Previous Article |
Table of Contents
| Next Article
Vol. 96, Issue 22, 12233-12239, October 26, 1999
Review
The metabolic implications of intracellular circulation
P. W.
Hochachka*
Departments of Zoology, Radiology, and Sports Medicine Division,
University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC Canada V6T 1Z4
Communicated by Ewald R. Weibel, University of Bern,
Herrenschwanden, Switzerland, August 16, 1999 (received for review May
17, 1999)
 |
Abstract |
Two views currently dominate research into cell function and
regulation. Model I assumes that cell behavior is quite similar to that
expected for a watery bag of enzymes and ligands. Model II assumes that
three-dimensional order and structure constrain and determine
metabolite behavior. A major problem in cell metabolism is determining
why essentially all metabolite concentrations are remarkably stable
(are homeostatic) over large changes in pathway fluxes
for
convenience, this is termed the [s] stability paradox. For muscle cells, ATP and O2 are the most perfectly
homeostatic, even though O2 delivery and metabolic rate
correlate in a 1:1 fashion. In total, more than 60 metabolites are
known to be remarkably homeostatic in differing metabolic states.
Several explanations of [s] stability are usually
given by traditional model I studies
none of which apply to all
enzymes in a pathway, and all of which require diffusion as the means
for changing enzyme-substrate encounter rates. In contrast, recent
developments in our understanding of intracellular myosin, kinesin, and
dyenin motors running on actin and tubulin tracks or cables supply a
mechanistic basis for regulated intracellular circulation systems with
cytoplasmic streaming rates varying over an approximately 80-fold range
(from 1 to >80 µm × sec
1). These new studies
raise a model II hypothesis of intracellular perfusion or convection as
a primary means for bringing enzymes and substrates together under
variable metabolic conditions. In this view, change in intracellular
perfusion rates cause change in enzyme-substrate encounter rates and
thus change in pathway fluxes with no requirement for large
simultaneous changes in substrate concentrations. The ease with which
this hypothesis explains the [s] stability paradox is
one of its most compelling features.
metabolic regulation | oxygen delivery | oxygen
regulation | intracellular perfusion | intracellular diffusion
 |
Two Models and Research Approaches in Cell Metabolism and
Regulation |
It is a rule of thumb in biology that
many physiological and molecular functions are the sum of individual
processes linked in sequence; in isolation, many such individual
processes have no clear functions at all. How such systems are designed
and regulated have presented perplexing problems to both biochemists
and physiologists. Integrated function is often evaluated by comparing
changes in flux through the pathway per se with changes in
concentrations of substrates and products of individual enzyme
reactions within the pathway. Two guiding paradigms or frameworks (for
convenience we will term them model I and model II) have guided these
evaluations. Although rarely stated, the implicit assumptions in model
I studies are that simple "solution chemistry" rules apply to the
cell/tissue as a whole, that changes in rates of
enzyme-substrate or protein-ligand interactions are generally
diffusion dominated, and that cell behavior can thus be considered to
be similar to that expected for a watery bag of organic materials. For
model II studies, the starting point is structure
the microanatomy of
the inside of the cell. These studies recognize that cells are filled
with organelles, membranous networks, microfilaments, microtubules,
channels, pumps, and motors, and that movements (not dead-still
solutions as in formal model I assumptions) dominate processes inside
of cells. In short, model II approaches explicitly assume that
three-dimensional order and structure constrain metabolite behavior and
that metabolic regulation theory has to incorporate this information to
realistically describe in vivo processes. This polarization
can be illustrated by considering a major, so far unsolved problem and
paradox in the current literature; namely, that essentially all
metabolite concentrations are remarkably stable (homeostatic) over
large changes in pathway fluxes (1).
 |
Phosphate Metabolite Homeostasis in Human Skeletal and Cardiac
Muscles |
One of our own recent noninvasive 31P
magnetic resonance spectroscopy (MRS) studies (2) clearly illustrates
the situation. In gastrocnemius muscle, during exercise requiring up to
40-fold changes in ATP turnover rates, the concentrations of ATP are
stable throughout the rest-work experimental protocols. The
concentrations of phosphocreatine (PCr) and Pi
change as linear functions of work, but these changes are still much
smaller than the change in work (about 3-fold compared with the 40-fold
increase in ATP turnover rate). Interrogated simultaneously in soleus
muscle, these changes in [PCr] and [Pi] are
found to be less than in gastrocnemius, whereas [ATP] and [ADP] are
again stable in all states examined (2). Similar MRS studies of human
(3) and dog (3) heart indicate a metabolism so well regulated that
change in cardiac work is achieved with even less perturbation of MRS
"visible" phosphate metabolites than in skeletal muscles.
 |
Metabolite Homeostasis Is a General Rule |
A key point is that the results for human muscles are in no way
unusual. Similar data for the adenylates, phosphagen,
Pi, and H+ arise from
studies of a wide assortment of animals (4-13) as well as other human
studies (6). These include invertebrates (7), fishes and other
ectothermic vertebrates (8-10), mammals, and birds (see ref. 5). What
is more, some of these studies have also analyzed many of the
intermediates in specific ATP supply pathways, such as glycolysis
(8-12), the Krebs cycle (13), amino acid metabolism, and the
-oxidation pathway of free fatty acid catabolism (see ref. 10 and
references therein); here too, changes in pathway intermediates are
modest (0.5- to 3-fold) despite large (from severalfold, up to and over
100-fold) changes in pathway fluxes that are simultaneously sustained
by the working tissue.
The implications emerging from such studies are (i)
that ATP is almost perfectly homeostatic under most conditions (except under very extreme fatigue conditions) and (ii) that other
intermediates in pathways of ATP supply or ATP demand are stabilized
within less rigorously controlled concentration ranges. In one of our earlier analyses (14), the latter condition was described as "relatively" homeostatic because the percent changes in
concentrations of intermediates are far less than the percent changes
in metabolic rates with which they correlate. For convenience, we shall
refer to the homeostasis of substrate concentration, [s],
in the face of large changes in cell work and cell metabolism, as the
[s] stability paradox, for which there are several
explanations already advanced.
 |
Traditional or Model I Explanations of the [s]
Stability Paradox |
A cursory examination of the literature indicates that
currently advanced explanations for metabolite homeostasis at any given step in metabolism depend on the kind of enzyme involved. For simple
enzymes obeying Michaelis-Menten kinetics, in vivo
operation is assumed to be under near-equilibrium conditions with very
high catalytic capacities assuring sensitive "high gain"
responses to small changes in [substrate]/[product] ratios
(see refs. 1, 15, and 16 for literature in this area). Such
near-equilibrium function of creatine phosphokinase (CPK) is the
accepted explanation for the especially precise regulation of ATP
during rate transitions
the traditional ATP "buffering" role of
CPK (2). For allosteric enzymes, usually functioning far from
equilibrium under in vivo conditions, large changes in rate
can often be sustained with relatively modest change in key modulators.
