposition 6.1 in a similar way, and at the end used that , cf. (6.8)ff. Finally, taking the contributions from together, we get

    using again that .

    It is found in a similar way, using that is of plus-type, that contributes with zero.

    To extend the formula to the original operator , we shall show that (cf. Theorem 5.8 ) gives a zero boundary contribution.

    Lemma 6.3. Let and let , where is . Then

    (6.10)

    for any .

    Proof. Since , ; moreover , so we can write the first integral as

    Approximate in by a sequence of functions , ; then

    With a similar argument for the second integral, we have

    since , and it is well-known that the operator of order satisfies for .

    We can then conclude:

    Theorem 6.4. Let , , be as in Theorem . For , , there holds

    (6.11)

    where . The formula extends to , , for , , with .

    The integrals over are interpreted as dualities (as in Proposition and Lemma ) when or , and when extended to general .

    Proof. Recall that , where , (cf. Theorem 5.8 ). We have the identities (6.10) with and (6.4) for , with , , . Adding the identities for and we obtain (6.11). It holds a fortiori for , .

    Example 6.5. The theorem applies in particular to studied in (3.5)–(3.6) and Example 5.9, showing that

    (6.12)

    The value is found in (3.17).

    This result was proved in [5,Prop. 1.4] by completely different, real methods, for .

    The result is one of the key ingredients in the proof of integration by parts formulas for operators on bounded domains in [5], where varies as the normal varies along the boundary. It would be interesting to extend this knowledge to general strongly elliptic operators on bounded domains by similar applications of Theorem 6.4.

    Example 6.6. Here is an example of an application to a nonelliptic operator satisfying Assumption 3.2. Let

    on , for some . For we have the normal , where

    i.e., , . Then by Theorem 6.4,

    for functions , .

    The halfspace has the normal and

    i.e., , . Here by Theorem 6.4,

    for functions with a factor . $

    Let satisfy Assumption 3.1, and assume . Along with the homogeneous Dirichlet problem (5.25), one can consider a nonhomogeneous local Dirichlet problem if the scope is expanded to allow so-called "large solutions", behaving like near the boundary of ; such solutions blow up at the boundary when . Namely, one can pose the nonhomogeneous Dirichlet problem

    (7.1)

    Problem (7.1) was studied earlier for operators satisfying the -transmission property in [8,9] (including the fractional Laplacian ), and a halfways Green's formula was shown in [11,Cor. 4.5]. The problem (7.1) for the fractional Laplacian, and the halfways Green's formula——with applications to solution formulas——were also studied in Abatangelo [1] (independently of [8]); the boundary condition there is given in a less explicit way except when is a ball. There have been further studies of such problems, see e.g., Abatangelo, Gomez-Castro and Vazquez [2] and its references.

    Note that the boundary condition in (7.1) is local. There is a different problem which is also regarded as a nonhomogeneous Dirichlet problem, namely to prescribe nonzero values of in the exterior of ; it has somewhat different solution spaces (a link between this and the homogeneous Dirichlet problem is described in [9]).

    For the general operators considered here, we shall now show that problem (7.1) has a good sense for with suitable .

    More precisely, since also satisfies the principal -transmission condition (as remarked after Definition 2.1), Theorem 5.8 can be applied with replaced by , implying that maps

    (7.2)

    This is also valid in the case where is only assumed to satisfy Assumption 3.2.

    From Theorem 5.4 we have (note that )

    (7.3)

    When , the weighted boundary value is well-defined, cf. (5.20):

    (7.4)

    The following regularity result holds for the nonhomogeneous Dirichlet problem:

    Theorem 7.1. Let satisfy Assumption with , and let . When and are given, and solves the nonhomogeneous Dirichlet problem with for some , then in fact .

    Proof. It is known from [8,Th. 6.1] that is a closed subspace of , equal to the set of for which . From the given we define

    where is the standard Poisson operator , . Then in view of (7.4),

    so that solves (7.1) with replaced by , replaced by 0. This is a homogeneous Dirichlet problem as in (5.25). Since with , it is in . It then follows from Theorem 5.8 that , and hence .

    For the hatted version there is even an existence and uniqueness result in these spaces.

    Theorem 7.2. Let satisfy Assumption with , and let . Then together with defines a homeomorphism:

    (7.5)

    Proof. The forward mapping properties are accounted for above. The existence of a unique solution of

    (7.6)

    for given , , is shown as in Theorem 7.1, now referring to Theorem 5.5 instead of Theorem 5.8.

    These theorems show that is the correct domain space for the nonhomogeneous Dirichlet problem, at least in the small range . Recall that and are dense subsets of for all .

    We now show a "halfways Green's formula", where one factor is in the domain of the nonhomogeneous Dirichlet problem for and the other factor is in the domain of the homogeneous Dirichlet problem for :

    Theorem 7.3. Let satisfy Assumption , and assume moreover that , .

    For and , there holds

    (7.7)

    where . The formula extends to with , with .

