The Journal of General Physiology
Cell MicroControls
  Home | Help | Feedback | Subscriptions | Archive | Search | Table of Contents
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF, 757K)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Services
Right arrow Email this article
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new content in the JGP
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via CrossRef
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Osterhout, W. J. V.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Osterhout, W. J. V.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Facebook   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?
The Journal of General Physiology, Vol 13, 715-732, Copyright © 1930 by The Rockefeller University Press

ARTICLE

CALCULATIONS OF BIOELECTRIC POTENTIALS

I. EFFECTS OF KCl AND NaCl ON NITELLA



W. J. V. Osterhout 1

1 From the Laboratories of The Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research

The P.D. of 0.01 M vs. 0.001 M KCl (concentration effect) in Nitella is 54.7 mv. and that of NaCl is 20.9 mv. The P.D. of 0.01 M NaCl vs. 0.01 M KCl is 82.9 mv.

If we assume that diffusion potentials predominate we may calculate the relative mobilities of the ions in the outer layer of the protoplasm. If we put vCl = 1 we obtain uK = 85.45 and uNa = 2.18. (These values depend upon the fact that the mean ionic activities in this layer must be equal at equilibrium to the mean ionic activities in the external solution.)

Using these values the calculated P.D. of 0.01 M NaCl vs. 0.005 M NaCl + 0.005 M KCl is 66 mv. (the observed value is 68.8 mv.) and the conductance of KCl in the outer layer of the protoplasm is 27 times as great as that of NaCl (the observed conductance for the whole protoplasm is 25 to 50 times greater for KCl than for NaCl).

Calculations on the basis of phase boundary potentials are less satisfactory.

 Accepted on March 20, 1930


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Facebook Facebook   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 ScienceHome page
C. L. Slayman and C. W. Slayman
Measurement of Membrane Potentials in Neurospora
Science, June 8, 1962; 136(3519): 876 - 877.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Cold Spring Harb Symp Quant BiolHome page
L. R. Blinks
THE RELATIONS OF BIOELECTRIC PHENOMENA TO IONIC PERMEABILITY AND TO METABOLISM IN LARGE PLANT CELLS
Cold Spring Harb Symp Quant Biol, January 1, 1940; 8(0): 204 - 215.
[Abstract] [PDF]


  Home | Help | Feedback | Subscriptions | Archive | Search | Table of Contents