Abbott, Cyril E.

English

UARK (University of Arkansas )

Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science Volume 2 Article 15 1947 Comparison Between the Reducing Action of Monosaccharide Sugars and Their Efficacy in Supporting the Life of Lucilia Sericata Meig Cyril E. Abbott Harding College Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.uark.edu/jaas  Part of the Entomology Commons Recommended Citation Abbott, Cyril E. (1947) "Comparison Between the Reducing Action of Monosaccharide Sugars and Their Efficacy in Supporting the Life of Lucilia Sericata Meig," Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science: Vol. 2 , Article 15. Available at: https://scholarworks.uark.edu/jaas/vol2/iss1/15 This article is available for use under the Creative Commons license: Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-ND 4.0). Users are able to read, download, copy, print, distribute, search, link to the full texts of these articles, or use them for any other lawful purpose, without asking prior permission from the publisher or the author. This Article is brought to you for free and open access by ScholarWorks@UARK. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science by an authorized editor of ScholarWorks@UARK. For more information, please contact scholar@uark.edu. 45A COMPARISON BETWEEN THE REDUCING ACTION OF MONOSACCHARI DESUGARS AND THEIR EFFICACY IN SUPPORTINGTHE LIFE OF LUCILIA SERICATA MEIG.C. E. Abbott, Harding College, SearoyNeither the materials nor the techniques presented In thispaper are wholly original. Only the method of comparison and theexact chemical methods can make any claim to originality: the re-sults, and the conclusions one may draw from them, might well havebeen predicted from results obtained by many students In variousways, as willappear from the brief outline which follows.In 1927, Bertolf reared honey bee larvae on pure sugars. Hefound that, so far as the monosaccharlde hexoses are concerned,fructose, glucose, and galactose support life In the order given.Fraenkel (1936) found that the adults of Calliphora erythrocephalasurvive equally well on all three of the sugars named and severalothers also: a situation which certainly does not obtain in thecase of Luc ilia sericata. Loefer (1935) found that the protozoan,Chlorogonium euchlorum, exhibits an acceleration of growth In thepresence of both fructose and galactose but for some reason glu-cose has less effect.Much evidence indicates that fructose Is a highly efficientnutrient for many animals. Thus Rowe, McManus, and Plummer (1935)found that, as concerns the ovarian function In young women, thereIs a much greater tolerance for fructose than for galactose. Thisis in line with the clinical use of fructose for diabetics.Weinbach and Calvin (1935) found that the relative reducingpower of the monosaccharides is fructose, glucose, galactose, Inthe order given, and Watchporn and Holmes (1931) had previouslydemonstrated that fructose is effective In reducing the productionof urea by embryonic kidneys, although the effect of galactose Inthis respect, is irregular, and xylose has no Inhibiting effect.Apparently the effect of glucose was not tested.This outline Is by no means a complete account of this mostinteresting problem. For such a review the reader is referred toTraeger's (1941) excellent discussion, and to the more recenttexts on biochemistry.The adult "greenbottle" fly, Luc ilia sericata Is incapable ofsurviving upon pure proteins, and evidently depends upon those in-gested in the larval state. The chief function of protein Ingest-ed by adult flies is the formation of eggs: without It, eggs donot develop. On the other hand.Luci Ii a survives for varying per-iods of time on pure carbohydrates-, especially sugars. The sugarmost effective In prolongllng life Is fructose, which, in pureform, enables 70% of the flies to survive 33 days. On a diet ofconcentrated glucose flies live about 29 days; while galactosesupports life no more than 14 days at most. Icannot agree withCrow (1932) who maintains that this species may live from 6 to 8days on water alone: repeated experiments under widely varyingconditions always brought 100% mortality no later than the fifthday.When fed sugars Inmolar dilutions, the time of survival de-pends Inpart, of course, upon the dilution of the sugar, but itis also a function of the species of sugar; so that Ifthe samemolar concentration of two different sugars Is employed In feedingtwo different groups of flies, there Is still a divergence betweenthem as concerns the duration of life. Moreover this divergence45Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science, Vol. 2 [1947], Art. 15Published by Arkansas Academy of Science, 194746becomes greater as the molar concentration Increases, as Is Illus-trated in Table I.Table I Survival of Lucilia on MonosaccharidesDay3 Surviving On:Molar Cone. Fructose I Glucose I Galactose1/64 7.0 6.0 6.01/48 7.5 7.0 6.51/32 10.5 9.5 7.51/24 14.0 13.0 9.01/16 20.0 18.5 11.01/8 29.0 27.0 14.0Since fructose, glucose, and galactose all reduce alkalinecuprlc sulphate solutions, one would naturally expect them to havea similar effect upon respiratory enzymes and pigments, and uponany substance which has the properties of such enzymes and pig-ments. Methylene blue, an efficient hydrogen acceptor, is onesuch substance. Itoxidizes fructose very rapidly, glucose some-what more slowly, while galactose requires a considerable time foroxidation. The reactions are more or less reversible, especiallyIn the presence of free oxygen. Nearly four times as much glucose(20.08 