    The left-hand side is interpreted as follows, for small :

    (7.8)

    Proof. We shall show how the result can be derived from Theorem 6.4. Let and . As shown in [8,p. 494], there exist functions and in such that .

    In terms of the Hilbert spaces: When with , let , then (denoting )

    (7.9)

    Here since . Moreover, when for a small , then

    (7.10)

    where both terms are in ; we here use Theorem 5.8 .

    For , we note that when with , then

    Then the dualities in (7.8) are well-defined and serve as an interpretation of the left-hand side in (7.7).

    The formula (7.7) will first be proved for and , and afterwards be extended by continuity to general . We use the decomposition (7.9), that leads to elements of for . When is supported in a ball , we can cut and down to have support in .

    Consider the contribution from . Here there holds

    (7.11)

    when and are in , since is of order . This gives the contribution 0 to (7.7) since is allowed in the definition of (recall that by hypothesis), and holds for the values of allowed in the definition of (where ). Thus contributes to the boundary integral with 0.

    For the contribution from , we note that, writing for , ,

    so the weighted boundary value for satisfies (since )

    (7.12)

    Moreover, by a simple integration by parts,

    since because of . Thus, by use of Theorem 6.4 and (7.12),

    Since , , so can be added to in the last integral. Adding also (7.11) to the left-hand side, we find (7.7).

    Since the expressions depend continuously on in the presented norms, the formula extends to the indicated spaces.

    Example 7.4. Theorems 7.1 and 7.2 apply in particular to the operator considered in (3.5)–(3.6) and Examples 5.9 and 6.5, when (this holds automatically if , since ). Theorem 7.3 applies to when and (again automatically satisfied when ). $

    Remark 7.5. The transmission spaces can also be defined in terms of other scales of function spaces. The case of Bessel-potential spaces , , is a main subject in our preceding papers. There is also the Hölder-Zygmund scale , coinciding with the Hölder scale when , with spaces over defined as in (5.1). Here since , also for . (More details on such spaces in our earlier papers, e.g., in [12].) So the results dealing with forward mapping properties of have useful consequences involving these spaces as well. Namely, Theorem 5.8 implies that maps

    and the integration by parts formulas in Sections 6 and 7 hold for functions in -type spaces, for the same .

    In the opposite direction, an inclusion of an -space in a Hölder spaces loses in the regularity parameter, hence does not give very good results. For better regularity results, it would be interesting to extend the above theory to -spaces with general , possibly under further hypotheses; this remains to be done. More smoothness than is needed for a symbol to be a Fourier multiplier in (some well-known conditions are recalled in [15,Sect. 1.3]). There is an extension of Vishik and Eskin's work to -based spaces by Shargorodsky [21], which should be useful. It is there pointed out that [6,Lemma 17.1] shows how smoothness properties carry over to the factors in the Wiener-Hopf factorization. $

    The author declares no conflict of interest.



    Funding



    This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

    Conflict of interest



    All authors declare no conflicts of interest in this review article.