A quintessential example that fits this pattern is phosphofructokinase
(PFK) regulation by several modulators that operate mainly through
effects on enzyme-substrate affinity, rather than through changes in
maximum reaction velocity. Substrate and product concentrations,
however, would be expected to change drastically during large-scale
allosteric activation of PFK, because comparable in vitro
catalytic rates require the enzyme to approach saturation with its
substrates (see ref. 10). In liver and other tissues, where the
difference between rest and maximally activated metabolism is modest, a
widely accepted model used to explain stable concentrations of
adenylates (and other intermediates) at varying ATP turnover rates
assumes coordinate control by Ca2+ of both ATP
supply and ATP demand pathways (see ref. 17 and literature therein).
These mechanisms, formally similar to other allosteric regulations,
apply only to Ca2+-sensitive steps, which
represent only a small fraction of all the enzyme-catalyzed reactions
in ATP demand and supply pathways. For muscle and heart, these
Ca2+-mediated mechanisms in any event seem
inadequate to account for the large rate changes observed, and the same
may apply for the kidney, which can sustain a very high metabolic scope
between ischemic, low-flow states and maximally activated, high-flow
states (4, 10). In a third category are enzymes that are regulated by
phosphorylation-dephosphorylation or other covalent modifications; when coupled with signal amplification (18), large changes at these
specific loci in metabolism can be achieved with modest change in
substrate/product concentrations, but again these processes apply to only a modest subset of enzymes in the complex web of pathways
that contribute to ATP turnover during cell work. In cases involving
covalent modification, the ratio of catalytically active to inactive
enzyme is the main parameter being modulated; this is the main reason
why change in reaction rate can occur with minimal change in substrate
concentrations. We generalized this concept and reasoned (5, 19) that
the simplest model to account for widespread metabolite homeostasis
assumes regulation of the concentrations of catalytically active
enzymes in pathways of both ATP demand and ATP supply
(eo regulation). This would achieve
changes in ATP turnover rates proportional to the
kcat of the enzymes involved with no
required change in substrates or products. Such regulation could be
achieved by protein-protein based "on-off" switching between
active and inactive forms of enzymes, as in actomyosin ATPase (5), by
redox-based "on-off" switching, as in V-type ATPases (20), or by
translocation from an inactive to an active intracellular location
(essentially isolating enzymes from their target substrates), as in
glucose transporters (21).
In short, to explain metabolite homeostasis in varying metabolic
states with simultaneous precision and integration of linked sequences
of enzyme function, several regulatory models are currently being
evaluated by workers in this field (1, 4, 6, 22-29). These include:
(i) simple feedback and mass action controls (for so-called
equilibrium enzymes), (ii) allosteric controls (for regulatory enzymes such as phosphofructokinase), (iii)
models involving the regulation of eo
(the concentration of functional catalytic sites by means of alteration
in protein interactions, by change in phosphorylation state, by change
in redox state, or by translocation from inactive to an active
intracellular location), and additionally, (iv) various
versions of metabolic control analysis originally introduced over a
decade ago (see ref. 30).
Such studies are admittedly, if variably, successful in
explaining metabolite homeostasis during changes in work rate [some, like metabolic control analysis, are empirical mathematical models that
do not directly address the issue of mechanisms of metabolite homeostasis and, in fact, recognized this as an issue only after our
papers began to appear in the literature (31)]. Despite some admitted
success of these earlier analyses, for models assuming key regulatory
roles for pathway intermediates, the striking homeostasis of most
metabolites consistently presents a thorny problem that has not really
been acceptably explained: namely, the percent change in putative
regulatory intermediate is always less than the percent change in flux
required to match the change in ATP turnover rate. Put another way, the
kinetic order is usually <1, too low for change in [s] to
be "driving" the observed flux or metabolic rate changes. Given
that this is observed for all categories of enzymes discussed above, it
would be a statistical miracle to observe similar [s]
stability for all of them. Yet a cursory count for pathways of glucose,
fat, and amino acid metabolism (5, 10) shows that the percent changes
in concentrations of more than 60 substrates and intermediates
quantified to date are far less than the percent changes in pathway and
enzyme flux rates with which they correlate. The only metabolite that
seems to be an exception is oxygen. Even this turns out not to be a real exception, but the research here is so instructive that it is
useful to reason our way through the empirical evidence.
 |
Oxygen Delivery Is Fundamental to Metabolic Regulation |
A huge literature has developed on how
O2 functions both as a substrate and as a
potential regulator of tissue metabolism over varying times of exposure
(32-40), and I shall not review this comprehensively at this time.
Suffice it to emphasize that over and over again numerous studies have
found essentially 1:1 relationships between O2
delivery and muscle work, in some cases somewhat offset by changes in
O2 extraction. For example, in recent studies
using a dog gastrocnemius preparation (26, 33), we found such a
relationship between O2 delivery and work over an 18-fold change in ATP turnover rate. Later, Hogan et al.
(27) used the same preparation to analyze subtle submaximal work
changes. These transitions were sustained with immeasurable change in
[PCr], [Pi], and [ATP]; presumably,
therefore, the concentrations of other metabolites in participating
metabolic pathways were also stable, as in other systems (4, 5, 11).
Yet, through these transitions, a 1:1 relationship between change in
work and change in O2 delivery was maintained.
Because these kinds of results are qualitatively similar to those found
in many other studies, we and many others in the field accept that
O2 plays a key role in regulating change in ATP
turnover (5). But how is the O2 signal transduced
within the cell?
 |
Oxygen Signal Transduction in Working Muscle |
Unfortunately, the answer to this question remains unclear,
and the only mechanisms proposed by traditional studies in this area
assume the Krogh cylinder and calculate smooth diffusion gradients
within the cell ending in mitochondrial O2 sinks.
