text:
# A nonsmooth variational approach to differential problems. A case study of nonresonance under the first eigenvalue for a strongly nonlinear elliptic problem

## 1. Introduction

The new nonsmooth trends in critical point theory dealing with continuous functionals on metric spaces  brought important developments, in particular in the abstract part of the theory . The reason is that the definition of the *weak slope* they use to measure regularity relies on a qualitative topological property on level sets which avoid us the technicalities of using pseudo-gradients to construct deformations. Hence, it is particularly useful to prove abstract critical point theorems. While considering applications to boundary value problems would be, a priori, more delicate. This is natural because we would need some appropriate calculus and a new sense for weak solutions, weaker than the traditional one, strong enough to be useful and still with a practical relevance. Many early applications of the nonsmooth theory to several problems in partial differential equations and variational inequalities where the functionals involved are not locally Lipschitz continuous were given  but this passes in general through a great deal of technicality. Recently, a specific subdifferential calculus has been developed by Campa and degiovanni  when the underlying space is normed and has been used successfully in applications where the Clarke’s subdifferential is in general inappropriate .

In the present paper, we use a general approach that combines the basic ideas of variational methods with these new developments and study nonresonance under the first eigenvalue for a strongly nonlinear elliptic problem involving the $`p`$-Laplacian operator where no growth condition is supposed. The strategy followed can be described by the following scheme:

1. Give an acceptable definition of a weak solution to the problem to be treated by changing the traditional space $`𝒞_0^{\mathrm{}}(\mathrm{\Omega })`$ of test functions by an other dense subspace of $`W_0^{1,p}(\mathrm{\Omega })`$.
2. Show that a critical point is a weak solution in the sense of the previous point with the help of a minimum of assumptions.
3. Prove the effective existence of a critical point for the nonsmooth theory by one of the available abstract theorems for our specific nonlinear problem.

The first two points are general and may be used with different boundary value problems. We could trace their origin to the papers . But, they are more visible in  where the authors have successfully tried a nonsmooth variational approach for a coercive semilinear problem with the Laplacian operator. Nevertheless, these are general and may be used for different boundary value problems with other geometries as in the situation of linking results.

## 2. Situating the problem

We recall the definition of regularity in the sense of Degiovanni-Marzocchi  and Katriel  and the key properties of the subdifferential calculus developed for by Campa-Degiovanni  we will use in the sequel.

Let $`(E,d)`$ be a metric space, $`f:E\overline{}`$ a function and denote the ball of center $`u`$ and radius $`\sigma `$ by $`B(u,\sigma )`$ and the epigraph of $`f`$ by

$$\text{epi }(f)=\{(u,\lambda )E\times ;f(u)\lambda \}.$$

Consider $`\text{epi }(f)`$ as a subspace of the metric space $`E\times `$ for the metric $`\text{dist }((u,\lambda ),(u^{},\lambda ^{}))=\left(\text{dist }(u,u^{})^2+(\lambda ^{}\lambda )^2\right)^{1/2}`$.

###### Definition 1.

A point $`uE`$ such that $`f(u)`$ is *$`\delta `$-regular* for a $`\delta >0`$, if there exists $`\sigma >0`$ and a continuous deformation $`\nu :\left(B_\sigma (u,f(u))\text{epi }(f)\right)\times [0,\sigma ]E`$ such that for all $`(w,\lambda )B(u,f(u))\text{epi }(f)`$ and all $`t[0,\sigma ]`$:

$$\text{dist }(\nu ((w,\mu ),t),w)t\text{and}f(\nu ((w,t),t))\mu \delta t.$$

The point $`u`$ is *regular* if there exists $`\delta >0`$ such that $`u`$ is $`\delta `$-regular and it is *critical* if it is not regular.

When $`f`$ is continuous, this definition may be simplified to the following form.

###### Definition 2.

Let $`f:E`$ be a continuous function. A point $`uE`$ is *$`\delta `$-regular* if there exists a continuous deformation $`\eta :[0,\sigma ]\times B(u,\sigma )E`$ such that for all $`(t,u)[0,\sigma ]\times B(u,\sigma )`$:

$$\text{dist }(\eta (t,u),u)t\text{and}f(u)f(\eta (t,u))\delta t.$$

The regularity of $`u`$ is evaluated by a generalized notion of the norm of the derivative called by Degiovanni-Marzocchi and Katriel respectively *weak slope* and *regularity constant* of $`f`$ at $`u`$:

$$|df|(u)=sup\left\{\delta >0;u\text{ is }\delta \text{regular}\right\},$$

which reduces to $`f^{}(u)`$ when $`f`$ is of class $`𝒞^1`$.

When $`u`$ is a local minimum of $`f`$, it is a critical point, i.e., $`|df|(u)=0`$. And when $`f`$ satisfies the geometric conditions of the mountain pass theorem of Ambrosetti-Rabinowitz , and an appropriate form of the Palais-Smale condition, it has a critical point whose value is characterized by the usual $`inf\mathrm{max}`$ argument (cf. ).

When $`X`$ is a normed space.

###### Definition 3.

For any $`uX`$ such that $`f(u)`$, $`vX`$ and $`\epsilon >0`$, we define $`f_\epsilon ^0(u;v)`$ as the infimum of $`r`$ such that there exists $`\delta >0`$ and a continuous mapping

$$\nu :(B_\delta (u,f(u))\text{epi }(f))\times ]0,\delta ]B_\epsilon (v)$$

satisfying

$$f(w+t\nu ((w,\mu ),t))\mu +rt$$

for all $`(w,\mu )B_\delta (u,f(u))\text{epi }(f)`$ and $`t]0,\delta ]`$.

Define also

$$f^0(u;v)=\underset{\epsilon >0}{sup}f_\epsilon ^0(u;v).$$

The function $`f^0(u;.)`$ is convex, lower semicontinuous (l.s.c.) and positively homogeneous of degree 1 (cf. ).

###### Definition 4.

For all $`uX`$ such that $`f(x)`$, we set

$$f(u)=\left\{\alpha X^{};\alpha ,vf^0(u;v)vX\right\}.$$

The real $`f^0(u;v)`$ is larger than the Clarke-Rockafellar generalized directional derivative. Hence, $`f(u)`$ contains the Clarke’s subdifferential of $`f`$ at $`u`$ which may be empty when $`f(u)`$ is not, as we can see for example for $`f(u)=u\sqrt{|u|}`$ at $`u=0`$ (there $`|df|(0)=0`$). Nevertheless they agree when $`f`$ is locally Lipschitz. The notions $`f^0(u;v)`$ and $`f(u)`$ have been introduced in  and are more adapted to use with the weak slope of Degiovanni-Marzocchi.

###### Proposition 1.

If $`uX`$ is such that $`f(u)`$, then
(a) $`|df|(u)<+\mathrm{}f(u)\mathrm{}`$.
(b) $`|df|(u)<+\mathrm{}|df|(u)\mathrm{min}\{\alpha ;\alpha f(u)\}`$.

###### Remark 1.

Examples where (b) is strict exist.

###### Proposition 2.

When $`uX`$ is such that $`f(u)`$ and $`g:X`$ is Lipschitz continuous, then

$$(f+g)(u)(f)(u)+(g)(u).$$

If moreover, $`g`$ is of class $`𝒞^1`$, we have equality and $`g(u)=\{g^{}(u)\}`$.

To illustrate the abstract approach, we will study nonresonance under the first eigenvalue for a strongly nonlinear elliptic problem for the $`p`$-Laplacian operator as in . The former reference contains improvements to some results in  adapting the contents of  to the case of the $`p`$-Laplacian. Both results might be adapted to a nonsmooth variational context. Degiovanni-Zani adapted their results of  in . We will do the same, by analogy to  to the results of  extending  to the case where $`p`$ may be different from 2.

The usual norm of $`W_0^{1,p}(\mathrm{\Omega })`$ will be denoted $`||.||_{1,p}`$, the Lebesgue measure of a set $`A`$ is $`|A|`$ while $`B(x,\rho )=B_\rho (x)`$ is the open ball of center $`x`$ and radius $`\rho `$. The notation $`m^{}`$ stands for the conjugate of $`m`$, i.e. $`1/m+1/m^{}=1`$.

The problem to be treated is:

$$(𝒫)\{\begin{array}{ccc}\hfill \mathrm{\Delta }_pu=& f(x,u)+h\hfill & \text{in }\mathrm{\Omega }\hfill \\ \hfill u=& 0\hfill & \text{on }\mathrm{\Omega }\hfill \end{array}$$

where $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ is a bounded domain of $`^N`$, $`\mathrm{\Delta }_p:W_0^{1,p}(\mathrm{\Omega })W^{1,p^{}}(\mathrm{\Omega })`$ is the $`p`$-Laplacian operator defined by

$$\mathrm{\Delta }_pu\text{div }\left(|u|^{p2}u\right),1<p<\mathrm{}.$$

The $`p`$-Laplacian is a degenerated quasilinear elliptic operator that reduces to the classical Laplacian if $`p=2`$. The notation $`.,.`$ stands hereafter for the duality pairing between $`W^{1,p^{}}(\mathrm{\Omega })`$ and $`W_0^{1,p}(\mathrm{\Omega })`$. While $`f:\mathrm{\Omega }\times `$ is a Carathéodory function and $`hW^{1,p^{}}(\mathrm{\Omega })`$.

Consider the energy functional $`\mathrm{\Phi }:W_0^{1,p}(\mathrm{\Omega })\overline{}`$ associated to the problem

$$\mathrm{\Phi }(u)=\frac{1}{p}_\mathrm{\Omega }|u|^p𝑑x_\mathrm{\Omega }F(x,u)𝑑xh,u,$$

where $`F(x,s)=_0^sf(x,t)𝑑t`$. We are interested in conditions to be imposed on the nonlinearity $`f`$ in order that problem $`(𝒫)`$ admits at least one solution $`u(x)`$ for any given $`h(x)`$. Such conditions are usually called *nonresonance conditions*.