    [1] Saikkonen K, Faeth SH, Helander M, et al. (1998) Fungal endophytes: a continuum of interactions with host plants. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 29: 319-343. doi: 10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.29.1.319
    [2] Patwardhan B, Warude D, Pushpangadan P, et al. (2005) Ayurveda and traditional Chinese medicine: A comparative overview. Evidence-based Complement Altern Med 2: 465-473. doi: 10.1093/ecam/neh140
    [3] Sigerist HE (1987)  A history of medicine: Early Greek, Hindu, and Persian medicine New York: Oxford University Press.
    [4] Sofowora A (1996) Research on medicinal plants and traditional medicine in Africa. J Altern Complement Med 2: 365-372. doi: 10.1089/acm.1996.2.365
    [5] Verma S, Singh S (2008) Current and future status of herbal medicines. Vet World 2: 347. doi: 10.5455/vetworld.2008.347-350
    [6] Yuan H, Ma Q, Ye L, et al. (2016) The traditional medicine and modern medicine from natural products. Molecules 21: 559. doi: 10.3390/molecules21050559
    [7] Mendelsohn R, Balick MJ (1995) The value of undiscovered pharmaceuticals in tropical forests. Econ Bot 49: 223-228. doi: 10.1007/BF02862929
    [8] Hamilton AC (2004) Medicinal plants, conservation and livelihoods. Biodivers Conserv 13: 1477-1517. doi: 10.1023/B:BIOC.0000021333.23413.42
    [9] WHO (2002)  WHO Traditional Medicine Strategy Geneva: World Health Organization.
    [10] Ten Kate K, Laird SA (2002)  The commercial use of biodiversity: access to genetic resources and benefit-sharing London: Earthscan.
    [11] Yarnell E, Abascal K (2002) Dilemmas of traditional botanical research. HerbalGram 55: 46-54.
    [12] Abebe W (2002) Herbal medication: potential for adverse interactions with analgesic drugs. J Clin Pharm Ther 27: 391-401. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2710.2002.00444.x
    [13] Allkin B (2017)  Useful plants–Medicines: At least 28,187 plant species are currently recorded as being of medicinal use London (UK): Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew.
    [14] Wani ZA, Ashraf N, Mohiuddin T, et al. (2015) Plant-endophyte symbiosis, an ecological perspective. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 99: 2955-2965. doi: 10.1007/s00253-015-6487-3
    [15] Mostert L, Crous PW, Petrini O (2000) Endophytic fungi associated with shoots and leaves of Vitis vinifera, with specific reference to the Phomopsis viticola complex. Sydowia 52: 46-58.
    [16] Rodriguez RJ, White JF, Arnold AE, et al. (2009) Fungal endophytes: diversity and functional roles. New Phytol 182: 314-330. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-8137.2009.02773.x
    [17] Rajamanikyam M, Vadlapudi V, Amanchy R, et al. (2017) Endophytic fungi as novel resources of natural therapeutics. Brazilian Arch Biol Technol 60: 451-454. doi: 10.1590/1678-4324-2017160542
    [18] Le Cocq K, Gurr SJ, Hirsch PR, et al. (2017) Exploitation of endophytes for sustainable agricultural intensification. Mol Plant Pathol 18: 469-473. doi: 10.1111/mpp.12483
    [19] Sudheep NM, Marwal A, Lakra N, et al. (2017)  Plant-microbe interactions in agro-ecological perspectives Singapore: Springer Singapore.
    [20] Bacon CW, White JF (2000) Physiological adaptations in the evolution of endophytism in the Clavicipitaceae. Microb endophytes 251-276. doi: 10.1201/9781482277302-13
    [21] Wang H, Hyde KD, Soytong K, et al. (2008) Fungal diversity on fallen leaves of Ficus in northern Thailand. J Zhejiang Univ Sci B 9: 835-841. doi: 10.1631/jzus.B0860005
    [22] Bacon CW, Porter JK, Robbins JD (1975) Toxicity and occurrence of Balansia on grasses from toxic fescue pastures. Appl Microbiol 29: 553-556. doi: 10.1128/am.29.4.553-556.1975
    [23] Nair DN, Padmavathy S (2014) Impact of endophytic microorganisms on plants, environment and humans. Sci World J 2014: 1-11. doi: 10.1155/2014/250693
    [24] Arnold A, Maynard Z, Gilbert G, et al. (2000) Are tropical fungal endophytes hyperdiverse? Ecol Lett 3: 267-274. doi: 10.1046/j.1461-0248.2000.00159.x
    [25] Potshangbam M, Devi SI, Sahoo D, et al. (2017) Functional characterization of endophytic fungal community associated with Oryza sativa L. and Zea mays L. Front Microbiol 8: 1-15. doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2017.00325
    [26] Lu Y, Chen C, Chen H, et al. (2012) Isolation and identification of endophytic fungi from Actinidia macrosperma and investigation of their bioactivities. Evidence-Based Complement Altern Med 2012: 1-8.