So far, this approach has been less than satisfactory because, to unravel the puzzle of how O2 delivery translates
into effects on metabolism within the cell, we require hard data on
intracellular O2 concentration. The problem is
that for most tissues this key parameter remains elusive and unknown.
The situation in muscle is more favorable, however. In this tissue,
myoglobin (Mb) supplies a direct intracellular detector of
[O2]. Mb is a relatively small, monomeric
respiratory pigment occurring in heart and mitochondria-rich skeletal
muscles at concentrations of <0.5 mM; in muscles of marine mammals
such as seals, Mb concentrations reach into the 4-5 mM range. Gene
knockout experiments (34, 35) show that mice can survive without Mb
(34) but that they can do so only by activating compensating mechanisms
such as increasing capillary densities and blood
O2 carrying capacity (35). It is therefore
usually assumed that Mb is functionally important under usual
physiological conditions. At 37°C, O2
solubility in physiological solutions is about 1 µM/torr (1 torr = 133 Pa). Because the reaction Mb + O2
MbO2 is always in equilibrium, with a
P50 of 3 torr
(Kd of about 3 µM), whenever
[O2] is less than saturating for Mb, measures
of percent MbO2 directly estimate intracellular
[O2]. Earlier attempts at such measurements
with working muscle preparations relied almost exclusively on near
infrared spectroscopy (see ref. 36 and references therein). More
recently, MRS is being used to take advantage of a histidine-H being
1H MRS "visible" in deoxyMb but being MRS
"invisible" in oxyMb. This new technology supplies workers in the
field with a noninvasive window on the oxygenation state of muscles in
different work and metabolic states, at least for muscles with a high
enough Mb to be 1H MRS "visible." When this
method was applied to both working human skeletal muscles (37) and to
heart (38), the same striking results were reported: essentially stable
percent MbO2 through large changes in work rate.
In such tests, as soon as a work load is imposed [even very low
intensity exercise, such as unloaded pedaling (37)], percent
MbO2 quickly establishes a new steady state,
usually between 40% and 70% saturation, both as a function of time
(36) and as a function of tissue work intensity (37, 38). Along with
gold-labeling studies showing a random Mb distribution in rat heart and
skeletal muscles (S. Shinn and P.W.H., unpublished data), the MRS data
imply that percent MbO2 and intracellular [O2] both remain relatively constant up to the
maximum sustainable aerobic metabolic rate of the tissue (37, 38). As
CPK serves to "buffer" ATP concentrations during changes in
muscle work, so Mb apparently serves to "buffer" intracellular
oxygen concentrations in different metabolic states. Parenthetically,
it should be acknowledged that the region of interest in these kinds of
MRS studies is large, and the MRS data necessarily are averages of
large numbers of fibers. Human muscles, like muscles in other mammals,
are formed from mixtures of fiber types, and as work intensity rises
for a given muscle mass, there may be changes in recruitment and in the
percent contribution of different fiber types. This problem does not
arise in studies of heart muscle, which is biochemically rather
homogenous (38). Whereas Richardson et al. (37) apparently avoided this artifact, this does not seem to be the case in a recent
study (39) on an unknown mix of fibers in human calf muscle. Evidence
of the problem initially arises from the 31P MRS
data, which showed an expected linear decrease in [PCr] as work
increased; at maximum aerobic work, [PCr] changed by maximally about
3-fold (39). Because the same [PCr] change occurs when gastrocnemius
work rate reaches only 40% of sustained aerobic maximum, but much
smaller changes in [PCr] occur in (the mainly slow fibers of) soleus
during the same work transition (2), it is probable that the regions of
interest in the Mole et al. (39) study may have overlapped
into muscles rich in slow-twitch fibers, where the change in [PCr] is
less for a given level of work than in fast-twitch fibers (2).
Otherwise, it would be difficult to understand why their preparation
had to be pushed to its maximum work level to achieve the same percent
[phosphagen] shifts that we observed at only 40% of aerobic maximum
(2). For these reasons, the percent MbO2 values
recorded at different work intensities almost certainly represent
different combinations of fiber types. Nevertheless, these studies (39)
reported that at about 50% and 80% of sustained aerobic maximum work
rate [representing huge ATP turnover rates, equivalent to about 50-80
µmol of ATP × g
1 × min
1 (5)], percent MbO2
(65-70%) did not change significantly, in agreement with earlier
studies (37), whereas at the maximum work rate, a further modest
desaturation to about 50% MbO2 occurred, which
is not in full agreement with earlier data (37). Because of the mixed
fiber and recruitment problems, we are not surprised by these modestly
different results, and, at least tentatively, we consider that the
small discrepancies probably arise from artifacts caused by differing
metabolic states in different fiber types. Thus, they do not strongly
influence our main conclusion that [O2] is
largely homeostatic.
In fact, even if most workers probably would accept that Mb
should function to buffer intracellular [O2],
the significance of this has not been fully appreciated. As Carl Honig
explained to the author in a discussion in 1987, this may be because of a too enthusiastic acceptance of traditional diffusion models assuming
smooth gradients across the capillary-muscle cell threshold all the
way to the mitochondrial sinks. Such models (see ref. 39 for an
example), which assume complete homogeneity and necessarily ignore the
issues of fiber type and recruitment heterogeneity, are not accepted by
the Honig group (40). According to Honig et al., the
structure of the capillary-muscle system develops steep gradients (and
localized high O2 fluxes) only at the
capillary-muscle interface, but very shallow gradients within the
muscle cell per se, as indeed found by the above later MRS
data on percent MbO2 in vivo (36-38).
That is why, in one of our earlier reviews (14), we already accepted
the MRS data on percent MbO2 at face value and
emphasized that, under normoxic conditions, O2 is
perfectly homeostatic in the sense that its concentration is stable
even while its flux to cytochrome oxidase can change by two or more orders of magnitude. In the examples given (1, 37, 39), the
concentration of O2 ranged between 2 and 4 µM
during pathway flux changes from about 1 to >80 µmol of ATP × g
1 × min
1 [these high
mass specific metabolic rates are attainable because most of the
cardiac output during these protocols is available for supporting the
work of relatively small muscle masses (see ref. 5)].