When the nonlinearity satisfies a growth condition of the type:

(2.1)
$$|f(x,s)|a|s|^{q1}+b(x)\text{ for all }s,\text{ and a.e. in }\mathrm{\Omega },$$

with $`q<p^{}`$ where the Sobolev exponent $`p^{}=\frac{Np}{Np}`$ when $`p<N`$ and $`p^{}=+\mathrm{}`$ when $`pN`$ and $`b(x)L^{(p^{})^{}}(\mathrm{\Omega })`$, the functional $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ is well defined, of class $`𝒞^1`$, l.s.c. and its critical points are weak solutions of $`(𝒫)`$ in the usual sense.

But when this growth condition is not satisfied, $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ is not necessarily of class $`𝒞^1`$ on $`W_0^{1,p}(\mathrm{\Omega })`$ and may take infinite values.

The first eigenvalue of the $`p`$-Laplacian characterized by the variational formulation

$$\lambda _1=\lambda _1(\mathrm{\Delta }_p)=\mathrm{min}\{\frac{_\mathrm{\Omega }|u|^p}{_\mathrm{\Omega }|u|^p}dx;uW_0^{1,p}(\mathrm{\Omega })\{0\}\}$$

is known (cf.  for example) to be associated to a simple eigenfunction that does not change sign. We will denote by $`\phi _1`$ the normalized eigenfunction such that $`\phi _1>0`$ almost everywhere.

A procedure used to treat $`(𝒫)`$ when the nonlinearity lies asymptotically on the left of $`\lambda _1`$ consists in supposing a “coercivity” condition on $`F`$ of the type:

(2.2)
$$\underset{s\pm \mathrm{}}{lim\; sup}\frac{pF(x,s)}{|s|^p}<\lambda _1\text{for almost every }x\mathrm{\Omega }$$

and minimizing $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ on $`W_0^{1,p}(\mathrm{\Omega })`$. The minimum being a weak solution of $`(𝒫)`$ in an appropriate sense (cf. ).

An other way, is to obtain *a priori* estimates on the solutions of some equations approximating $`(𝒫)`$ and to show that their weak limit is indeed a weak solution.

Notice that with the help of the conditions (2.1) and (2.2), we know since the work of Hammerstein (1930) that $`(𝒫)`$ admits a weak solution that minimizes the functional $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ on $`W_0^{1,p}(\mathrm{\Omega })`$.

The condition (2.2) does not imply a growth condition on $`f`$ unless $`f(x,u)`$ is convex in $`u`$ (see for example ).

In , Anane and Gossez supposed only a one-sided growth condition with respect to the Sobolev (conjugate) exponent that do not suffice to guarantee the differentiability of $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$, which may even take infinite values. Nevertheless, they showed that any minimum of $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ solves $`(𝒫)`$ in a suitable sense.

Then, Degiovanni-Zani  in the case $`p=2`$ and Chakrone in  for $`1<p<\mathrm{}`$ supposed only that $`f`$ maps $`L^{\mathrm{}}(\mathrm{\Omega })`$ to $`L^1(\mathrm{\Omega })`$:

(2.3)
$$\underset{|s|R}{sup}|f(.,s)|L_{loc}^1(\mathrm{\Omega }),R>0$$

and a coercivity condition of the type (2.2). They proved that any minimum $`u`$ of $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$, which is not of class $`𝒞^1`$ on $`W_0^{1,p}(\mathrm{\Omega })`$ and may take infinite values too, is a weak solution of $`(𝒫)`$ in the sense

$$_\mathrm{\Omega }|u|^{p2}uvdx=_\mathrm{\Omega }f(x,u)v𝑑x+h,v,$$

for $`v`$ in a dense subspace of $`W_0^{1,p}(\mathrm{\Omega })`$. Recently, in 1998 Degiovanni and Zani adapted their technique of  for the Laplacian operator ($`p=2`$) to a nonsmooth analytical context in . We will do here the same with the results of  for the $`p`$-Laplacian ($`1<p<\mathrm{}`$).

In the autonomous case $`f(x,s)=f(s)`$, De Figueiredo and Gossez  have proved the existence of solutions for any $`hL^{\mathrm{}}(\mathrm{\Omega })`$ by a topological method. They supposed only a coercivity condition and established that

$$_\mathrm{\Omega }|u|^{p2}uvdx=_\mathrm{\Omega }f(x,u)v𝑑x+h,v$$

for all $`vW_0^{1,p}(\mathrm{\Omega })L^{\mathrm{}}(\mathrm{\Omega })\{u\}`$ but the solution obtained may not minimize $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$. Indeed, an example is given in  in the case $`p=2`$ and an other one is given in  where $`p`$ may be different from 2.

Notice that in our case, the condition (2.3) implies no growth condition on $`f`$ as it may be seen in the following example from .

###### Example 1.

Consider the function

$$f(x,s)=\{\begin{array}{cc}d(x)\left(\mathrm{sin}\left(\frac{\pi s}{2}\right)\frac{\text{sign }(s)}{2}\right)\mathrm{exp}\left(\frac{2\mathrm{cos}\left(\frac{\pi s}{2}\right)}{\pi }+\frac{|s|1}{2}\right)\hfill & \text{if }|s|1\hfill \\ d(x)\frac{s}{2}(10s^29)\hfill & \text{if }|s|1\hfill \end{array}$$

where $`d(x)L_{loc}^1(\mathrm{\Omega })`$ and $`d(x)0`$ almost everywhere in $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$, so that

$$F(x,s)=\{\begin{array}{cc}d(x)\mathrm{exp}\left(\frac{2\mathrm{cos}\left(\frac{\pi s}{2}\right)}{\pi }\right)\mathrm{exp}\left(\frac{|s|1}{2}\right)\hfill & \text{if }|s|1\hfill \\ d(x)\frac{s^2}{4}(5s^2+9)\hfill & \text{if }|s|1\hfill \end{array}$$

Then, $`F(x,s)0`$ for all $`s`$ almost everywhere in $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$. So, $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ is coercive. Nevertheless, as we can check easily, $`f`$ satisfies no growth condition.

## 3. Theoretical approach

We will show that when (2.3) is fulfilled, a critical point in the sense of Degiovanni-Marzocchi , is a weak solution of $`(𝒫)`$ in an acceptable sense.

###### Definition 5.

For $`1p\mathrm{}`$, the space $`L_0^p(\mathrm{\Omega })`$ is defined by:

$$L_0^p=\left\{vL_0^p;v(x)=0\text{ a.e. outside a compact subset of }\mathrm{\Omega }\right\}.$$

Consider $`uW_0^{1,p}(\mathrm{\Omega })`$, we set

$$V_u=\left\{vW_{loc}^{1,p};uL^{\mathrm{}}(\{x\mathrm{\Omega };v(x)0\})\right\}.$$

###### Proposition 3 (Brezis-Browder ).

If $`uW_0^{1,p}(\mathrm{\Omega })`$, there exists a sequence $`(u_n)_nW_0^{1,p}(\mathrm{\Omega })`$ such that:
(i) $`(u_n)_nW_0^{1,p}(\mathrm{\Omega })L_0^{\mathrm{}}(\mathrm{\Omega })`$.
(ii) $`|u_n(x)||u(x)|`$ and $`u_n(x).u(x)0`$ a.e. in $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$.
(iii) $`u_n_n\mathrm{}u`$ in $`W_0^{1,p}(\mathrm{\Omega })`$.

The linear space $`V_u`$ enjoys some nice properties. The next proposition that refines in some sense the former one is due to  when $`p=2`$.

###### Proposition 4 (Chakrone ).

The space $`V_u`$ is dense in $`W_0^{1,p}(\mathrm{\Omega })`$. And if we suppose suppose that (2.3) holds, then

$$A_u=\left\{\phi W_0^{1,p}(\mathrm{\Omega });f(x,u)\phi L^1(\mathrm{\Omega })\right\}$$

is a dense subspace of $`W_0^{1,p}(\mathrm{\Omega })`$ as $`V_uA_u`$. More precisely, Brezis-Browder’s result holds true if we replace $`W_0^{1,p}(\mathrm{\Omega })L_0^{\mathrm{}}(\mathrm{\Omega })`$ by $`A_u`$.

###### Proof.

It suffices to show that $`V_u`$ is dense in $`W_0^{1,p}(\mathrm{\Omega })`$ and that $`V_uA_u`$ when (2.3) holds.
1. The density of $`V_u`$ in $`W_0^{1,p}(\mathrm{\Omega })`$:
We have to show that for any $`\phi W_0^{1,p}(\mathrm{\Omega })`$, there exists a sequence $`(\phi _n)_nV_u`$ satisfying (ii) and (iii). This is done in two steps. First, we show it is true for all $`\phi W_0^{1,p}(\mathrm{\Omega })L_0^{\mathrm{}}(\mathrm{\Omega })`$. Then, using Proposition 3, we show it is true in $`W_0^{1,p}(\mathrm{\Omega })`$.

First Step: Suppose $`\phi W_0^{1,p}(\mathrm{\Omega })L_0^{\mathrm{}}(\mathrm{\Omega })`$ and consider a sequence $`(\mathrm{\Theta }_n)_n𝒞_0^{\mathrm{}}()`$ such that:
(1) $`\text{supp }\mathrm{\Theta }_n[n,n]`$,
(2) $`\mathrm{\Theta }1`$ on $`[n+1,n1]`$,
(3) $`0\theta _n1`$ on $``$ and
(4) $`|\mathrm{\Theta }_n^{}(s)|2`$.