    [27] Sun X, Guo L (2015) Endophytic fungal diversity: review of traditional and molecular techniques. Mycology 3: 1203.
    [28] Suhandono S, Kusumawardhani MK, Aditiawati P (2016) Isolation and molecular identification of endophytic bacteria from Rambutan fruits (Nephelium lappaceum L.) cultivar Binjai. HAYATI J Biosci 23: 39-44. doi: 10.1016/j.hjb.2016.01.005
    [29] Hiroyuki K, Satoshi T, Shun-ichi T, et al. (1989) New fungitoxic Sesquiterpenoids, Chokols A-G, from stromata of Epichloe typhina and the absolute configuration of Chokol E. Agric Biol Chem 53: 789-796. doi: 10.1080/00021369.1989.10869341
    [30] Sahai AS, Manocha MS (1993) Chitinases of fungi and plants: their involvement in morphogenesis and host-parasite interaction. FEMS Microbiol Rev 11: 317-338. doi: 10.1111/j.1574-6976.1993.tb00004.x
    [31] Pleban S, Chernin L, Chet I (1997) Chitinolytic activity of an endophytic strain of Bacillus cereusLett Appl Microbiol 25: 284-288. doi: 10.1046/j.1472-765X.1997.00224.x
    [32] Pennell C, Rolston M, De Bonth A, et al. (2010) Development of a bird-deterrent fungal endophyte in turf tall fescue. New Zeal J Agric Res 53: 145-150. doi: 10.1080/00288231003777681
    [33] Rajulu MBG, Thirunavukkarasu N, Suryanarayanan TS, et al. (2011) Chitinolytic enzymes from endophytic fungi. Fungal Divers 47: 43-53. doi: 10.1007/s13225-010-0071-z
    [34] Zheng YK, Miao CP, Chen HH, et al. (2017) Endophytic fungi harbored in Panax notoginseng: Diversity and potential as biological control agents against host plant pathogens of root-rot disease. J Ginseng Res 41: 353-360. doi: 10.1016/j.jgr.2016.07.005
    [35] Cairney JWG, Burke RM (1998) Extracellular enzyme activities of the ericoid mycorrhizal endophyte Hymenoscyphus ericae (Read) Korf & Kernan: their likely roles in decomposition of dead plant tissue in soil. Plant Soil 205: 181-192. doi: 10.1023/A:1004376731209
    [36] Lu H, Zou WX, Meng JC, et al. (2000) New bioactive metabolites produced by Colletotrichum sp., an endophytic fungus in Artemisia annuaPlant Sci 151: 67-73. doi: 10.1016/S0168-9452(99)00199-5
    [37] Ahmad N, Hamayun M, Khan SA, et al. (2010) Gibberellin-producing endophytic fungi isolated from Monochoria vaginalisJ Microbiol Biotechnol 20: 1744-1749.
    [38] Forchetti G, Masciarelli O, Alemano S, et al. (2007) Endophytic bacteria in sunflower (Helianthus annuus L.): isolation, characterization, and production of jasmonates and abscisic acid in culture medium. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 76: 1145-1152. doi: 10.1007/s00253-007-1077-7
    [39] Shahabivand S, Maivan HZ, Goltapeh EM, et al. (2012) The effects of root endophyte and arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi on growth and cadmium accumulation in wheat under cadmium toxicity. Plant Physiol Biochem 60: 53-58. doi: 10.1016/j.plaphy.2012.07.018
    [40] Yanni YG, Dazzo FB (2010) Enhancement of rice production using endophytic strains of Rhizobium leguminosarum bv. trifolii in extensive field inoculation trials within the Egypt Nile delta. Plant Soil 336: 129-142. doi: 10.1007/s11104-010-0454-7
    [41] Zhang Y, Kang X, Liu H, et al. (2018) Endophytes isolated from ginger rhizome exhibit growth promoting potential for Zea mays. Arch Agron Soil Sci 64: 1302-1314. doi: 10.1080/03650340.2018.1430892
    [42] Waqas M, Khan AL, Kang S-M, et al. (2014) Phytohormone-producing fungal endophytes and hardwood-derived biochar interact to ameliorate heavy metal stress in soybeans. Biol Fertil Soils 50: 1155-1167. doi: 10.1007/s00374-014-0937-4
    [43] Yamaji K, Watanabe Y, Masuya H, et al. (2016) Root fungal endophytes enhance heavy-metal stress tolerance of Clethra barbinervis growing naturally at mining sites via growth enhancement, promotion of nutrient uptake and decrease of heavy-metal concentration. PLoS One 11: 1-15.
    [44] Maggini V, Mengoni A, Gallo ER, et al. (2019) Tissue specificity and differential effects on in vitro plant growth of single bacterial endophytes isolated from the roots, leaves and rhizospheric soil of Echinacea purpureaBMC Plant Biol 19: 284. doi: 10.1186/s12870-019-1890-z
    [45] Abdelshafy Mohamad OA, Ma J-B, Liu Y-H, et al. (2020) Beneficial endophytic bacterial populations associated with medicinal plant Thymus vulgaris alleviate salt stress and confer resistance to Fusarium oxysporumFront Plant Sci 11: 1-17. doi: 10.3389/fpls.2020.00047