To recapitulate, the situation arising from these new studies of
O2 and metabolic regulation can be summarized as
follows: First, because of the buffering role of Mb,
O2 concentrations are low (in the
P50 or Kd range
of about 3 µM), and intracellular [O2]
gradients must be quite shallow. The latter point is more fully
discussed by the Rochester group (24, 40); one of the most important
insights emphasized by these researchers is that the capillary-muscle
contact surface area is only a fraction of the surface area of inner
mitochondrial membranes and cristae; at steady state, of course, the
same net O2 transfers are occurring at both
sites. That is why the highest gradients and highest
O2 fluxes must be at the smaller contact zones
(i.e., at capillary-muscle cell interfaces) and why
O2 gradients are necessarily much shallower in
the cytosol. Second, the low intracellular [O2]
is powerfully "buffered" by Mb and remains essentially stable
throughout large changes in work and metabolic rates. Thus the
[s] stability paradox (constant [s] when flux
and hence enzyme-substrate encounter and catalysis rates are
increasing) applies to O2 as well as to other metabolites. Nevertheless, O2 consumption and
O2 delivery are closely related, suggesting a key
role for oxygen in metabolic regulation.
Given that it is O2 delivery, not
intracellular [O2], that correlates with work
rate, the problem we are left with is the issue of how the
O2 signal is transmitted to the machinery of cell
metabolism. At this time, we admit that there is no widely accepted
answer. When we first recognized this puzzling situation, we proposed a
model that postulates an O2 sensing system
presumably located in the cell membrane (or even more distally) and
signal transduction pathways or mechanisms for "telling" the cell
metabolic machinery when and how potently to respond to changing
availability of O2 (5). However, the nature and
even existence of such sensing and signal transducing systems remain to
be elucidated. In any event, this and all of the other above attempts
to explain the [s] stability paradox are based on
diffusion control of change in enzyme-substrate encounter rates. Model
II questions this assumption. It takes an entirely different tack and
postulates that intracellular circulation, not diffusion, is the main
means for bringing ligands and their binding sites together during
upwards or downwards transitions in metabolic and tissue work rates.
 |
Model II: Explaining the [s] Stability Paradox
with Intracellular Structure and Intracellular Perfusion Systems |
Conceptually, the major difference between the above
traditional approach to metabolic regulation and model II is the
emphasis placed on intracellular order and structure. The point of
departure for the latter view is that the cell is not a bag of enzymes; instead, it assumes that most metabolic systems operate within an
ordered milieu and that important functional consequences arise. Time
and space will not allow a detailed review of the evidence for this
position. Suffice it to emphasize that it arises from a variety of
approaches and that the overall hypothesis is constructed from several
different lines of evidence favoring intracellular perfusion and lines
of argument not favoring diffusion as the main means for changing the
rates at which enzymes and their substrates are brought together. First
and most fundamental is the structural argument: ultrastructural,
histochemical, and cytochemical studies do not indicate the cell as a
static bag of enzymes, but rather a three-dimensional membrane-bound
microcosm housing an internal milieu filled with complex organelles,
motors, membranes, cables, trabecullae, pumps, and channels. Rather
than a static, dead-still solution [as would be required for formal
application of laws of diffusion (41)], the internal media of cells
are very much "alive" in the sense that movement is the rule of
thumb, movement of organelles, of particles, and of cytosol. In large
cells, so-called cytoplasmic streaming occurs at rates from <1 to
about 80 µm/sec (42, 43). The process is metabolically
controlled (44), varies with metabolic state (42), is based on
ATP-dependent and ATP-utilizing myosin motors [so-called
unconventional myosin isoforms (45)] that can be activated to run on
actin filaments (45, 46), and behaves for practical purposes like an
intracellular circulation system. What is more, because of the
conservative nature of macromolecular structures and functions, we have
good reasons for thinking that this, and comparable systems based on kinesin and dynein motors running on microtubules, are widespread and
probably characteristic of all cells (46). Additionally, in contrast to
what might be expected of a bag of enzymes, over a half-century of
research has clearly concluded that many metabolic pathways and their
component enzymes are restricted to specific cell compartments, and
numerous so-called soluble enzymes (see ref. 47 for a recent study of
aldolases) show intracellular binding to specific intracellular sites
(48, 49). Order, structure, and circulation are thus the key players in
the game, as far as the literature on cell ultrastructure is concerned,
and it is not a diffusion-dominated game. Take away the order and the
system behavior falls apart; sometimes function is lost completely. A good recent example of this comes from genetic studies of
Drosophila flight muscle metabolism. Whereas earlier studies
had shown that aldolase, glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenase, and
-glycerophosphate dehydrogenase colocalize mainly at Z-discs, Wojtas
et al. (50) used clever genetic manipulations (that
influenced binding but not overall catalytic activities) to show that
mislocating these enzyme activities in the cytosol rather than
correctly bound to Z-discs would render Drosophila
flightless. This is a compelling demonstration that enzyme-substrate
encounter by simple diffusion mechanisms is inadequate to maintain
function, even if all three enzymes are expressed at adequate
activities; their three-dimensional organization is part and parcel of
in vivo regulated function of the pathway.
Second is the argument on macromolecular diffusional constraints.
As we might expect from the above (and indeed find), the intracellular
mobilities of enzymes and of carrier proteins such as Mb are not
equivalent to those in simple aqueous solutions. For example,
intracellular diffusibility estimates for Mb in the cytosol range from
as low as 1/10 that found in simple solutions (51) to values of
about 1/2 (52). Interestingly, the latter MRS study estimated
rotational diffusion, whereas Juergens et al. (51) estimated
translational diffusion and these may change independently (53). Be
that as it may, even so-called soluble cytosolic enzymes and other
proteins are also apparently highly restricted in their intracellular
mobility (51); again, this picture is not easily compatible with the
concept of the cell as a bag of easily diffusible enzymes. Order and
structure seem to be constraining the intracellular behavior of
macromolecules, and their restricted mobilities would not facilitate
the kind of enzyme-substrate encounters required for simple solution
models of cell function. In contrast, an intracellular perfusion system could easily circumvent these kinds of limitations on bringing enzymes
and substrates together.