The sequence we are looking for is obtained by setting

$$\phi _n(x)=(\mathrm{\Theta }u)(x)\phi (x)\text{for a.e. }x\text{ in }\mathrm{\Omega }.$$

Indeed, let’s check the following three points
(a) $`\phi _nV_u`$,
(b) $`|\phi _n(x)||\phi (x)|`$ and $`\phi _n(x)\phi (x)>0`$ a.e. in $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ and
(c) $`\phi _n\phi `$ in $`W_0^{1,p}(\mathrm{\Omega })`$.
For (a), since $`\phi L_0^{\mathrm{}}(\mathrm{\Omega })`$, we have that $`\phi _nL_0^{\mathrm{}}(\mathrm{\Omega })`$ and it’s clear by (4) that $`\phi _nW_0^{1,p}(\mathrm{\Omega })`$. Finally, by (1), $`u(x)[n,n]`$ for a.e. $`x`$ in $`\{x\mathrm{\Omega };\phi _n(x)0\}`$.

The assumption (b) is a consequence of (3).

For (c), by (2), $`\phi _n(x)\phi (x)`$ a.e. in $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ and

$$\frac{\phi _n}{x_i}(x)=\mathrm{\Theta }_n^{}(u(x))\frac{u}{x_i}\phi (x)+\mathrm{\Theta }_n(u(x))\frac{\phi }{x_i}\frac{\phi }{x_i}\text{ in }\mathrm{\Omega }.$$

And by (4),

$$\left|\frac{\phi _n}{x_i}(x)\right|\left|\frac{u}{x_i}(x)\right||\phi (x)|+\left|\frac{\phi }{x_i}(x)\right|L^p(\mathrm{\Omega }).$$

Finally, by the dominated convergence theorem we get (c).

Second Step: Suppose that $`\phi W_0^{1,p}(\mathrm{\Omega })`$. By Proposition 3, there is a sequence $`(\psi _n)_nW_0^{1,p}(\mathrm{\Omega })`$ satisfying (i), (ii) and (iii).

For $`k=1,2,\mathrm{}`$, there is $`n_k`$ such that $`\psi _{n_k}\phi _{1,p}1/k`$. Since $`\psi _{n_k}W_0^{1,p}(\mathrm{\Omega })L_0^{\mathrm{}}(\mathrm{\Omega })`$, by the first step, there is $`\psi _kV_u`$ such that $`|\phi _k(x)||\psi _{n_k}(x)|`$ and $`\phi _k(x)\psi _{n_k}(x)0`$ almost everywhere in $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ and $`\phi _k\psi _{n_k}_{1,p}1/k`$, so that $`(\phi _k)_k`$ is the sequence we are seeking. Indeed, $`|\phi _k(x)||\psi _{n_k}(x)||\phi (x)|`$, $`\phi _k(x)\phi (x)0`$ a.e. in $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ and $`\phi _k\phi (x)_{1,p}\phi _k\psi _{n_k}_{1,p}+\psi _{n_k}\phi (x)_{1,p}2/k`$.
The inclusion $`V_uA_u`$:
Indeed, for $`\phi V_u`$, set $`E=\left\{x\mathrm{\Omega };\phi (x)0\right\}`$ so that

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill |f(x,u)\phi |& =\left|f(x,u)\chi _E\phi (x)\right|\hfill \\ & \mathrm{max}\{|f(x,s)\phi (x)|;|s|u_{L^{\mathrm{}}(E)}\}\hfill \end{array}$$

where $`\chi _E`$ is the characteristic function of the set $`E`$.

By (2.3), the last term lies to $`L^1(\mathrm{\Omega })`$, so that $`\phi A_u`$. ∎

So, we have that

(3.1)
$$\begin{array}{c}\hfill \mathrm{\Lambda }u=sup\{_\mathrm{\Omega }f(x,u)vdx;vA_u,||v||_{1,p}1\}=\\ \hfill sup\{_\mathrm{\Omega }f(x,u)vdx;vV_u,||v||_{1,p}1\}.\end{array}$$

###### Definition 6.

Consider $`uW_{loc}^{1,p}(\mathrm{\Omega })`$, we say that $`f(x,u)W^{1,p^{}}(\mathrm{\Omega })`$ if

$$\mathrm{\Lambda }u<+\mathrm{}.$$

Then, the mapping $`T:V_u`$ defined by

$$T(\phi )=_\mathrm{\Omega }f(x,u)\phi 𝑑x$$

is linear, continuous and admits an extension $`\stackrel{~}{T}`$ to the whole space $`W_0^{1,p}(\mathrm{\Omega })`$. Henceforth, we will make the identification $`f(x,u)=\stackrel{~}{T}`$; this justifies the terminology of Definition 6.

###### Definition 7 (Weak solution).

A point $`uW_0^{1,p}(\mathrm{\Omega })`$ is a weak solution of $`(𝒫)`$ if $`f(x,u)W^{1,p^{}}(\mathrm{\Omega })`$ (in the sense of Definition 6) and $`(𝒫)`$ is satisfied in $`W^{1,p^{}}(\mathrm{\Omega })`$.

In particular, we would have

$$_\mathrm{\Omega }|u|^{p2}uvdx=_\mathrm{\Omega }f(x,u)v𝑑x+h,v,vA_u.$$

According to the conventions of , adopted also in , we will consider that by definition

$$_\mathrm{\Omega }F(x,u)^+𝑑x=_\mathrm{\Omega }F(x,u)^{}𝑑x=+\mathrm{}\text{implies that }_\mathrm{\Omega }F(x,u)𝑑x=\mathrm{}.$$

And since the definition of the functional $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ contains the term $`_\mathrm{\Omega }F(x,u)𝑑x`$, the above convention has to be considered for $`F`$.

###### Theorem 5.

Let $`uW_0^{1,p}(\mathrm{\Omega })`$ such that $`\mathrm{\Psi }(u)=_\mathrm{\Omega }F(x,u)𝑑x`$, then
(a) For any $`vW_0^{1,p}(\mathrm{\Omega })`$ such that $`f(x,u)vL^1(\mathrm{\Omega })`$, we have

$$\mathrm{\Psi }^{}(u;v)_\mathrm{\Omega }f(x,u)v𝑑x.$$

This is true in particular for all $`vV_u`$.
(b) If $`\mathrm{\Psi }(u)\mathrm{}`$, then $`f(x,u)W^{1,p^{}}(\mathrm{\Omega })`$ and $`\mathrm{\Psi }(u)=\{f(x,u)\}`$.

###### Proof.

(a) We will prove that the assertion holds for all $`vV_u`$ in a first step and then, for all $`vA_u`$ in a second step.

1 $`^{\text{st}}`$ step:
Consider $`vV_u`$, $`\epsilon >0`$, $`R>0`$ and

$$r>_\mathrm{\Omega }f(x,u)v𝑑x.$$

Consider also a smooth function $`\mathrm{\Theta }_R:[0,1]`$ with support in $`[2R,2R]`$ such that $`\mathrm{\Theta }_R(s)=1`$ in $`[R,R]`$ and $`|\mathrm{\Theta }_R^{}(s)|2/R`$ in $``$. For $`R`$ large enough, we have $`\mathrm{\Theta }_R(u)vv_{1,p}<\epsilon `$ and

$$r>_\mathrm{\Omega }f(x,u)\mathrm{\Theta }(u)v𝑑x.$$

Affirmation:

$$\underset{\begin{array}{c}wu\\ t0^+\end{array}}{lim}_\mathrm{\Omega }\frac{F(x,w+t\mathrm{\Theta }_R(w)v)F(x,w)}{t}𝑑x=_\mathrm{\Omega }f(x,u)\mathrm{\Theta }_R(u)v𝑑x.$$

Indeed, consider $`(w_h)_h`$ such that $`w_hu`$ in $`W_0^{1,p}(\mathrm{\Omega })`$ and $`(t_h)_h`$ such that $`t_h0^+`$. Without loss of generality, we may suppose that $`w_h(x)u(x)`$ almost everywhere and that $`t_h1`$. It follows that

$$\underset{h}{lim}\frac{F(x,w_h+t_h\mathrm{\Theta }_R(w_h)v)F(x,w_h)}{t_h}=f(x,u)\mathrm{\Theta }_R(u)v\text{ a.e. in }\mathrm{\Omega }.$$

On the other hand, for almost every $`x`$ in $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$, there exists $`\tau _h]0,t_h[`$ such that

$$\begin{array}{cc}\frac{F(x,w_h+t_h\mathrm{\Theta }_R(w_h)v)F(x,w_h)}{t_h}\hfill & =|f(x,w_h+t_h\mathrm{\Theta }_R(w_h)v)||v|\mathrm{\Theta }_R(w_h)\hfill \\ & \left(sup_{|s|T}|f(x,s)|\right)|v|\hfill \end{array}$$

where $`T=2R+v_{\mathrm{}}`$. The affirmation follows then from (2.3) and Lebesgue’s dominated convergence theorem.

Therefore, there exists $`\delta >0`$ such that for any $`wW_0^{1,p}(\mathrm{\Omega })`$ satisfying $`wv_{1,p}<\delta `$ and $`0<t<\delta `$ we have

$$\mathrm{\Theta }_R(w)vv_{1,p}<\epsilon ,$$

$$F(x,w+t\mathrm{\Theta }_R(w)v)F(x,w)L^1(\mathrm{\Omega }),$$

and

$$_\mathrm{\Omega }\frac{F(x,w+t\mathrm{\Theta }_R(w)v)F(x,w)}{t}𝑑x<r.$$

Consider now the continuous function $`\nu :(B_\delta (u,\mathrm{\Psi }(u))\text{epi }(\mathrm{\Psi }))\times ]0,\delta ]B_\epsilon (v)`$ defined by $`\nu ((w,\mu ),t)=\mathrm{\Theta }_R(w)v`$.