    [46] Castronovo LM, Calonico C, Ascrizzi R, et al. (2020) The cultivable bacterial microbiota associated to the medicinal plant Origanum vulgare L.: from antibiotic resistance to growth-inhibitory properties. Front Microbiol 11: 1-17. doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2020.00862
    [47] Pereira SIA, Monteiro C, Vega AL, et al. (2016) Endophytic culturable bacteria colonizing Lavandula dentata L. plants: Isolation, characterization and evaluation of their plant growth-promoting activities. Ecol Eng 87: 91-97. doi: 10.1016/j.ecoleng.2015.11.033
    [48] Snook ME, Mitchell T, Hinton DM, et al. (2009) Isolation and characterization of Leu 7-surfactin from the endophytic Bbacterium Bacillus mojavensis RRC 101, a biocontrol agent for Fusarium verticillioidesJ Agric Food Chem 57: 4287-4292. doi: 10.1021/jf900164h
    [49] Nyambura Ngamau C (2012) Isolation and identification of endophytic bacteria of bananas (Musa spp.) in Kenya and their potential as biofertilizers for sustainable banana production. African J Microbiol Res 6: 6414-6422. doi: 10.5897/AJMR12.1170
    [50] Rungin S, Indananda C, Suttiviriya P, et al. (2012) Plant growth enhancing effects by a siderophore-producing endophytic streptomycete isolated from a Thai jasmine rice plant (Oryza sativa L. cv. KDML105). Antonie Van Leeuwenhoek 102: 463-472. doi: 10.1007/s10482-012-9778-z
    [51] Naveed M, Mitter B, Yousaf S, et al. (2013) The endophyte Enterobacter sp. FD17: A maize growth enhancer selected based on rigorous testing of plant beneficial traits and colonization characteristics. Biol Fertil Soils 50: 249-262. doi: 10.1007/s00374-013-0854-y
    [52] Hiroyuki K, Satoshi T, Shun-ichi T, et al. (1989) New fungitoxic sesquiterpenoids, chokols A-G, from stromata of Epichloe typhina and the absolute configuration of chokol E. Agric Biol Chem 53: 789-796. doi: 10.1080/00021369.1989.10869341
    [53] Findlay JA, Li G, Johnson JA (1997) Bioactive compounds from an endophytic fungus from eastern larch (Larix laricina) needles. Can J Chem 75: 716-719. doi: 10.1139/v97-086
    [54] Wakelin SA, Warren RA, Harvey PR, et al. (2004) Phosphate solubilization by Penicillium spp. closely associated with wheat roots. Biol Fertil Soils 40: 36-43. doi: 10.1007/s00374-004-0750-6
    [55] Schwarz M, Köpcke B, Weber RWS, et al. (2004) 3-Hydroxypropionic acid as a nematicidal principle in endophytic fungi. Phytochemistry 65: 2239-2245. doi: 10.1016/j.phytochem.2004.06.035
    [56] Strobel G (2006) Harnessing endophytes for industrial microbiology. Curr Opin Microbiol 9: 240-244. doi: 10.1016/j.mib.2006.04.001
    [57] Kuldau G, Bacon C (2008) Clavicipitaceous endophytes: Their ability to enhance resistance of grasses to multiple stresses. Biol Control 46: 57-71. doi: 10.1016/j.biocontrol.2008.01.023
    [58] Kajula M, Tejesvi MV, Kolehmainen S, et al. (2010) The siderophore ferricrocin produced by specific foliar endophytic fungi in vitro. Fungal Biol 114: 248-254. doi: 10.1016/j.funbio.2010.01.004
    [59] Tomsheck AR, Strobel GA, Booth E, et al. (2010) Hypoxylon sp., an endophyte of Persea indica, producing 1,8-Cineole and other bioactive volatiles with fuel potential. Microb Ecol 60: 903-914. doi: 10.1007/s00248-010-9759-6
    [60] Nath R, Sharma GD, Barooah M (2012) Efficiency of tricalcium phosphate solubilization by two different endophytic Penicillium sp. isolated from tea (Camellia sinensis L.). Eur J Exp Biol 2: 1354-1358.
    [61] Waqas M, Khan AL, Kamran M, et al. (2012) Endophytic fungi produce gibberellins and indoleacetic acid and promotes host-plant growth during stress. Molecules 17: 10754-10773. doi: 10.3390/molecules170910754
    [62] Kedar A, Rathod D, Yadav A, et al. (2014) Endophytic Phoma sp. isolated from medicinal plants promote the growth of Zea mays. Nusant Biosci 6: 132-139.
    [63] Shentu X, Zhan X, Ma Z, et al. (2014) Antifungal activity of metabolites of the endophytic fungus Trichoderma brevicompactum from garlic. Brazilian J Microbiol 45: 248-254. doi: 10.1590/S1517-83822014005000036
    [64] Abraham S, Basukriadi A, Pawiroharsono S, et al. (2015) Insecticidal activity of ethyl acetate extracts from culture filtrates of mangrove fungal endophytes. Mycobiology 43: 137-149. doi: 10.5941/MYCO.2015.43.2.137
    [65] Xin G, Glawe D, Doty SL (2009) Characterization of three endophytic, indole-3-acetic acid-producing yeasts occurring in Populus trees. Mycol Res 113: 973-980. doi: 10.1016/j.mycres.2009.06.001