Third is the argument on metabolite mobility. Because of the
complexity of the internal milieu, the translational mobility even of
simple molecules may be restricted compared with simple solutions (53),
and this is especially true in the mitochondrial matrix (54). A recent
study dissected different contributions to limiting mobility of
intracellular metabolites. Compared with water, hindrance to
translational diffusion in cytoplasm could be attributed to three
independent factors
viscosity, binding, and interference from cell
solids: (i) fluid-phase cytoplasmic viscosity in the
fibroblasts used in the study was nearly 30% greater than water;
(ii) nonspecific, transient binding of small solutes (such
as the fluorescent probe used in the study) by intracellular components
of low mobility decreased metabolite mobility by about 20%; and
(iii) translational diffusion of small solutes was hindered 2.5-fold by collisions with cell solids comprising about 15% of isosmotic cell volume. Together, these three factors could account for
translational diffusion in cytosol that was decreased to only 27% that
observed in water (53). Interestingly, these studies also demonstrated
that, during osmotic stress (cell volume increasing to 2 times
isosmotic volume, during which the cells sustained a proportional
increase in metabolism as part of osmoregulatory costs), the relative
translational diffusion coefficient increased by about 6-fold, while
the rotational diffusion constant remained constant. Similar insights
arise from recent studies of the phosphagen system in vertebrate
muscles. Recall that two fundamental assumptions underlie traditional
dogma on CPK function in phosphagen-containing cells: (i)
CPK always operates near equilibrium, and (ii) CPK has
access to, and reacts with, the total pool (tCr) of PCr and creatine
(Cr). Recently, we tested the latter assumption in fish fast-twitch
muscle by introducing [14C]Cr into the muscle
pool in vivo (55). Current model I theory would predict that
at steady state, after [14C]Cr administration,
the specific activities of PCr and Cr should be the same under
essentially all conditions. In contrast, we found that the specific
activity of PCr greatly exceeded that of Cr in various metabolic states
between rest and recovery from exercise. The data imply that a
significant fraction of Cr is not free to rapidly exchange with
exogenously added [14C]Cr; releasing of this
unlabeled or "missing" Cr on acid extraction accounts for lowered
specific activities. Because Cr dominates tCr only in fatigue states,
the reduced mobilities implied by these studies correlate with states
of lowered metabolic rate. In a follow-up study,
1H MRS was used to further evaluate the in
vivo behavior of (the methyl triplet of) tCr in human
gastrocnemius muscle. We found (56)
that the
T2 values for tCr decrease on
transition from rest (through a volitional exercise protocol) to
ischemic fatigue. In ischemic fatigue, the ATP turnover rate of human
calf muscle is severely depressed (5).
Because
Cr forms the bulk of tCr in ischemic fatigue, its MRS behavior
(especially the reduced molecular mobility implied by the reduced
T2 values) is consistent with the
earlier 14C results and may explain the mystery
of "missing" creatine in the 14C study. The
key point is that, just as in the Kao et al. fibroblast study (53), the solution behavior of metabolite-sized molecules such as
Cr seems to be a function of the metabolic state of the tissue
high
molecular mobilities (caused in part by high intracellular circulation
rates?) correlating with high metabolic rates. In all of these kinds of
studies, order and structure seem to dominate the intracellular
behavior of micromolecules such as metabolite intermediates, and
serious constraints on diffusion would again not readily facilitate
large-scale increases or decreases in enzyme-substrate encounters as
required for simple solution models of cells functioning in widely
varying activity and metabolic states. Again, these limitations could
be easily circumvented with intracellular circulation systems.
Given that enzymes are structurally localized and not free to
readily diffuse about and that substrates are also relatively restricted compared with simple solutions, workers in this area (41,
57, 58) consider diffusion by itself to be an inadequate, inefficient,
and minimally regulatable means of delivering carbon substrates and
O2 to appropriate enzyme targets in the cell
under the variable conditions and rates that are required in
vivo. Instead, an intracellular circulation or convection system
is proposed as an elegantly simple "assist" mechanism providing
for the efficient bringing together of substrates (including
O2) and enzymes under varying metabolic
conditions. The main evidence for this concept is indirect and comes
from studies showing cytoplasmic steaming at velocities far exceeding
those to be reasonably expected from diffusion alone, especially in the
absence of steep [metabolite] and [O2]
gradients. As mentioned above, such intracellular movement is known to
be [possibly Ca2+ (44)] regulated and to be
based on two kinds of molecular motors: myosin motors traveling on
actin filaments and kinesin or dynein motors traveling on tubulin
tracks (59, 60). Even organelles such as mitochondria display
metabolically regulated movement in cells; actin and tubulins can both
be used as tracks for moving mitochondria, but questions of where and
how such motors interact with (and are localized on) the outer
mitochondrial membrane are not yet fully resolved (61). Nevertheless,
mitochondrial-bound myosins are clearly required for directional
movements of mitochondria (62), and a recent study showed that
depolymerization of F-actin causes a large (5-fold!) decrease in the
velocity of mitochondrial movement (63), presumably coincident with a
large drop in O2 consumption caused by the same
kind of manipulation (64). Except for a few recent analyses (41, 57,
58), the metabolic implications of such intracellular convection
systems have been completely overlooked (or ignored). However, the idea
of intracellular convection as a means for increasing enzyme-substrate
encounter rates with increasing tissue work is quite compelling. Not
only is the rate of cytoplasmic streaming variable [over at least an
80-fold or more range (42, 43) as would be required in
vivo], in several cell systems (43, 65) there is evidence for a
direct relationship between cell work and cytoplasmic streaming rates;
and, in a plant cell model, a linear relationship exists between the
myosin motor velocity and the force against which it must operate (66).
The 1H MRS studies mentioned above
(56)
show that low metabolic rate states (such
as ischemic fatigue) correlate with low molecular mobilities of key
metabolites such as Cr (consistent with times of low intracellular
circulation rates). Using fibroblasts and osmotic stress, the studies
of Kao et al. (53) similarily show that increasing metabolic
rate correlates with increasing molecular translational mobilities
(which, again, could be consistent with increased intracellular
circulation rates). Thus, we already have some good reasons for
anticipating that changes in intracellular convection correlate with
changes in cell metabolic rate, although more studies along these lines
are clearly desirable.
From the point of view of the current paper, the key advantage of
this model is that it easily explains how enzymes and substrates can be
brought together and how reaction rates can occur at widely varying
rates with minimal change in substrate concentrations; i.e., it easily
explains the [s] stability paradox of pathway substrates
and intermediates, including O2. As in the
perfusion of tissues such as muscle mentioned above, the rate of
intracellular metabolism by this model is a product of intracellular
perfusion rate: the greater the intracellular perfusion rate the
greater the metabolic rate with no concomitant change in substrate
concentrations required
a coarse control principle, long and well
appreciated by physiologists as the Fick principle. To be sure, this
need not rule out other control mechanisms, the kinds that have so far
absorbed much of metabolic research; it merely puts them into a
different physiological context.