We have that $`\mathrm{\Psi }(w+t\nu ((w,\mu ),t))=\mathrm{}`$ if and only if $`\mathrm{\Psi }(w)=\mathrm{}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Psi }(w+t\nu ((w,\mu ),t))\mathrm{\Psi }(w)+rt\mu +rt`$.

Therefore, $`\mathrm{\Psi }_\epsilon ^{}(u;v)r`$. Since $`\epsilon `$ has been taken arbitrary, we have $`\mathrm{\Psi }^{}(u;v)r`$.

And since $`r`$ has been also taken arbitrary, we get (a) for all $`vV_u`$.

2 $`^{\text{nd}}`$ step:
Let $`vW_0^{1,p}`$ such that $`f(x,u)vL^1(\mathrm{\Omega })`$, i.e $`uA_u`$. By Proposition 3, there exists $`(v_n)_nV_u`$ such that $`v_nv`$ in $`W_0^{1,p}(\mathrm{\Omega })`$. We can suppose that $`v_nv`$ almost everywhere,

$$|f(x,u)v_n||f(x,u)v|\text{ and }f(x,u)v_nf(x,u)v\text{ a.e. }.$$

By the dominated convergence theorem, we have then

$$\underset{h}{lim}_\mathrm{\Omega }f(x,u)v_n𝑑x=_\mathrm{\Omega }f(x,u)v𝑑x.$$

And since $`\mathrm{\Psi }^{}(u;.)`$ is l.s.c., the assertion (a) holds true for all $`vA_u`$.

(b) Let $`\alpha \mathrm{\Psi }(u)`$. Suppose that $`vW_0^{1,p}(\mathrm{\Omega })`$ and that $`f(x,u)vL^1(\mathrm{\Omega })`$, then

$$\alpha ,v\mathrm{\Psi }^{}(u;v)_\mathrm{\Omega }f(x,u)v𝑑x.$$

As we can change in the above inequality $`v`$ by $`v`$, it follows that $`\alpha ,v={\displaystyle _\mathrm{\Omega }}f(x,u)v𝑑x`$, so $`f(x,u)W^{1,p^{}}(\mathrm{\Omega })`$ and $`\alpha =f(x,u)`$. ∎

So, we get as an immediate consequence of Propositions 1 and 2 and Theorem 5, the following result.

###### Theorem 6.

If $`uW_0^{1,p}(\mathrm{\Omega })`$ is a critical point of $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ in the sense of Degiovanni-Marzocchi such that $`\mathrm{\Psi }(u)`$, then $`u`$ is a weak solution of the problem $`(𝒫)`$.

## 4. Coercive problems

We will see now in an analogous approach to  some conditions due to  that guarantee the existence of a global minimum $`u`$ of $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ in $`W_0^{1,p}(\mathrm{\Omega })`$ and such that $`\mathrm{\Psi }(u)`$ and hence are exactly what we need. Three results are obtained using similar nonresonance conditions respectively to Mawhin-Ward-Willem  and to Landesman-Lazer  in the two first ones and using some comparison functions and comparison spaces in the third. The three theorems are shown to be incomparable.

Set $`G(x,s)=F(x,s)\lambda _1|s|^p/p`$. The conditions will port on $`G(x,s)/|s|^\alpha `$ for $`1\alpha p`$. Anane and Gossez introduced in  some comparison functions and comparison spaces. Other ones are used here.

###### Definition 8.

A continuous even function $`\phi :^+`$ is called a comparison function of order $`\alpha `$, where $`1\alpha p`$ if
(i) $`{\displaystyle \frac{\phi (s)}{|s|^p}}0`$ when $`s+\mathrm{}`$.
(ii) $`{\displaystyle \frac{\phi (s)}{|s|}}+\mathrm{}`$ when $`s+\mathrm{}`$.
(iii) $`{\displaystyle \frac{\phi (s)}{\phi (t_n)}}r^\alpha `$ when $`{\displaystyle \frac{s_n}{t_n}}r>0`$, $`s_n\mathrm{}`$ and $`t_n\mathrm{}`$.
(iv) For all $`\beta >\alpha `$, there exist $`t_0,a`$ and $`b`$ such that

$$\frac{\phi (ts)}{\phi (t)}a|s|^\beta +b\text{forall }tt_0\text{ and all }s0.$$

###### Example 2.

a) $`\phi (s)=|s|^\alpha `$, $`1<\alpha <p`$.
b) $`\phi (s)={\displaystyle \frac{|s|^\alpha }{\left|\mathrm{log}|s|\right|}}`$, $`1<\alpha <p`$.
c) $`\phi (s)=|s|^\alpha \left|\mathrm{log}|s|\right|`$, $`1\alpha <p`$.

###### Definition 9.

Let $`1\alpha p`$. We denote by $`X_\alpha `$ the set of all measurable functions $`\eta (x)`$ on $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ satisfying:
(i) $`\eta (x)L^1(\mathrm{\Omega })`$ if $`p=N`$.
(ii) $`\eta (x)L^q(\mathrm{\Omega })`$ for some $`q>1`$ if $`p=N`$.
(iii) $`\eta (x)L^q(\mathrm{\Omega })`$ for some $`q>(p^{}/\alpha )^{}`$ if $`p<N`$.
The set $`Y_\alpha `$ is defined the same way as $`X_\alpha `$ except that it is required that $`\eta (x)L^{(p^{}/\alpha )^{}}(\mathrm{\Omega })`$ if $`p<N`$.

For a comparison function $`\phi `$ of order $`\alpha `$, $`1\alpha p`$, we denote by

$$G_\phi ^\pm (x)=\underset{s\pm \mathrm{}}{lim\; sup}\frac{G(x,s)}{\phi (s)}\text{ for almost every }x\mathrm{\Omega }.$$

If $`\phi (s)=|s|^\alpha `$, we write only

$$G_\phi ^\pm (x)=G_\alpha ^\pm (x)$$

Consider now a slightly stronger condition than (2.3),

($`f_0`$)
$$\underset{|s|R}{sup}|f(.,s)|L^1(\mathrm{\Omega }),R>0$$

We have then the following coercivity results for the problem $`(𝒫)`$:

###### Theorem 7.

Suppose $`(f_0)`$,
$`(G_1)G_\alpha ^\pm 0\text{ a.e. in }\mathrm{\Omega }`$,
$`(G_1^{})|\{x\mathrm{\Omega };G_p^+<0\}|0\text{ and }|\{x\mathrm{\Omega };G_p^{}<0\}|0`$.
Then, $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ achieves its minimum in a point $`u`$ in $`W_0^{1,p}(\mathrm{\Omega })`$ and $`\mathrm{\Psi }(u)`$. And hence $`u`$ is a weak solution of $`(𝒫)`$.

###### Theorem 8.

Suppose $`(f_0)`$,
$`(G_3)G_1^\pm \eta \text{ a.e. uniformly in }\mathrm{\Omega }\text{ for some }\eta Y_1`$, and
$`(G_3^{})_\mathrm{\Omega }G_1^{}(x)\phi _1(x)<h,\phi _1<_\mathrm{\Omega }G_1^+(x)\phi _1(x)`$.
Then, the conclusion of Theorem 7 holds.

###### Theorem 9.

Suppose that $`\phi `$ is a comparison function of order $`\alpha `$, $`1\alpha p`$. Suppose also that $`(f_0)`$ holds and
$`(G_2)G_\phi ^\pm \eta \text{ a.e. uniformly in }\mathrm{\Omega }\text{ for some }\eta X_\alpha `$, and
$`(G_2^{})_\mathrm{\Omega }G_\phi ^+(x)(\phi _1(x))^\alpha <0\text{ and }_\mathrm{\Omega }G_\phi ^{}(x)(\phi _1(x))^\alpha <0`$.
Then, the conclusion of Theorem 7 holds.

The proofs of the three theorems use the same technique. To give the best idea on the role played by comparison spaces and functions, we will prove Theorem 9. We begin first by some properties of $`X_\alpha `$ and $`\phi `$ in the following lemma.

###### Lemma 10.

Consider $`\eta _1(x)X_\alpha `$, $`uW_0^{1,p}(\mathrm{\Omega })`$ and a sequence $`(u_n)_nW_0^{1,p}(\mathrm{\Omega })`$ then
(a) $`\eta _1(x)\phi (u(x))L^1(\mathrm{\Omega })`$.
(b) If $`u_nu`$ in $`W_0^{1,p}(\mathrm{\Omega })`$, then $`\eta _1(x)\phi (u_n)\eta _1(x)\phi (u)`$ in $`L^1(\mathrm{\Omega })`$.
(c) If $`u_n_{1,p}+\mathrm{}`$ and $`v_n=u_n/u_n_{1,p}v`$ in $`W_0^{1,p}(\mathrm{\Omega })`$ and almost everywhere in $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ then $`\eta _1(x)\phi (u_n)/u_n_{1,p}^p0`$ in $`L^1(\mathrm{\Omega })`$.

###### Proof of Lemma 10.

Consider only the case $`p<N`$ (When $`pN`$, the proof is immediate.)

Consider $`q>(p^{}/\alpha )^{}`$ such that $`\eta _1(x)L^q(\mathrm{\Omega })`$, there is $`\beta >\alpha `$ such that $`q>(p^{}/\beta )^{}>(p^{}/\alpha )^{}`$. Set $`q_1=\beta q^{}`$ and $`g:\mathrm{\Omega }\times `$ defined by $`g(x,s)=\eta _1(x)\phi (x)`$. Then, $`g`$ is a Carathéodory function and maps $`L^1(\mathrm{\Omega })`$ into $`L^1(\mathrm{\Omega })`$, which follows immediately from the property (iv) of $`\phi `$. Since $`q_1<p^{}`$, we have $`W_0^{1,p}`$ embeds compactly in $`L^{q_1}(\mathrm{\Omega })`$, hence we get (a), (b).