    [66] Pye CR, Bertin MJ, Lokey RS, et al. (2017) Retrospective analysis of natural products provides insights for future discovery trends. Proc Natl Acad Sci 114: 5601-5606. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1614680114
    [67] Sen S, Chakraborty R (2017) Revival, modernization and integration of Indian traditional herbal medicine in clinical practice: Importance, challenges and future. J Tradit Complement Med 7: 234-244. doi: 10.1016/j.jtcme.2016.05.006
    [68] Romano G, Costantini M, Sansone C, et al. (2017) Marine microorganisms as a promising and sustainable source of bioactive molecules. Mar Environ Res 128: 58-69. doi: 10.1016/j.marenvres.2016.05.002
    [69] Matsumoto A, Takahashi Y (2017) Endophytic actinomycetes: promising source of novel bioactive compounds. J Antibiot (Tokyo) 70: 514-519. doi: 10.1038/ja.2017.20
    [70] Staniek A, Woerdenbag HJ, Kayser O (2008) Endophytes: Exploiting biodiversity for the improvement of natural product-based drug discovery. J Plant Interact 3: 75-93. doi: 10.1080/17429140801886293
    [71] Jin Z, Gao L, Zhang L, et al. (2017) Antimicrobial activity of saponins produced by two novel endophytic fungi from Panax notoginsengNat Prod Res 31: 2700-2703. doi: 10.1080/14786419.2017.1292265
    [72] Horn WS, Simmonds MSJ, Schwartz RE, et al. (1995) Phomopsichalasin, a novel antimicrobial agent from an endophytic Phomopsis sp. Tetrahedron 51: 3969-3978. doi: 10.1016/0040-4020(95)00139-Y
    [73] Liu JY, Song YC, Zhang Z, et al. (2004) Aspergillus fumigatus CY018, an endophytic fungus in Cynodon dactylon as a versatile producer of new and bioactive metabolites. J Biotechnol 114: 279-287. doi: 10.1016/j.jbiotec.2004.07.008
    [74] Kongsaeree P, Prabpai S, Sriubolmas N, et al. (2003) Antimalarial dihydroisocoumarins produced by Geotrichum sp., an endophytic fungus of Crassocephalum crepidioidesJ Nat Prod 66: 709-711. doi: 10.1021/np0205598
    [75] Wang FW, Jiao RH, Cheng AB, et al. (2007) Antimicrobial potentials of endophytic fungi residing in Quercus variabilis and brefeldin A obtained from Cladosporium sp. World J Microbiol Biotechnol 23: 79-83. doi: 10.1007/s11274-006-9195-4
    [76] Eze P, Ojimba N, Abonyi D, et al. (2018) Antimicrobial activity of metabolites of an endophytic fungus isolated from the leaves of Citrus jambhiri (Rutaceae). Trop J Nat Prod Res 2: 145-149. doi: 10.26538/tjnpr/v2i3.9
    [77] Hoffman AM, Mayer SG, Strobel GA, et al. (2008) Purification, identification and activity of phomodione, a furandione from an endophytic Phoma species. Phytochemistry 69: 1049-1056. doi: 10.1016/j.phytochem.2007.10.031
    [78] Stierle A, Strobel G, Stierle D (1993) Taxol and taxane production by Taxomyces andreanae, an endophytic fungus of Pacific yew. Science (80-) 260: 214-216. doi: 10.1126/science.8097061
    [79] Chakravarthi BVSK, Das P, Surendranath K, et al. (2008) Production of paclitaxel by Fusarium solani isolated from Taxus celebicaJ Biosci 33: 259-267. doi: 10.1007/s12038-008-0043-6
    [80] Kusari S, Lamshöft M, Spiteller M (2009) Aspergillus fumigatus Fresenius, an endophytic fungus from Juniperus communis L. Horstmann as a novel source of the anticancer pro-drug deoxypodophyllotoxin. J Appl Microbiol 107: 1019-1030. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2672.2009.04285.x
    [81] Kusari S, Lamshöft M, Zühlke S, et al. (2008) An endophytic fungus from Hypericum perforatum that produces hypericin. J Nat Prod 71: 159-162. doi: 10.1021/np070669k
    [82] Parthasarathy R, Sathiyabama M (2015) Lovastatin-producing endophytic fungus isolated from a medicinal plant Solanum xanthocarpumNat Prod Res 29: 2282-2286. doi: 10.1080/14786419.2015.1016938
    [83] Ding L, Münch J, Goerls H, et al. (2010) Xiamycin, a pentacyclic indolosesquiterpene with selective anti-HIV activity from a bacterial mangrove endophyte. Bioorganic Med Chem Lett 20: 6685-6687. doi: 10.1016/j.bmcl.2010.09.010
    [84] Bhore S, Preveena J, Kandasamy K (2013) Isolation and identification of bacterial endophytes from pharmaceutical agarwood-producing Aquilaria species. Pharmacognosy Res 5: 134. doi: 10.4103/0974-8490.110545
    [85] Strobel GA, Miller RV, Martinez-Miller C, et al. (1999) Cryptocandin, a potent antimycotic from the endophytic fungus Cryptosporiopsis cf. quercinaMicrobiology 145: 1919-1926. doi: 10.1099/13500872-145-8-1919
    [86] Aly AH, Edrada-Ebel RA, Wray V, et al. (2008) Bioactive metabolites from the endophytic fungus Ampelomyces sp. isolated from the medicinal plant Urospermum picroidesPhytochemistry 69: 1716-1725. doi: 10.1016/j.phytochem.2008.02.013