For O2 transport, this view places Mb
function into an entirely different perspective as well, where the
fundamental purpose of an intracellular Mb may be to equalize
[O2] everywhere in the cytosol. Functionally,
this would ensure that intracellular convection would always be
delivering similar amounts of O2 per unit volume of cytosol to cytochrome oxidases. This model would predict that Mb
knockout mice would either be seriously disturbed [as indeed frequently noted (34)], or through ontogeny would develop compensatory mechanisms [as indeed is also observed in those mice that survive Mb
gene deletion (35)]. However, from this new point of view, the
"buffering" function of Mb, the main function of a half
O2 saturated, randomly distributed Mb, is to
ensure a similar [O2] everywhere in the cytosol
(and simultaneously to minimize or even destroy intracellular
[O2] gradients). While this model is consistent with the minimal intracellular [O2] gradients
in muscle cells proposed by the Honig, Connett, and Gayeski work (40),
it takes on quite a different meaning. Finally, the concept of an
intracellular perfusion system supplies purpose and meaning to
intracellular movements (motor-driven or otherwise induced cytoplasmic
streaming), which, until this point in time, have been pretty well
ignored by traditional metabolic studies.
Diffusion of course is a limited solution to limited problems.
Earlier (5), I pointed out that, in the up-regulation of metabolic
capacities of skeletal and heart muscles [for example, in organisms
such as the hummingbird (67)], the higher the O2 fluxes required, the shorter the diffusion distances and the less and
less dependent on diffusion muscle metabolic organization seems to
become. Of course, these same adaptations mean that the higher the
fluxes required, the shorter the intracellular perfusion distances. The
flight muscles of insects might represent these phenomena close to
their limit, with tracheal-supplied mitochondria and myofilaments being
packed so tightly together that there is hardly any room left for (and
hardly any need for) any intracellular perfusion systems (see refs. 5
and 67 and references therein). Adaptations in the same direction seem
to be evident in recent Mb gene knockout studies, which show that some
Mb-free mice survive the deletion, apparently because of compensatory
mechanisms such as increased capillary densities (35). Although heart
muscle cell diameters were not recorded (35), in similar CPK knockout protocols, ontogenetic adjustments led to smaller muscle cells (see
ref. 5). Functionally, these adjustments would mean minimizing diffusion and perfusion distances, as in hummingbird and insect flight
muscles. To this point, physiologists have generally agreed that
organisms get around diffusion limitation problems of
O2 transport by relying on convection systems:
ventilation at the lungs and circulation to the tissues, interspersed
with diffusion-based steps along the way. The concept of intracellular
convection modifies our overall view to include an intracellular
component to the chain of convective and diffusive steps in the overall
path of O2 from air to mitochondria (68-70).
In considering the concept of intracellular convection, early
pioneers in this field may be prone to over-enthusiastic pressing of
their case; this is understandable because it seems to explain so much
previously puzzling data so easily (41, 58). Nevertheless, there
clearly remain critical functions that are largely or solely diffusion-based, so the understandable over-enthusiasm with which model
II proponents minimize the importance of diffusion in energy metabolism
puts them at risk of casting away a very useful concept. To finally
assemble a model that can realistically explain a realistic working
range of metabolic systems, what seems to be required for the future is
an opening up of channels of communication between the above two very
differing views of metabolic regulation.
 |
Summary |
Acute responses to increases in cell work (to increases in
ATP demand) invariably require the activation of ATP supply pathways. The requirements for cell homeostasis would also require that these
transitions occur with minimal perturbation of metabolite concentrations, whereas most metabolic regulation models would predict
major changes in concentrations of pathway intermediates. Empirically,
it is observed that the demands of cell homeostasis prevail; i.e., that
during transition from low to high work rates, the concentrations of
most substrates in ATP demand and ATP supply pathways are remarkably
stable. I term this the [s] stability paradox in this
paper. Researchers have tried to resolve this paradox while working
within two guiding paradigms. The first, model I, looks on the cell as
a watery bag of enzymes. Within this framework, several explanations
have been advanced to explain the apparent homeostasis of pathway
metabolites during small- and large-scale changes in pathway fluxes.
While admittedly successful, different mechanisms have to be postulated
to account for different kinds of enzymes, and thus different
mechanisms have to be postulated for specific loci in metabolic
pathways. On balance, we consider it unlikely that all of these
different mechanisms would summate to similar [s]
stabilities observed for more than 60 metabolites at different loci in
different metabolic pathways. So, within model I approaches, we
consider that the [s] paradox remains unresolved.
Model II approaches to metabolic regulation recognize cell
structure to be an inherent part of cell function. A subset of these
studies places especial emphasis on the fact that the intracellular milieu is not a still, watery solution in which bulk transfer of
metabolites occurs mainly by diffusion; instead, it is a
three-dimensional structured system in which transport of materials is
dominated by intracellular perfusion or convection systems. Current
evidence suggests that cytoplasmic streaming (at surprisingly high
maximum rates) is controlled by means of controlling molecular motors on actin filaments or on microtubules. Our analysis of the metabolic implications of an intracellular circulation system leads to the concept of intracellular convection as an added and critical means for
regulating rates of enzyme-substrate encounter. Increasing enzyme-substrate encounter rates with increasing perfusion rates easily explains changes in pathway fluxes with minimal changes in
substrate concentrations. This mechanism for accelerating reaction rates would work equally well at all steps in complex metabolic pathways, no matter what the catalytic and regulatory properties of
enzymes might be at these loci in metabolism. Indeed, the ease with
which the model II (intracellular convection) model explains the
[s] stability paradox is one of its most appealing features.
Finally, it may be worth emphasizing that developments in the
above two research approaches have been progressing for the last three
to four decades, along surprisingly independent trajectories, with
minimal communication between the two fields. The usual lack of
dialogue between the two research approaches is all the more peculiar
when it is pointed out that some of us sometimes work within one
paradigm, while at other times we work within the other's constraints.