The property (c) is a consequence of the properties (i) and (iv) of $`\phi `$. ∎

###### Proof of Theorem 9.

The functional $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ is well defined and takes its values in $`\{+\mathrm{}\}`$. Indeed, let $`\epsilon >0`$, by ($`f_0`$) and (G<sub>2</sub>), there is $`d_\epsilon (x)L^1(\mathrm{\Omega })`$ such that

(4.1)
$$F(x,s)\frac{\lambda _1}{p}|s|^p+(\eta (x)+\epsilon )\phi (s)+d_\epsilon (x)\text{ a. e. in }\mathrm{\Omega }\text{ and }s.$$

For $`uW_0^{1,p}(\mathrm{\Omega })`$, we have

(4.2)
$$\mathrm{\Phi }(u)\frac{1}{p}_\mathrm{\Omega }\left(|u|^p\frac{\lambda _1}{p}|u|^p\right)_\mathrm{\Omega }\left(\eta _\epsilon (x)\phi (u(x))d_\epsilon (x)\right)h,u$$

where $`\eta _\epsilon (x)=\epsilon +\eta (x)X_\alpha `$. By the property (a) of Lemma 10, we get the result.

The functional $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ is w.l.s.c., it suffices to use (4.1), the property (b) of Lemma 10 and Fatou’s lemma. $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ is also coercive. Suppose by contradiction that there exists $`A`$, $`(u_n)_nW_0^{1,p}(\mathrm{\Omega })`$ such that $`u_n_{1,p}\mathrm{}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Phi }(u_n)A`$ for all $`n`$. Set $`v_n=u_n/u_n_{1,p}`$. We can suppose that $`v_nv`$ in $`W_0^{1,p}(\mathrm{\Omega })`$, $`v_nv`$ in $`L^p(\mathrm{\Omega })`$ and almost everywhere in $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$.

Affirmation

$$v=\phi _1\text{or}v=\phi _1.$$

Indeed, it suffices to divide (4.2) by $`\frac{1}{p}u_n_{1,p}^p`$. Tending $`n\mathrm{}`$ and using the property (c) of Lemma 10, we obtain $`01\lambda _1|v|^p`$, and hence

$$v_{1,p}^p1\lambda _1|v|^pv_{1,p}^p.$$

The affirmation is then a consequence of the variational characterization of $`(\lambda _1,\varphi _1)`$. Suppose that $`v=\phi `$ (we get the same conclusion if $`v=\phi _1`$).

Since $`\frac{1}{p}|u_n|^p\frac{\lambda _1}{p}|u_n|^p0`$, then $`A\mathrm{\Phi }(u_n)G(x,u_n)h,u_n`$. Divide by $`\phi (u_n)`$, when $`n\mathrm{}`$, since $`u_n/\phi (u_n)_n\mathrm{}0`$ (property (ii) of $`\phi `$) when $`n`$ goes to $`\mathrm{}`$, we get

$$\underset{n}{lim\; inf}_\mathrm{\Omega }\frac{G(x,u_nv_n)}{\phi (u_n)}0.$$

By (4.1), the property (iv) of $`\phi `$ and Fatou’s lemma, we obtain then

$$0_\mathrm{\Omega }\underset{n}{lim\; sup}\frac{G(x,u_nv_n)}{\phi (u_n)}.$$

Since $`\phi (|s|)=\phi (s)`$, and by the property (iii) of $`\phi `$ we have for almost every $`x\mathrm{\Omega }`$ that

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill \underset{n}{lim\; sup}\frac{G(x,u_nv_n)}{\phi (u_n)}& =\underset{n}{lim\; sup}\frac{G(x,u_nv_n)\phi (u_nv_n)}{\phi (u_nv_n)\phi (u_n)}\hfill \\ & G_\phi ^{}(x).(\phi _1(x))^\alpha .\hfill \end{array}$$

It follows that $`0_\mathrm{\Omega }G_\phi ^{}(x).(\phi _1(x))^\alpha `$, a contradiction with the hypothesis ($`G_2^{}`$). ∎

In the following three examples, we can see that neither of the three theorems implies the two others.

###### Example 3.

Let $`1\alpha p`$, $`\phi `$ a comparison function of order $`\alpha `$ and $`\eta (x)X_\alpha `$. Set $`F(x,s)=\frac{\lambda _1}{p}|s|^p+\eta (x)\phi (x)`$. It is clear that under the condition $`_\mathrm{\Omega }\eta (x)(\phi (x))^\alpha <0`$, Theorem 9 applies but Theorem 7 do not because $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_p^\pm (x)=0`$ almost everywhere in $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$. If moreover, we suppose $`\left|\left\{x\mathrm{\Omega };\eta (x)>0\right\}\right|0`$ then Theorem 8 do not apply neither because the property $`(G_3)`$ is not satisfied.

###### Example 4.

Set $`F(x,s)=\frac{\lambda _1}{p}|s|^p+\eta (x)|s|`$ where $`\eta (x)Y_1`$. We can check easily that Theorem 8 applies under the condition $`(G_3^{})`$ which is equivalent to

$$_\mathrm{\Omega }\eta (x)\phi _1(x)<|h,\phi _1|.$$

But the two other theorems do not apply.

###### Example 5.

Let $`a(x)`$ a functional in $`𝒞_c^{\mathrm{}}(\mathrm{\Omega })`$ such that $`a(x)0`$ for all $`x\mathrm{\Omega }`$, $`\left|\left\{x\mathrm{\Omega };a(x)=0\right\}\right|0`$ and $`\left|\left\{x\mathrm{\Omega };a(x)<0\right\}\right|0`$. Set for some comparison function $`\phi `$ of order $`\alpha `$, $`1\alpha p`$

$$F(x,s)=\left(\frac{\lambda _1}{p}+a(x)\right)+|s|^p+\left(\phi (s)|s|^p\right)^{1/2}.$$

Then, $`(G_1)`$ and $`(G_1^{})`$ are satisfied, while $`(G_2)`$ and (G<sub>3</sub>) are not because $`G_\phi ^+=G_\phi ^{}=G_1^+=G_1^{}=+\mathrm{}`$ in the set of positive measure $`\left\{x\mathrm{\Omega };a(x)=0\right\}`$.

###### Remark 2.

1) The comparison functions are useless in the autonomous case $`f(x,s)=f(x)`$. Indeed we have
(1.a) $`(G_1)`$, $`(G_1^{})`$ imply $`(G_2)`$, $`(G_2^{})`$ and $`G_\phi ^\pm =\mathrm{}`$.
(1.b) $`(G_2)`$, $`(G_2^{})`$ imply $`(G_3)`$, $`(G_3^{})`$ for any $`hW^{1,p^{}}(\mathrm{\Omega })`$ and $`G_1^\pm =\mathrm{}`$.
(1.c) The condition

(4.3)
$$\underset{s\pm \mathrm{}}{lim}\frac{G(s)}{|s|}=\mathrm{}$$

implies $`(G_3)`$, $`(G_3^{})`$ for any $`hW^{1,p^{}}(\mathrm{\Omega })`$ and $`G_1^\pm =\mathrm{}`$.

2) Always, in the autonomous case, we can check easily that the condition (2.2) implies the condition (4.3). The converse is false. Indeed, for $`f(s)=\lambda _1|s|^{p2}s\beta |s|^{\beta 2}s`$ where $`1<\beta <p`$ so that $`F(s)=\lambda _1|s|^p/p|s|^\beta `$ and $`G(s)=|s|^\beta `$. We have that the function $`G`$ satisfies (4.3) but $`lim\; sup_{s\pm \mathrm{}}p.F(s)/|s|^p=\lambda _1`$.

Acknowledgement. The author is grateful to an anonymous referee who brought to his attention some misprints. This led to a better and more correct form of the present paper.


format: text

text:
# Beryllium abundances in stars hosting giant planetsBased on observations collected with the VLT/UT2 Kueyen telescope (Paranal Observatory, ESO, Chile) using the UVES spectrograph (Observing runs 66.C-0116 A and 66.D-0284 A), and with the William Herschel and Nordic Optical Telescopes, operated at the island of La Palma by the Isaac Newton Group and jointly by Denmark, Finland, Iceland, and Norway, respectively, in the Spanish Observatorio del Roque de los Muchachos of the Instituto de Astrofísica de Canarias.

## 1 Introduction

In the last few years we have witnessed a fantastic development in an “old” but until recently not very successful field of astrophysics: the search for extra-solar planets. Following the first success in exoplanet searches with the discovery of the planet around 51 Peg (Mayor & Queloz May95 (1995)), the number of known giant planets orbiting solar-type stars did not stop growing, being currently of 72 (including 7 multi-planetary systems)111Counts of January 2002. For a list see e.g. table at obswww.unige.ch/$``$naef/who\_discovered\_that\_planet.html..

Unexpectedly, the planets found to date do not have much in common with the ones in our own Solar System (for a review see Marcy et al. Mar00 (2000), Udry et al. Udr01 (2001), or Mayor & Santos May01b (2001)). One remarkable characteristic appears to be related with the parent stars themselves: stars with planetary companions are considerably metal-rich when compared with single field dwarfs (Gonzalez Gon98 (1998); Santos et al. San00 (2000); Gonzalez et al. Gon01 (2001); Santos et al. 2001a , 2001b ). To explain the observed difference two main explanations have been suggested. The first and more “traditional” is based upon the fact that the more metals you have in the proto-planetary disk, the higher should be the probability of forming a planet (see e.g. Pollack et al. Pol96 (1996) for the traditional paradigm of planetary formation). Thus, in this case the “excess” of metallicity is seen as primordial to the cloud that gave origin to the star/planet system. “Opposing” to this view, the high metal content observed for stars with planets has also been interpreted as a sign of the accretion of high-Z material by the star sometime after it reached the main-sequence (e.g. Gonzalez Gon98 (1998); Laughlin Lau00 (1996)).