    [87] Huang Z, Cai X, Shao C, et al. (2008) Chemistry and weak antimicrobial activities of phomopsins produced by mangrove endophytic fungus Phomopsis sp. ZSU-H76. Phytochemistry 69: 1604-1608. doi: 10.1016/j.phytochem.2008.02.002
    [88] Gogoi DK, Deka Boruah HP, Saikia R, et al. (2008) Optimization of process parameters for improved production of bioactive metabolite by a novel endophytic fungus Fusarium sp. DF2 isolated from Taxus wallichiana of North East India. World J Microbiol Biotechnol 24: 79-87. doi: 10.1007/s11274-007-9442-3
    [89] Adelin E, Servy C, Cortial S, et al. (2011) Isolation, structure elucidation and biological activity of metabolites from Sch-642305-producing endophytic fungus Phomopsis sp. CMU-LMA. Phytochemistry 72: 2406-2412. doi: 10.1016/j.phytochem.2011.08.010
    [90] Nithya K, Muthumary J (2011) Bioactive metabolite produced by Phomopsis sp., an endophytic fungus in Allamanda cathartica LinnRecent Res Sci Technol .
    [91] Tayung K, Barik BP, Jha DK, et al. (2011) Identification and characterization of antimicrobial metabolite from an endophytic fungus, Fusarium solani isolated from bark of Himalayan yewMycosphere 2: 203-213.
    [92] Zhang G, Sun S, Zhu T, et al. (2011) Antiviral isoindolone derivatives from an endophytic fungus Emericella sp. associated with Aegiceras corniculatumPhytochemistry 72: 1436-1442. doi: 10.1016/j.phytochem.2011.04.014
    [93] Ai W, Wei X, Lin X, et al. (2014) Guignardins A-F, spirodioxynaphthalenes from the endophytic fungus Guignardia sp. KcF8 as a new class of PTP1B and SIRT1 inhibitors. Tetrahedron 70: 5806-5814. doi: 10.1016/j.tet.2014.06.041
    [94] Cui L, Wu S, Zhao C, et al. (2016) Microbial conversion of major ginsenosides in ginseng total saponins by Platycodon grandiflorum endophytes. J Ginseng Res 40: 366-374. doi: 10.1016/j.jgr.2015.11.004
    [95] Sakiyama CCH, Paula EM, Pereira PC, et al. (2001) Characterization of pectin lyase produced by an endophytic strain isolated from coffee cherries. Lett Appl Microbiol 33: 117-121. doi: 10.1046/j.1472-765x.2001.00961.x
    [96] Stamford TL, Stamford N., Coelho LCB, et al. (2001) Production and characterization of a thermostable α-amylase from Nocardiopsis sp. endophyte of yam bean. Bioresour Technol 76: 137-141. doi: 10.1016/S0960-8524(00)00089-4
    [97] Stamford TLM, Stamford NP, Coelho LCBB, et al. (2002) Production and characterization of a thermostable glucoamylase from Streptosporangium sp. endophyte of maize leaves. Bioresour Technol 83: 105-109. doi: 10.1016/S0960-8524(01)00206-1
    [98] Dorra G, Ines K, Imen BS, et al. (2018) Purification and characterization of a novel high molecular weight alkaline protease produced by an endophytic Bacillus halotolerans strain CT2. Int J Biol Macromol 111: 342-351. doi: 10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2018.01.024
    [99] Choi YW, Hodgkiss IJ, Hyde KD (2005) Enzyme production by endophytes of Brucea javanicaJ Agric Technol 55-66.
    [100] Peng XW, Chen HZ (2007) Microbial oil accumulation and cellulase secretion of the endophytic fungi from oleaginous plants. Ann Microbiol 57: 239-242. doi: 10.1007/BF03175213
    [101] Strobel GA, Knighton B, Kluck K, et al. (2008) The production of myco-diesel hydrocarbons and their derivatives by the endophytic fungus Gliocladiurn roseum (NRRL 50072). Microbiology 154: 3319-3328. doi: 10.1099/mic.0.2008/022186-0
    [102] Russell JR, Huang J, Anand P, et al. (2011) Biodegradation of polyester polyurethane by endophytic fungi. Appl Environ Microbiol 77: 6076-6084. doi: 10.1128/AEM.00521-11
    [103] Defranceschi Oliveira AC, Farion Watanabe FM, Coelho Vargas JV, et al. (2012) Production of methyl oleate with a lipase from an endophytic yeast isolated from castor leaves. Biocatal Agric Biotechnol 1: 295-300. doi: 10.1016/j.bcab.2012.06.004
    [104] Zaferanloo B, Virkar A, Mahon PJ, et al. (2013) Endophytes from an Australian native plant are a promising source of industrially useful enzymes. World J Microbiol Biotechnol 29: 335-345. doi: 10.1007/s11274-012-1187-y
    [105] Mugesh S, Thangavel A, Maruthamuthu M (2014) Chemical stimulation of biopigment production in endophytic fungi isolated from Clerodendrum viscosum L. Chem Sci Rev Lett 3: 280-287.
    [106] Thirunavukkarasu N, Jahnes B, Broadstock A, et al. (2015) Screening marine-derived endophytic fungi for xylan-degrading enzymes. Curr Sci 109: 112-120.