I include myself in this situation; for example, the study by Allen
et al. (2) illustrates model I approaches, while Hochachka
and Mossey (55) clearly illustrate a model II preference. Because both
paradigms cannot be right, we consider that it may be time to treat the
schizophrenia in these two fields, a process that for certain would
require opening up communication channels between them. Whether or not
this turns out to be possible remains to be seen; nevertheless, the
present paper is part of our ongoing attempt to facilitate this process.
 |
Acknowledgements |
These studies were supported by the Natural Sciences and
Engineering Research Council (Canada).
 |
Abbreviations |
MRS, magnetic resonance spectroscopy;
PCr, phosphocreatine;
CPK, creatine phosphokinase;
Mb, myoglobin.
 |
Footnotes |
*
E-mail: PWH{at}zoology.ubc.ca.
Trump, M. E., Allen, P. S.,
Gheorghiu, D., Hanstock, C. C. & Hochachka, P. W.,
Proceedings of the International Society of Magnetic Resonance Meeting,
1997, Vancouver, p. 1337.
 |
References |
| 1.
|
Hochachka, P. W., McClelland, G. B., Burness, G. P., Staples, J. F. & Suarez, R. K.
(1998)
Comp. Biochem. Physiol. B Biochem. Mol. Biol.
120,
17-26[CrossRef].
|
| 2.
|
Allen, P. S., Matheson, G. O., Zhu, G., Gheorgiu, D., Dunlop, R. S., Falconer, T., Stanley, C. & Hochachka, P. W.
(1997)
Am. J. Physiol.
273,
R999-R1007[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 3.
|
Hochachka, P. W., Clark, C. M., Holden, J. E., Stanley, C., Ugurbil, K. & Menon, R. S.
(1996)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
93,
1215-1220[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 4.
|
Balban, R. S.
(1990)
Am. J. Physiol.
258,
C377-C389[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 5.
|
Hochachka, P. W.
(1994)
Muscles and Molecular and Metabolic Machines
(CRC, Boca Raton, FL).
|
| 6.
|
Hogan, M. C., Richardson, R. S. & Haseler, L. J.
(1999)
J. Appl. Physiol.
86,
1367-1373[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 7.
|
Wegener, G., Bolas, N. M. & Thomas, A. A. G.
(1991)
J. Comp. Physiol. B
161,
247-256.
|
| 8.
|
Dobson, G. P. & Hochachka, P. W.
(1987)
J. Exp. Biol.
129,
125-140[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 9.
|
Hochachka, P. W. & Guppy, M.
(1987)
Metabolic Arrest and the Control of Biological Time
(Harvard Univ. Press, Cambridge, MA).
|
| 10.
|
Hochachka, P. W. & Somero, G. N.
(1984)
Biochemical Adaptation
(Princeton Univ. Press, Princeton).
|
| 11.
|
Dobson, G. P., Parkhouse, W. S., Weber, J. M., Stuttard, E., Harman, J., Snow, D. H. & Hochachka, P. W.
(1988)
Am. J. Physiol.
255,
R513-R519[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 12.
|
Hochachka, P. W., Bianconcini, M., Parkhouse, W. S. & Dobson, G. P.
(1991)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
88,
5764-5768[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 13.
|
Rowan, A. N. & Newsholme, E. A.
(1979)
Biochem. J.
178,
209-216[Medline]
.
|
| 14.
|
Hochachka, P. W. & McClelland, G. B.
(1997)
J. Exp. Biol.
200,
381-386[Abstract].
|
| 15.
|
Betts, D. F. & Srivastava, D. K.
(1991)
J. Theor. Biol.
151,
155-167[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
.
|
| 16.
|
Staples, J. F. & Suarez, R. K.
(1997)
J. Exp. Biol.
200,
1247-1254[Abstract].
|
| 17.
|
McCormack, J. G. & Denton, R. M.
(1990)
Biochim. Biophys. Acta
1018,
287-291[Medline]
.
|
| 18.
|
Koshland, D. E., Jr.
(1998)
Science
280,
852-853[Free Full Text].
|
| 19.
|
Hochachka, P. W. & Matheson, G. O.
(1992)
J. Appl. Physiol.
73,
570-581.
|
| 20.
|
Harvey, W. R. & Wieczoreck, H.
(1997)
J. Exp. Biol.
200,
203-216[Abstract].
|
| 21.
|
Norris, A. J., Martin, S. S., Harita, T., Nelson, J. G., Vollenweider, P., Gustafson, T. A., Mueckler, M., Rose, D. W. & Olefsky, J. M.
(1996)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
93,
8401-8406[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 22.
|
Atkinson, D. E.
(1977)
Cellular Energy Metabolism and Its Regulation
(Academic, New York).
|
| 23.
|
Atkinson, D. E.
(1990)
in
Control of Metabolic Processes, eds.
Cornish-Bowden, A. & Cardenas, M. L.
(Plenum, New York), pp. 11-27.
|
| 24.
|
Connett, R. J. & Honig, C. R.
(1989)
Am. J. Physiol.
256,
R898-R906[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 25.
|
Kushmerick, M. J., Meyer, R. A. & Brown, T. R.
(1992)
Am. J. Physiol.
263,
C598-C606[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 26.
|
From, A. H. L., Zimmer, S. D., Michurski, S. P., Mohanakrishnan, P., Ulstad, V. K., Thomas, W. J. & Ugurbil, K.
(1990)
Biochemistry
29,
3733-3743.
|
| 26.
|
Hogan, M. C., Arthur, P. G., Bebout, D. E., Hochachka, P. W. & Wagner, P. D.
(1992)
J. Appl. Physiol.
73,
728-736[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 27.
|
Hogan, M. C., Kurdak, S. S. & Arthur, P. G.
(1996)
J. Appl. Physiol.
80,
1313-1321[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 28.
|
Suarez, R. K., Lighton, J. R., Joos, B., Roberts, S. P. & Harrison, J. F.
(1996)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
93,
12616-12620[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 29.
|
Suarez, R. K., Staples, J. F., Lighton, J. R. & West, T. G.
(1997)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
94,
7065-7069[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 30.
|
Kashiwaya, Y., Sato, K., Tshuchiya, N., Thomas, S., Fell, D. A., Veech, R. L. & Passonneau, J. V.
(1994)
J. Biol. Chem.
269,
25502-25514[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 31.
|
Thomas, S. & Fell, D. A.
(1998)
Eur. J. Biochem.
258,
956-967[ISI][Medline]
.
|
| 32.
|
Hochachka, P. W.