Although recent results seem to favor the former scenario as the key process leading to the observed metal richness of stars with planets (Santos et al. 2001a , 2001b ; Pinsonneault et al. Pin01 (2001)), signs of accretion of planetary material have also been found for some planet hosts (e.g. Israelian et al. 2001a ; Laws & Gonzalez Law01 (2001)). The question is then turned to know how frequent those phenomena happen, and to how much these could have affected the observed metal contents.

One possible and interesting approach to this problem may pass by the study of one particularly important element: beryllium (Be). Together with lithium (Li) and boron (B), Be is a very important tracer of the internal stellar structure and kinematics. Be is mainly produced by spallation reactions in the interstellar medium, while it is burned in the hot stellar furnaces (e.g. Reeves Ree94 (1994)). While most works of light element abundances are based on Li (the abundances of this element are easier to measure), Be studies have one major advantage when compared with Li. Since it is burned at much higher temperatures, Be is depleted at lower rates than Li, and thus we can expect to measure Be abundances in stars which have no detectable Li in their atmospheres (like intermediate-age late G- or K-type dwarfs). In fact, for about 50% of the known planet host stars no Li was detected (Israelian et al. 2001b ). Furthermore, Li studies have shown the presence of a significant scatter for late-type stars of similar temperature. This has also been observed in open clusters where all stars have the same age, and appears to be related to the clusters’s age, rotational velocities, pre-Main Sequence history, etc. (see, e.g., García López et al. Gar94 (1994); Randich et al. Ran98 (1998); Jones et al. Jon99 (1999)), a fact that may complicate or even preclude a comparison.

Given all these points, Be studies of planetary host stars can indeed be particularly important and telling. For example, if pollution has played some important role in determining the high-metal content of planet host stars, we would expect to find a similar or even higher increase in the Be contents. This is basically due to the fact that planetary material is relatively poor in H and He when compared to the star (e.g. Anders & Grevesse And89 (1989)). Furthermore, and unlike for iron, Be may be already a bit depleted in the stellar surface. Thus, the injection of planetary material into this latter could even be responsible for a more important abundance change in the Be abundance than in the iron content. If pollution has indeed played an important role, the net result of the fall of planetary material into the central “sun” would thus be that, for a given temperature interval, we should find that planet hosts are (in principle) more Be-rich that non-planet host stars. In other words, the analysis of Be abundances represents an independent way of testing the pollution scenario.

García López & Péres de Taoro (Gar98 (1998)) carried out the first Be measurements in stars hosting planets: 16 Cyg A and B, and 55 Cnc, followed by Deliyannis et al. (Del00 (2000)). In order to continue to address this problem, we present222Preliminary results were already presented in García López et al. (Gar01 (2001)). here a study of Be abundances in a set of 29 stars with planets, and a smaller set of 6 stars without known planetary companions. In Sects. 2 and 3 we present the observations and analysis of the data and in Sect. 4 we discuss the results in the context of the planetary host stars chemical abundances, but also in terms of the Be depletion processes. We conclude in Sect. 5.

## 2 Observations and data reduction

Observations of the Be ii doublet at 3131 Å were carried out during 5 different observing runs. Two of them made use of the UVES spectrograph, at the VLT/UT2 Kueyen telescope (ESO, Chile). The obtained spectra have a resolution R$`\lambda /\mathrm{\Delta }\lambda `$ of around 70 000 for one of the runs (66.C-0116 A) and 50 000 for the other (66.D-0284 A), and the S/N ratios in the region around 3131 Å varying between 30 and 250 (from now on we will refer to runs UVES(A)/(B), respectively). UVES spectra were complemented with data obtained using the UES spectrograph (R=55 000) at the 4.2-m William Herschel Telescope (WHT) and, in two different observing runs (A/B), with the IACUB echelle spectrograph (R=33 000) at the 2.6-m Nordic Optical Telescope (NOT), both at the Observatorio del Roque de los Muchachos (La Palma). The observations, together with the corresponding observing run and S/N ratios obtained are listed in Table 1.

Data reduction was done using IRAF333IRAF is distributed by National Optical Astronomy Observatories, operated by the Association of Universities for Research in Astronomy, Inc., under contract with the National Science Foundation, U.S.A. tools in the echelle package. Standard background correction, flat-field, and extraction procedures were used. For the UVES(A) run and for the UES data, the wavelength calibration was done using a ThAr lamp spectrum taken during the same night. For the UVES(B) and IACUB runs the wavelength calibration was done using photospheric lines in the region of interest. The final linear dispersions for the UVES(A), UVES(B), IACUB(A), IACUB(B), and UES spectra were 30, 17, 35, 35 and 17 mÅ pixel-1, respectively, with rms values in the range 4$`\times 10^4`$ to 8$`\times 10^3`$ Å.

## 3 Abundance Analysis

### 3.1 Atmospheric parameters

García López et al. (Gar95 (1995)) carried out a detailed analysis of the sources of uncertainties regarding the determination of Be abundances. They concluded that the precision of the derived Be abundances is mostly dependent on the choice of the stellar atmospheric parameters. In particular, they are very sensitive to the adopted value for the surface gravity ($`\mathrm{log}g`$).

In order to limit the possible systematic errors in our determinations it is important, whenever possible, to use an uniform set of atmospheric parameters for all the programme stars. We thus decided to use the values listed by Santos et al. (2001a ; 2001b ), computed from an uniform and accurate spectroscopic analysis available for most of the stars studied in this paper444The list of atmospheric parameters in Santos et al. (2001a ) was determined by these authors for part of the objects, or was taken from the studies of Gonzalez (Gon98 (1998)), Gonzalez & Laws (Gon98 (1998)), and Gonzalez et al. (Gon99 (1999),Gon01 (2001)).. For three of the stars (HD 870, HD 1461, and HD 3823 for which no planetary companions were found to date), no parameters were available, and we computed them using CORALIE or FEROS spectra, in the very same way as in Santos et al. (2001a ). The values are listed in Table 2. As discussed by the authors, the errors in $`T_{\mathrm{eff}}`$ are usually lower than 50 K, and errors in the microturbulence parameter are of the order of 0.1 km s-1. As for $`\mathrm{log}g`$, the uncertainties are in the range of 0.10 to 0.15 dex555Note that these small uncertainties are relative, and not absolute..

### 3.2 Spectral synthesis

The abundance analysis was done in standard Local Thermodynamic Equilibrium (LTE) using a revised version of the code MOOG (Sneden Sne73 (1973)), and a grid of Kurucz et al. (Kur93 (1993)) ATLAS9 atmospheres. Be abundances were derived by fitting synthetic spectra to the data, using the same line-list as in García López & Perez de Taoro (Gar98 (1998)). While both Be ii lines at 3130.420 and 3131.065 Å are present in our data, we only used the latter, given the severe line blending in the region around 3130.420 Å (used only for checking the consistency of the fit).

In the analysis, the overall metallicity was scaled to the iron abundance. We then iterated by changing the Be abundance, the continuum placement and the Gaussian smoothing profile until the best fit for the whole spectral region was obtained (we fitted all the spectrum between 3129.5 and 3132.0 Å). When considered important (e.g. for $`\tau `$ Boo), the smoothing function used was a combination of a Gaussian and a rotational profile; for these cases we used the $`v\mathrm{sin}i`$ value determined from the width of the CORAVEL cross-correlation dip (Benz & Mayor Ben84 (1984)). Three examples are shown in Figs. 1 and 2. The resulting abundances for all the objects observed are listed in Table 2. Here we use the notation $`\mathrm{log}N(Be)`$=\[Be\]=$`\mathrm{log}(\mathrm{Be}/\mathrm{H})`$+12.

### 3.3 Errors

It is not simple to derive accurate uncertainties for measurements of Be abundances (García López et al. Gar95 (1995)). In this paper the errors were estimated as follows. We considered that from the errors of $`\pm `$50 K in temperature and $`\pm `$0.15 dex in $`\mathrm{log}g`$ we can expect typical uncertainties around 0.03 and 0.06 dex, respectively. There are several OH lines blended with the Be ii 3130.420 Å line; changes in the oxygen abundance would also change the location of the pseudo-continuum in that region, affecting the overall fit. To take this into account, an error of 0.05 dex, associated with the uncertainties in the oxygen abundances expected for these stars, has been added. Other atmospheric parameters, like the metallicity \[Fe/H\] and the microturbulence, do not influence significantly the results, and we will conservatively consider that together they introduce an error of 0.05. Adding quadratically, these figures produce an uncertainty of 0.09 dex, that was added to the error due to continuum placement and fit quality for each case, that we conservatively considered to be at least of 0.10 dex. The final errors, listed in Table 2 together with the derived Be abundances, are of the order of 0.16 dex, and quite independent of the S/N of the spectrum.

Note that we are interested in carrying out a differential analysis, and thus the knowledge of the absolute temperatures and surface gravities is not very important. Rather, it is crucial that these values are all in the same “scale”.

