The fine structure of red and white myotomal muscle fibres of the coalfish (Gadus virens)

Seasonal variation of Co-enzyme Q10 content in pelagic fish tissues from Eastern Quebec

“…The higher concentration of CoQ10 observed in red flesh as compared to white flesh has been explained by its higher abundance in mitochondria (Farbu and Lambertsen, 1979). Moreover, it was shown that red flesh could store more energy rich materials such as glycogen and lipids than white flesh fibres (Patterson and Goldspink, 1972), and that it contains a higher cytochrome oxidase activity (Johnston et al, 1977). As a consequence, red flesh is mainly used for continuous swimming activities, and obtains its energy from oxidative phosphorylation, whereas white flesh is mostly active during vigorous movements (quick bursts) and gets mainly its energy from anaerobic glycolysis (Johnston and Goldspink, 1973;Huss, 1995).…”

The pCa‐tension and force‐velocity characteristics of skinned fibres isolated from fish fast and slow muscles

“…While there have been a number ofelectrophysiological (Bone, 1966;Hudson, 1969;Stanfield, 1972;Hidaka & Toida, 1969), ultrastructural (Kryvi, 1977;Patterson & Goldspink, 1972;Johnston, 1981 a) and biochemical (Johnston et al 1977;Johnston & Moon, 1980) studies of fish fast and slow muscle fibres, very little is known about their mechanical properties. The complex orientation of fibres within fish myotomes (see Alexander, 1969) makes mechanical studies difficult; the few experiments performed on fish muscle to date have been restricted mainly to fin and jaw muscles (see Bone, 1978;Johnston, 1981b for reviews).…”

Ultrastructural and morphometric studies on the axial muscles of the Grey mulletMugil cephalusL. (Pisces Perciformes)

“…O n the other hand, white and red muscle fibres of the grey mullet show no significant difference in their percentage of sarcoplasmic reticulum and T system, in the location of triads nor in myofibriI organization. However, they show morphometric features quite similar to those observed in the corresponding fibre types of Gadits viretzs by Patterson and Goldspink (1972) and of Etmopterits spitiax and Galens rnelastomzts by Kryvi (1977).…”

“…I n fact, these fibre types do not differ in their ultrastructure (Franzini-Armstrong and Porter, 1964; Bishop and Odense, 1967;Kilarski, 1967;Nag, 1972); on the contrary, they differ in their histo-biochemical (Patterson et al, 1975; Kryvi and Totland, 19771, physiologicd (Johnston et al, 1977;Mosse and Huson, 1977) and morphomctric (Patterson and Goldspink, 1972; Kryvi, 1977) characteristics. I n any case, this difference is not enough to clarify their role in swimming locomotion.…”