(1998)
Am. Zool.
37,
595-603.
|
| 33.
|
Arthur, P. G., Hogan, M. C., Wagner, P. D. & Hochachka, P. W.
(1992)
J. Appl. Physiol.
73,
737-760[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 34.
|
Garry, D. J., Ordway, G. A., Lorenz, J. N., Radford, N. B., Chin, E. R., Grange, R. W., Baseel-Duby, R. & Williams, R.
(1999)
Nature (London)
395,
905-908.
|
| 35.
|
Gödecke, A., Flögel, U., Zanger, K., Ding, Z., Hirchenhain, J., Decking, U. K. M. & Schrader, J.
(1999)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
96,
10495-10500[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 36.
|
Tran, T.-K., Sailasuta, N., Kreutzer, U., Hurd, R., Chung, Y., Mole, P., Kuno, S. & Jue, T.
(1999)
Am. J. Physiol.
276,
R1682-R1690[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 37.
|
Richardson, R. S., Noyszewski, E. A., Kendrick, K. F., Leigh, J. S. & Wagner, P. D.
(1996)
J. Clin. Invest.
96,
1916-1926.
|
| 38.
|
Jelicks, L. A. & Wittenberg, B. A.
(1995)
Biophys. J.
68,
2129-2136[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 39.
|
Mole, P. A., Chung, Y., Tran, K., Sailasuta, N., Hurd, R. & Jue, T.
(1999)
Am. J. Physiol.
277,
R173-R180.
|
| 40.
|
Honig, C. R., Connett, R. J. & Gayeski, T. E.
(1992)
Med. Sci. Sports Exercise
24,
47-53[ISI][Medline]
.
|
| 41.
|
Wheatley, D. N.
(1998)
BioSystems
45,
151-163[CrossRef][Medline]
.
|
| 42.
|
Reid, R. J. & Walker, N. A.
(1983)
Aust. J. Plant Physiol.
10,
373-383.
|
| 43.
|
Ryan, P. R. & Walker, N. A.
(1994)
J. Exp. Bot.
45,
1057-1167[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 44.
|
Takagi, S.
(1997)
J. Plant Res.
110,
299-303.
|
| 45.
|
Mermall, V., Post, P. L. & Mooseker, M. S.
(1998)
Science
279,
527-533[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 46.
|
Howard, J.
(1998)
Nature (London)
391,
239-240[Medline]
.
|
| 47.
|
Wang, J., Tolan, D. R. & Pagliaro, L.
(1997)
Exp. Cell Res.
237,
445-451[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
.
|
| 48.
|
Walliman, T., Dolder, M., Schlattner, U., Eder, M., Hornemann, T., O'Gorman, E., Ruck, A. & Brdiczka, D.
(1998)
Biofactors
8,
229-234[ISI][Medline]
.
|
| 49.
|
Wallimann, T., Wyss, M., Brdiczka, D., Nicolay, K. & Eppenberger, H. M.
(1992)
Biochem. J.
281,
21-40.
|
| 50.
|
Wojtas, K., Slepecky, N., von-Kalm, L. & Sullivan, D.
(1997)
Mol. Biol. Cell.
8,
1665-1675[Abstract].
|
| 51.
|
Juergens, K. D., Peters, T. & Gros, G.
(1994)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
91,
3829-3833[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 52.
|
Wang, D., Kruetzer, U., Chung, Y. & Jue, T.
(1997)
Biophys. J.
73,
2764-2770[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 53.
|
Kao, H. P., Abney, J. R. & Verkman, A. S.
(1993)
J. Cell Biol.
120,
175-184[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 54.
|
Scalettar, B. A., Abney, J. R. & Hackenbrock, C. R.
(1991)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
88,
8057-8061[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 55.
|
Hochachka, P. W. & Mossey, M. K. P.
(1998)
Am. J. Physiol.
274,
R868-R872.
|
| 56.
|
Hanstock, C. C., Thompson, R. B., Trump, M. E., Gheorghiu, D., Hochachka, P. W. & Allen, P. S.
(1999)
Magn. Reson. Med.
42,
421-424[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
.
|
| 57.
|
Hochachka, P. W.
(1999)
Br. J. Med. Biol. Res.
12,
166-176.
|
| 58.
|
Wheatley, D. N. & Clegg, J. S.
(1994)
BioSystems
32,
83-92[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
.
|
| 59.
|
Langford, G. M.
(1995)
Curr. Opin. Cell Biol.
7,
82-88[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
.
|
| 60.
|
Simon, V. R. & Pon, L. A.
(1996)
Experientia
52,
1117-1122[CrossRef][Medline]
.
|
| 61.
|
Hollenbeck, P. J.
(1996)
Front. Biosci.
1,
d91-d102[Medline]
.
|
| 62.
|
Krendel, M., Sgourdas, G. & Bonder, E. M.
(1998)
Cell Motil. Cytoskeleton
40,
368-378[CrossRef][Medline]
.
|
| 63.
|
Boldogh, I., Vojtov, N., Karmon, S. & Pon, L. A.
(1998)
J. Cell Biol.
141,
1371-1381[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 64.
|
Kasuya, Y., Keiji, F., Masaki, M. & Haruma, K.
(1994)
J. Biomed. Mater. Res.
28,
397-404[Medline]
.
|
| 65.
|
Yamaya, M., Fukushima, T., Sekizawa, K., Ohrui, T. & Sasaki, H.
(1995)
Respir. Physiol.
101,
199-205[CrossRef][Medline]
.
|
| 66.
|
Chaen, S., Inoue, J. & Sugi, H.
(1995)
J. Exp. Biol.
198,
1021-1027[Abstract].
|
| 67.
|
Suarez, R. K.
(1992)
Experientia
48,
565-570[CrossRef][Medline]
.
|
| 68.
|
Schmidt-Nielsen, K.
(1979)
Scaling: Why is Animal Size So Important?
(Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, U.K.).
|
| 69.
|
Weibel, E. R., Taylor, C. R. & Hoppeler, H.
(1991)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
88,
10357-10361[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 70.
|
Taylor, C. R., Weibel, E. R., Weber, J.-M., Vock, R., Hoppeler, J., Roberts, T. J. & Brichon, G.
(1996)
J. Exp. Biol.
199,
1643-1649[Abstract].
|
Copyright © 1999 by The National Academy of Sciences 0027-8424/99/9612233-7$2.00/0