## 4 Be in stars with planets

There are many evidences indicating that the depletion of Be is connected with the rotational history of a star (e.g. Stephens et al. Ste97 (1997)). Although still not completely established, this history may be related to the presence or not of a (massive) proto-planetary disk (Edwards et al. Edw93 (1993); Strom Str94 (1994); Stassun et al. Sta99 (1999); Barnes et al. Bar01 (2001); Rebull Reb01 (2001); Hartmann Har02 (2002)). If true, this may result in different depletion rates for stars which had different disk masses, and thus may or not have been able to form the now discovered giant planets. This could, in fact, have been the case for the pair of very similar dwarfs 16 Cyg A and B (the latter having a detected planetary companion), for which the Li abundances seem to be quite different (Cochran et al. Coc97 (1997); King et al. Kin97 (1997); Gonzalez et al. Gon98 (1998)), but show similar amounts of Be (García López & Perez de Taoro Gar98 (1998)). On the other hand, if pollution plays any role, we might also expect to detect some differences between stars with planets and stars without planets concerning light element abundances, and in particular concerning Be.

Stars with planets might thus present statistically different Be contents when compared with stars without (detected) planetary systems.

In Fig. 3 we show a plot of Be abundances for the stars presented in this paper as a function of Teff. Filled symbols represent stars with planets, while open symbols denote dwarfs with no planet companions found by radial-velocity surveys (i.e. measured in the context of the CORALIE survey (Udry et al. Udr00 (2000)), and having no clear radial-velocity signature of a planet). We also included three objects from the study of García López & Perez de Taoro (Gar98 (1998)) – triangles, namely 16 Cyg A (HD 186408), 16 Cyg B (HD 186427) and 55 Cnc (HD 75732 A), for which the atmospheric parameters have been computed using the same technique as for the stars presented here (Gonzalez Gon98 (1998)). In order to keep this work as an homogeneous comparative study, we have preferred not to introduce measurements for stars “without” planets taken from other works (e.g. Stephens et al. Ste97 (1997)), derived using different sets of atmospheric parameters and chemical analysis (e.g. equivalent widths).

In the figure, stars with a surface gravity $`\mathrm{log}g`$4.1 (probably slightly evolved) are represented by the squares. These include HD 10697, HD 38529, HD 117176, HD 143761, and HD 168443 (all planet hosts). Note also that HD 114762, a quite metal-poor dwarf (\[Fe/H\]=$``$0.6) with a brown-dwarf companion was also included amongst the planet hosts.

Superposed with the measurements are a set of Yale beryllium depletion isochrones from Pinsonneault et al. (Pin90 (1990)) for solar metallicity and an age of 1.7 Gyr. Given that it is not possible to know what was the initial Be abundance for each star, we have considered an initial $`\mathrm{log}N(Be)=1.28`$, i.e., between Solar ($`\mathrm{log}N(Be)`$=1.15 – Chmielewski et al. Chm75 (1975)) and meteoritic ($`\mathrm{log}N(Be)`$=1.42 – Anders & Grevesse And89 (1989)).

Although still preliminary, a look at the figure shows that the current results argue against pollution as the key process leading to the metallicity excess of stars with planets (see also Santos et al. 2001a , 2001b  and Pinsonneault et al. Pin01 (2001)). Adding $``$50 earth masses of C1 chondrites to the Sun, for example, would increase its iron abundance by about 0.25 dex (a value similar to the average difference observed between stars with and without detected giant planets), and its Be abundance would increase by a slightly higher factor666For this calculation we have used a Be/Fe ratio similar to C1 chondrites, and considered an iron content of $``$20% by mass (Anders & Grevesse And89 (1989)). Note also that the fall of a few jupiter-mass jovian planet(s) would not have a big effect on the iron or beryllium abundance of the star.. No such difference seems present in our data. In the same way, the results also do not support extra-mixing due to an eventual different angular momentum history of the two “populations” of stars. We note, however, that at this stage we are limited by the small number of comparison stars analyzed in this work.

In this context, one particular star (HD 82943) deserves a few comments. This planet host was recently found to have a near meteoritic 6Li/7Li ratio (Israelian et al. 2001a ), better interpreted as a sign that planet/planetary material was engulfed by this dwarf sometime during its lifetime. Israelian et al. have suggested that the Li isotopic ratio of HD 82943 could be explained by the fall of either the equivalent of a 2 jupiter mass giant planet or a 3 earth mass terrestrial planet (or planetary material). Considering that HD 82943 had initially a solar Be abundance, the addition of this quantity of material would increase its Be abundance by about 0.1 dex. A small “excess” of Be would thus be observed, but this value would be within the error bars of our measurements. As we can see from Fig. 3, the Be abundance of HD 82943 is not particularly high when compared to other stars in the plot (although it seems to occupy a position near the upper envelope of the Be abundances). No further conclusions can be taken.

### 4.1 The $`\mathrm{log}N(Be)`$ vs. Teff trend

According to the standard models (without rotation – e.g. Table 1 of Pinsonneault et al. Pin90 (1990)), basically no Be depletion should occur for dwarfs in the temperature region plotted in the figure. This is clearly not compatible with the observations. However, it is already known that standard models are not able to explain most of the observed behaviors of Li and Be (e.g. Stephens et al. Ste97 (1997)). On the other hand, models with rotation (Pinsonneault et al. Pin90 (1990))777Improved Yale models (e.g. Deliyannis & Pinsonneault Del93 (1993)) do not show an important difference. The 1990 models were thus used in the current paper, since they are the only tabulated. were shown to be quite satisfactory for stars with 6500 K $``$ Teff$``$5600 K (Stephens et al. Ste97 (1997)). But as we can see from the figure, they do not predict significant burning at temperatures around 5200 K. We note that according to these isochrones, Be depletion is done at moderate rates once the star reaches the main-sequence (about 0.06 dex from 0.7 to 1.7 Gyr for a 0.9 M dwarf, and at a considerably lower rate for higher ages following the Fig. 11 of Stephens et al. Ste97 (1997)), and thus we do not expect a crucial difference with the presented curves.

In contrast with the models888We will assume for now that the initial Be abundance was similar (within the uncertainties) for all the stars in the plot., one very interesting detail is seen. If, for temperatures between about 5600 and 6200 K, the dispersion in the $`\mathrm{log}N(Be)`$ is remarkably small, and the abundances seem to be consistent with the model predictions, the general trend for lower temperatures follows a slow decrease with decreasing temperature. Under the assumption that no difference exists between stars with and without giant planets, either the trend is due to some metallicity or age effect, or it is simply telling us that the models are not able to reproduce the observations for temperatures bellow $``$5600 K. This problem was also noted by Stephens et al. (Ste97 (1997)), but no such extreme cases had been found, maybe because their “solar metallicity sample” did not go down to temperatures lower than $``$5500 K. Note that the iron abundances for the stars in the plot are in the range from $``$0.6 to $`+`$0.5, and the variation of the initial Be abundance with stellar metallicity seems to be quite small in this interval (Rebolo et al. Reb88 (1988); Molaro et al. Mol97 (1997); García López et al., in preparation).

Particularly interesting are the 4 cases for which only upper values for the Be abundances were found: HD 38529, HD 145675 (14 Her), HD13445 (Gl 86), and HD 75732 (55 Cnc), all in the temperature interval between 5150 K and 5700 K. A detail of the spectral synthesis for one of these stars can be seen in Fig.2. While for HD 38529 the Be depletion may be explained by the fact that this star is already leaving the main-sequence (its low surface gravity and its position in the HR-diagramme – e.g. Gonzalez et al. Gon01 (2001) – show it to be evolved) for the three remaining objects no simple explanations seem to exist.

One possible explanation for Be abundances of the most discrepant objects could be their ages. For example, 55 Cnc and Gl 86 seem to be quite old, with isochrone ages in agreement with the oldest stars in the galaxy (ages were determined from theoretical isochrones of Schaller et al. Sch92 (1992), and Schaerer et al. 1993a , 1993b ). This is not the case for 14 Her, with an age around $``$6 Gyr. Furthermore, for 14 Her, there is a star (HD 222335, without detected giant planet) with about the same temperature, similar age ($``$5-6 Gyr) but much higher Be abundance.

Can a metallicity effect explain the observed difference? An increase in the metallicity (and thus in the opacities) has the effect of changing the convective envelope depth of a star. It has been shown by Swenson et al. (Swe94 (1994)) that even small changes in the oxygen abundances may have a strong effect on the Li depletion rates. Although it is unwise to extrapolate directly, a similar effect should exist concerning Be. In what concerns our case, most of the objects in the plot having temperatures lower than 5400 K are metal-rich with respect to the Sun. For example, 14 Her is one of the most metal rich stars in the sample (\[Fe/H\]=$`+`$0.50). But some counter examples exist, like Gl 86, only about 100 K cooler, with a value of \[Fe/H\]=$``$0.20. Unfortunately, no theoretical isochrones for Be depletion are available for these high metallicities, and it is not clear whether a difference of $`+`$0.5 dex in metallicity can or cannot induce significantly different Be depletion rates for this temperature range. On the other hand, if some unknown opacity effect could lead to systematic errors as a function of temperature – e.g. the missing UV opacity (Balachandran & Bell Bal98 (1998)) – we could maybe expect to measure some trend. However, we have no special reason to believe that this effect can lead to the observed trend. Furthermore, the missing UV opacity problem is far from being solved (if it exists at all); indeed, recent results seem to show that we can obtain a good fit of the solar spectrum without taking into account this extra-opacity (Allende Prieto & Lambert All00 (2000)).

Although not conclusive, the evidences discussed above suggest that a bona-fide explanation for the observed Be abundances may pass either by some inconsistency in the models, or by some metallicity effect. But given the much higher number of planet hosts in the plot when compared with the non-planet hosts, we still cannot discard that the presence of a planet might be the responsible for the observed trend999Can the presence of a massive proto-planetary disk (able to form planets), or other variables connected to the process of planetary formation itself (e.g. timescale), induce different angular momentum histories for stars with different Teff?. Else, since Be depletion in the Pinsonneault et al. (Pin90 (1990)) models is strongly related to the angular momentum lost, we would have, for example, to consider that there is some negative correlation between initial angular momentum and/or angular momentum loss and stellar mass (which does not seem very plausible). Unfortunately only the addition of more objects to the plot, and in particular the determination of Be abundances for a larger sample of dwarfs with T$`{}_{\mathrm{eff}}{}^{}<`$5400 K will permit to better settle down this question. Such observations are currently in progress.