    [107] Fillat Ú, Martín-Sampedro R, Macaya-Sanz D, et al. (2016) Screening of eucalyptus wood endophytes for laccase activity. Process Biochem 51: 589-598. doi: 10.1016/j.procbio.2016.02.006
    [108] Yopi, Tasia W, Melliawati R (2017) Cellulase and xylanase production from three isolates of indigenous endophytic fungi. IOP Conf Ser Earth Environ Sci 101: 012035. doi: 10.1088/1755-1315/101/1/012035
    [109] Oses R, Valenzuela S, Freer J, et al. (2006) Evaluation of fungal endophytes for lignocellulolytic enzyme production and wood biodegradation. Int Biodeterior Biodegrad 57: 129-135. doi: 10.1016/j.ibiod.2006.01.002
    [110] Rashmi M, Venkateswara Sarma V (2019) Secondary metabolite production by endophytic fungi: the gene clusters, nature, and expression. Endophytes and secondary metabolites 475-490. doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-90484-9_20
    [111] Sanchez JF, Somoza AD, Keller NP, et al. (2012) Advances in Aspergillus secondary metabolite research in the post-genomic era. Nat Prod Rep 29: 351. doi: 10.1039/c2np00084a
    [112] Nielsen JC, Nielsen J (2017) Development of fungal cell factories for the production of secondary metabolites: Linking genomics and metabolism. Synth Syst Biotechnol 2: 5-12. doi: 10.1016/j.synbio.2017.02.002
    [113] Wang X, Zhou H, Chen H, et al. (2018) Discovery of recombinases enables genome mining of cryptic biosynthetic gene clusters in Burkholderiales species. Proc Natl Acad Sci 115: E4255-E4263. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1720941115
    [114] Taghavi S, Weyens N, Vangronsveld J, et al. (2011) Improved phytoremediation of organic contaminants through engineering of bacterial endophytes of trees. Endophytes of Forest Trees: Biology and Applications Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands, 205-216. doi: 10.1007/978-94-007-1599-8_13
    [115] Tilman D, Cassman KG, Matson PA, et al. (2002) Agricultural sustainability and intensive production practices. Nature 418: 671-677. doi: 10.1038/nature01014
    [116] Carvalho FP (2006) Agriculture, pesticides, food security and food safety. Environ Sci Policy 9: 685-692. doi: 10.1016/j.envsci.2006.08.002
    [117] Pathak DV, Kumar M (2016)  Microbial inoculants in sustainable agricultural productivity New Delhi: Springer India.
    [118] Shamseldin A, El-sheikh MH, Hassan HSA, et al. (2010) Microbial bio-fertilization approaches to improve yield and quality of Washington Navel Orange and reducing the survival of Nematode in the soil. J Am Sci 6: 264-271.
    [119] Easton HS, Christensen MJ, Eerens JPJ, et al. (2001) Ryegrass endophyte: a New Zealand Grassland success story. Proc New Zeal Grassl Assoc 37-46. doi: 10.33584/jnzg.2001.63.2429
    [120] Adaptive Symbiotic Technologies BioEnsure® Microbial Inoculant, 2020 (2020) .Available from: http://www.adaptivesymbiotictechnologies.com.
    [121] Strobel G, Daisy B (2003) Bioprospecting for microbial endophytes and their natural products. Microbiol Mol Biol Rev 67: 491-502. doi: 10.1128/MMBR.67.4.491-502.2003
    [122] Karpyn Esqueda M, Yen AL, Rochfort S, et al. (2017) A review of perennial Ryegrass endophytes and their potential use in the management of African Black Beetle in perennial grazing systems in Australia. Front Plant Sci 8: 1-21. doi: 10.3389/fpls.2017.00003
    [123] Priti V, Ramesha BT, Singh S, et al. (2009) How promising are endophytic fungi as alternative sources of plant secondary metabolites? Indian Acad Sci 97: 477-478.
    [124] Tan RX, Zou WX (2001) Endophytes: A rich source of functional metabolites. Nat Prod Rep 18: 448-459. doi: 10.1039/b100918o
    [125] Bailey BA, Bae H, Strem MD, et al. (2006) Fungal and plant gene expression during the colonization of cacao seedlings by endophytic isolates of four Trichoderma species. Planta 224: 1449-1464. doi: 10.1007/s00425-006-0314-0
  • microbiol-07-02-012-S001.pdf
  • This article has been cited by:

    1. Gerd Grubb, Resolvents for fractional-order operators with nonhomogeneous local boundary conditions, 2023, 284, 00221236, 109815, 10.1016/j.jfa.2022.109815
    2. B.-Wolfgang Schulze, Jörg Seiler, Truncation quantization in the edge calculus, 2023, 14, 1662-9981, 10.1007/s11868-023-00564-0
  • Reader Comments
  • © 2021 the Author(s), licensee AIMS Press. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)
通讯作者: 陈斌, bchen63@163.com
  • 1. 

    沈阳化工大学材料科学与工程学院 沈阳 110142

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

Metrics

Article views(8555) PDF downloads(820) Cited by(43)

/

DownLoad:  Full-Size Img  PowerPoint
Return
Return

Catalog