A comparative study of the phosphagens, with some remarks on the origin of vertebrates

Abstract

The original discovery of labile phosphorus in muscular tissue by Eggleton and Eggleton (1927, a , b ) was rapidly followed by a succession of researches which demonstrated its great importance in muscular contraction. Fiske and Subbarow (1929) showed shortly afterwards that the phosphagen of the Eggletons was a compound containing equimolecular amounts of creatine and phosphoric acid, which, owing to its great instability in acid solution, had always previously been estimated as inorganic orthophosphate. It remained for the Eggletons (1928), Nachmansohn (1928, 1929, a , b ) and Meyerhof (1930) to delineate the functional importance of phosphagen in the muscle machinery, its breakdown under anaerobic conditions, its restitution in oxygen, and its energetical relations with the lactic acid cycle. In the course of their investigations, Eggleton and Eggleton (1928) examined the tissues of a certain number of invertebrates, and failed to find there any creatine phosphate. About the same time, however, Meyerhof and Lohmann (1928) reported the discovery of another phosphagen in crustacean muscle, a phosphagen in which the creatine portion of the molecule was replaced by arginine. This led to an examination of certain other invertebrates by Meyer­ hof himself (1928), from which a wide distribution of arginine phosphate in the invertebrate Phyla was suggested. Throughout the subsequent discussions it has been assumed that creatine phosphate may be regarded as characteristic of the Vertebrates and arginine phosphate as characteristic of the Invertebrates, although in the absence of thorough-going comparative researches, this view could only remain a very tentative generalisation. “The development of creatine phosphoric acid in the Vertebrates from the arginine phosphoric acid of the Invertebrates,” said Meyerhof (1930, p. 93) “must be regarded as a characteristic chemical mutation.” It is probable that Meyerhof was led to this sharp division by the general conclusions at which Hunter arrives in his monograph on creatine and creatinine (1928). Reviewing the various attempts which have been made to demonstrate the presence of creatine or creatinine in invertebrates ( e . g ., Wilson (1914), Myers (1920)) he points out that nearly all depend on the very unspecific Jaffe reaction, and concludes that up to the present time no good evidence exists in favour of their presence. But this is clearly only a negative conclusion, and the issue is therefore pre­judged when Meyerhof writes, “Corresponding to the restriction of creatine to the vertebrate group, Eggleton and Eggleton failed to find phosphagen in the muscles of invertebrates” (1930, p. 92). Moreover, it is not possible to include all the data in the literature in Hunter’s condemnation, for Quast (1924) in reporting the presence of creatinine in the kidney of the gastropod, Cyclostoma elegans , states that he relied upon the tests of Weyl and Maschke as well as on that of Jaffe. And in any case, there remain large and important groups of animals (the Echinoids for instance) which have never been thoroughly examined either for creatine or for phosphagen.

Glycolysis in Oyster Muscle

“…Studies on other species point to the preEence of arginino phosphate in oyster muBcle (Meyerhof, 1928) nnd it proved possible to demonstrate this couipound iu both the nacreoua and vitreous tissue (Table 11) by methods involving phosphorus determination after fractionating the Ca salts (J. Needham, D. M. Noedham, Baldwin and Yudkin, 1932). These results were confirmed in other experiments by hydrolysing the Ca salt of arginine phosphate with 0-1 M IICl at 100' 0. and determining the arginino set free by using arginase to produce urea, wbieh eould be estimated maiiometrically with urease (Kreba, 1942).…”

Between Biochemists and Embryologists – The Biochemical Study of Embryonic Induction in the 1930s

“…As a result, in 1932, he was awarded the official fellowship of his college and honored with the Doctor of Science degree. Most important, just prior to his travel to Germany, in the spring of 1933, Needham was appointed Reader in Biochemistry, positioning him as second-in-command to Frederick G. Hopkins, the institute's renowned director (Cambridge University Registry, 1932;Needham, 1932Needham, , 1933a). Needham's esteemed stature and scientific prestige allowed him to recruit researchers and research students from abroad, thereby compensating for the limited interest shown by his colleagues.…”

“…11 9 The Needhams worked in different research fields but had collaborated on occasion since the early days of their respective careers. During the 1920s, they studied cellular oxidation-reduction processes and in the early 1930s, conducted research in comparative biochemistry (Needham and Needham, 1925;Needham et al, 1932;Teich, 2003;Armon, Interview with Mikula´sˇTeich, 17 May, 2006). 10 The embryological research existing was conducted primarily in the Oxford Zoological Department and to a large extent followed on the morphological tradition and its occupation with the relationship between evolution and development (Ridley, 1985;Horder, 2008).…”

Thermodynamics of the Arginine Kinase Reaction

“…About the time the Eggleton and Eggleton (1927) (2) and Fiske and Subbarow (1929) (3) discovered PCr in vertebrate skeletal muscle, Meyerhof and Lohmann (20) found another phosphagen, PArg, in crustacean muscle (4). Six years later, Lohmann demonstrated the reaction in muscle extracts prepared from crabs.…”