It is also worth mentioning that on the other side of the Teff plane, both HD 120136 ($τ$ Boo) and BD $-$10 3166, positioned in the Li (and Be) dip region (e.g. Boesgaard & King Boe01b (2001)), have a Be abundance that may be compatible with the models.

### 4.2 Lithium vs. Beryllium

Our data can also be used to further investigate the issue of Li and Be depletion in main sequence stars. Fig. 4 compares Li and Be abundances for the same stars, and shows, as expected, that Li is burned much faster than Be, and its decline with temperature is much more clear. This is clearly expected from the models for a middle age solar type dwarf in this temperature regime. Only two points seem to come out of the main trend (in the Li panel). These are the cases of HD 10697 and HD 117176 (70 Vir). These two stars deserve some particular discussion in Sect. 4.2.1.

In Fig. 5 we plot Be vs. Li abundances for all the stars with T$`{}_{\mathrm{eff}}{}^{}<`$6300 K for which both Li and Be abundances are available. The plot reveals no clear trends. Even 70 Vir and HD 10697 follow the main trend, probably attesting the normality of these two stars. Again, no significant difference is seen between the two groups of stars (planet hosts and non-planet hosts).

One interesting but expected detail in Fig. 5 is that there are no stars in the lower right part of the plot, a region that would correspond to stars having depleted much of their Be but that are still Li rich. This “gap” in the figure, plus the few stars in the upper right corner, suggests that there might be a correlation between Li and Be depletions (like the one found by Deliyannis et al. Del98 (1998), Boesgaard et al. Boe01 (2001) and more recently by Boesgaard & King Boe01b (2001) for their sample of hotter dwarfs, but absent in the study of Domínguez Herrera Her98 (1998), and in the sample of old cluster members of Randich et al. Ran01 (2001)). However, there is a significant number of stars in the upper left region of the plot having Be determinations but only upper limits for the Li abundance (objects that are not present in Fig. 14 of Boesgaard et al.). This particular point in quite interesting, since it is, to our knowledge, the first time such a “population” of stars is discussed in the literature.

In Fig. 6 we have done the same plot as in Fig. 5, but this time using different symbols as a function of the temperature of the object. As we can easily see from the plot, the objects in the three different temperature regimes chosen occupy clearly different positions in the diagramme. Stars with Teff$``$5400 are positioned in the lower-left corner. These correspond basically to objects having burned some Be, and that only have upper values for the Li abundance. In the upper-right corner of the figure are positioned stars in the range Teff$`>`$5900 K. These correspond to objects that have essentially not burned any Be, having depleted only moderately their Li content. An intermediate population, with 5400 K$`<`$Teff$``$5900 K, having already considerably depleted its original Li but not its Be content is present in the mid-upper part of the plot.

Except for HD 38529, a sub-giant star (the object with the lowest Be abundance in the plot), all the other objects are well grouped according to their temperature range. This is an interesting result, since it is giving us important clues about the temperature at which the onset of Li and Be depletion occurs in our metal-rich stars: if for Li depletion occurs already for temperatures around 5900 K, for Be this only seems to happen at Teff$``$5400 K. Note, however, that given the dispertion these limits have to be seen as approximate.

Note also that we did not include $τ$ Boo in Figs. 5 and 6, since its the only object in the sample that is clearly in the Li-dip region.

#### 4.2.1 HD 10697 and 70 Vir

As mentioned above, HD 10697 and 70 Vir do not fit into the mean trend in the lower panel of Fig. 4. Considering as initial abundances of Li the “cosmic” value ($`\mathrm{log}N(Li)`$=3.31; Martin et al. Mar94 (1994)) and for Be the average between meteoritic and solar ($`\mathrm{log}N(Be)`$=1.28, as above), then the observed values for 70 Vir indicate that Be ($`\mathrm{log}N(Be)`$=0.82) is depleted about 3 times, while Li ($`\mathrm{log}N(Li)`$=1.76) is depleted by by a factor of 22. Nevertheless, such a pattern of Li and Be depletion is not so unexpected (see e.g. Deliyannis & Pinsonneault Del97 (1997); Stephens et al. Ste97 (1997)), and is compatible with models of depletion including turbulent induced rotational mixing (see e.g. discussion in Stephens et al. Ste97 (1997)). But 70 Vir is not a young object (it seems to be slightly evolved, as confirmed by its low surface gravity $`\mathrm{log}g`$=3.90), and it seems strange that an evolved star with its temperature may still have so much Li.

One possibility would be to invoke Li and Be dredge up from a “buffer” below the former main-sequence convective envelope (Deliyannis et al. Del90 (1990)). But as discussed in e.g. Randich et al. (Ran99 (1999)), this scenario does not seem to be supported by the observations. However, the fact that this star is evolved means that its current temperature is probably different to the one it had during the main-sequence phase. With a near solar metallicity (\[Fe/H\]=$``$0.03) and a mass of $``$1.1 M, the temperature of 70 Vir would have been more close to 6000 K. A dwarf with this temperature is not supposed to burn much of its Li (as we can see from the plot). So, we speculate that this star may have just left the main-sequence, and started to dilute (and/or burn) the Li (as well as Be) content present in its convective envelope. If the size of the convective envelope has increased “quite fast”, maybe it still did not have time to deplete/dilute all the Li, but is already depleting part of its Be (Charbonnel et al. Cha00 (2000)).

The case of HD 10697 is in fact not very different from the one of 70 Vir. Both have the same mass (1.10 M), and similar surface gravities. The main difference resides in the fact that HD 10647 seems to have, within the errors, preserved most of its Be content, while Li is depleted about 23 times. But given the uncertainties in our Be abundance determination, and the unknown initial Li and Be content of the star, we cannot be certain whether the Be is really intact in the atmosphere of this object. The same arguments discussed for 70 Vir may thus be valid in this case.

It is worth mentioning that another possibility to explain the high Li abundances of these two stars would be to invoke a planet engulfment (like in the case of HD 82943 – Israelian et al. 2001a ), that could simply result from the migration of a former close-in planet due to tidal interactions with the evolved star (Rasio et al. Ras96 (1996)). Unfortunately, no measurements of the Li isotopic ratio are available for 70 Vir. But recent models by Siess & Livio (Sie99 (1999)) show that the absorption of a planet by a giant star would have the effect of increasing considerably its Li abundance, but only slightly the Be content, a situation that could be compatible with the observed Li and Be abundances for this star.

There is another interesting point about these two stars. Although they have very similar Li abundances, their Be contents differ by 0.56 dex. Given that both stars have similar metallicity ($``$0.03 and $`+`$0.16, for 70 Vir and HD 10697, respectively) their initial Be content is not expected to be significantly different (Rebolo et al. Reb88 (1988); Molaro et al. Mol97 (1997); García López et al., in preparation). However, we do not know up to which extent Be and Li abundances are uniform in the Inter-Stellar Medium. A different initial Li/Be ratio, together with the uncertainties in the Li and Be determinations, could probably lead to the observed effect. Else, we would need to invoke that the two stars have burned Li at the same rate, while the opposite happened for Be. But given that these two stars are sub-giants, we cannot exclude that we are simply observing some evolutionary effect, eventually combined with slightly different initial Li and Be abundances. Note that the former object is a bit cooler, being positioned in the temperature region where the Be depletion seems to occur (see previous Sect.).

## 5 Conclusions

We have obtained Be abundances for a sample of planet hosts stars, and a smaller sample of stars without known giant planetary companions, aimed at studying the existence of any significant difference between the two groups. Our data also allow us to further investigate Li and Be depletion among metal-rich stars. The objects have metallicities between about $``$0.6 and $`+`$0.5 dex, and cover the temperature interval between $``$5150 K and 6450 K. The main conclusions go as follows:

* No particular difference was found between the Be abundances of stars with and without giant planetary companions in the temperature interval for which both groups were observed. This may be interpreted as an argument against the “pollution scenario” as the source of the high-\[Fe/H\] observed for planet host stars. However, given the low number of comparison stars available in this study, no strong constraints can still be set.
* For stars with T$`{}_{\mathrm{eff}}{}^{}<`$5500 K, the general trend of the Be abundances is not well described by models of light element depletion for solar metallicity (e.g. Pinsonneault et al. Pin90 (1990)). These inconsistencies may be connected either to some metallicity effect, or to some problem with the models, but at the moment we cannot completely discard some relation with the presence of a planet.
* For temperatures lower than 6300 K, no clear correlated Li and Be pattern is seen, contrary to what was found by other authors for hotter dwarfs (Deliyannis et al. Del98 (1998); Boesgaard et al. Boe01 (2001)).
* Our data permit to establish approximate temperature limits for the onset of strong Li and Be depletion for the metal-rich stars studied in this work. For stars with T$`{}_{\mathrm{eff}}{}^{}<`$5900 K, severe Li burning is seen, while for Be this limit is around 5400 K.

A large survey for Be in planet and non-planet host stars is currently under way, and we expect it to give new insights into this timely and interesting subject.

###### Acknowledgements.

We thank our anonymous referee for the useful and interesting comments and suggestions. We wish to thank the Swiss National Science Foundation (FNSRS) for the continuous support to this project. This research was also partially supported by the Spanish DGES under project PB98-0531-C02-02. Support from Fundação para a Ciência e Tecnologia, Portugal, to N.C.S. in the form of a scholarship is gratefully acknowledged.