mgs.) as fructose (5.94 mgs.) Is required to reduce equiva-lent quantities of methylene blue in a given time.In order to obtain a reliable comparison of the reducing ac-tion of the three sugars, a given unit of methylene blue solutionwas mixed with a measured quantity of sugar of known concentra-tion, and the time required for reduction at constant temperaturecarefully recorded. This was repeated with each sugar, and In or-der to make the comparison more complete, several "standard" con-centrations of the sugars were used. Preliminary tests indicatedthat the most desirable concentrations were molar dilutions: .02,.04, .06, .08, and .10. In practice, 5 ml. of each was added tofive marked test tubes. To each tube 10 ml. of the dye was then'quickly added, and the tubes simultaneously Immersed In a waterbath of 40° C.The stock solution used In the tests was made by dissolving0.00047 gms. of the dye In 500 ml. of water to which 1.0 gm. ofsodium hydroxide had been added. Methylene blue Is reduced onlyinalkaline solution.- ItIs usually comparatively easy to timethe reduction of methylene blue because the color disappears rap-Idly and completely. The results of the tests are given in thefollowing table.Table II Reduction of Methylene Blue by MonosaccharidesTime Of Reduction In Minutes By;Molar Cone. Fructose I Glucose 1 Galactose0702 §To ISTO 15700.04 6.0 8.0 12.00.06 5.0 6.0 9.00.08 4.5 5^0 7^00.10 4.0 4.0 6.046Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science, Vol. 2 [1947], Art. 15https://scholarworks.uark.edu/jaas/vol2/iss1/1547One should notice that difference In reduction time for dif-ferent sugars Is much greater at very low concentrations than It IsIn solutions containing the sugar In more concentrated form. Thesignificance of this Is not entirely evident, but It seems to becharacteristic, because Itappears consistently, even when sub-stances other than methylene blue are used. This Is Indicated onTable III,which consists of data relative to the reduction ofhaemoglobin.Table III Reduction of Haemoglobin by MonosaccharidesTime Of Reduction In Minutes By:Molar Cone . Fructose | Glucose | ' Oalectose0.02 14.0 16.0 20.00.04 9.0 10.0 12.00.06 7.0 7.5 9.00.08 6.0 6.5 7.00.10 5.0 5.0 6.0The hoemoglobin solution was prepared by dissolving In 500ml.of water 1.0 gm. of dry, powdered haemoglobin and 1.0 gm.of sodiumhydroxide. The preparation was filtered before use. The reduc-tion of haemoglobin Is more difficult to observe because thechange In color Is from a yellow amber to a cherry red, and thechange Is often so gradual that It Is dlffucult to determine thetime at which reduction begins and whether or'not Ithas been com-pleted. Only by repeating the experiments many times could re-liable conclusions be made as to the reduction time.Peptone, gelatine and egg albumin did not reduce either »•«methylene blue or haemoglobin, even when the solutions were heat-ed to the boiling point and then allowed to stand for twenty-fourhours .All of the evidence presented seems to Indicate that there Isa close relationship between the ease with which a carbohydrate Isoxidized In the animal body and Its ability to support the life ofthe organism. That this Is likewise related to the fact that pro-teins are not oxidized readily seems probable. Of course the onlyway one could finally determine whether or not the oxidation ofcarbohydrates "spares protein" in proportion to the ease withwhich a given carbohydrate is oxidized would be to run nitrogendeterminations on flies fed specific sugars. Apparently this hasnot been done. Evidently Luc 1 1ia lacks the chemical machinery forconverting Ingested proteins Into materials which are easily oxi-dized.One conclusion seems inevitable: there is no direct rela-tionship between the ease with which a sugar is oxidized and itschemical relationship to other sugars. Glucose and galactose arestereolsomerlc aldoses, yet they are not oxidized with anythinglike equal speed, either In vitro or in the animal body. On theother hand fructose, which Is a ketose sugar, Is oxidized moreeasily than either of them.47Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science, Vol. 2 [1947], Art. 15Published by Arkansas Academy of Science, 194748Literature CitedBertolf, L. M. 1927. Jour. Agr. Res., 35.Crow, Selma. 1932. Physlol. Zool., 5:16-35.Fraenkel, G. 1936. Nature, 137: 237.Loefer, J. B. 1935. Arch. Protlst., 84: 456-471.Rowe, A. W., M. A. McManus, and A. J. Plummer, 1935. Jour. Amer.Med. Assoc, 104: 451-453.Trager, W. 1941. Physlol. Rev., 21: 1-30.Welnbach, A. P., and D. B. Calvin, 1935. science, 81: 407-408Watchporn, E. and B. E. Holmes, 1931. Biochem. Jour., 25: 843-848.48Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science, Vol. 2 [1947], Art. 15https://scholarworks.uark.edu/jaas/vol2/iss1/1549Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science, Vol. 2 [1947], Art. 15Published by Arkansas Academy of Science, 1947

Comparison Between the Reducing Action of Monosaccharide Sugars and Their Efficacy in Supporting the Life of  Lucilia Sericata Meig

ScholarWorks@UARK

Journal of the Arkansas Academy of ScienceVolume 2 Article 151947Comparison Between the Reducing Action ofMonosaccharide Sugars and Their Efficacy inSupporting the Life of Lucilia Sericata MeigCyril E. AbbottHarding CollegeFollow this and additional works at: http://scholarworks.uark.edu/jaasPart of the Entomology CommonsThis article is available for use under the Creative Commons license: Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-ND 4.0). Users are able toread, download, copy, print, distribute, search, link to the full texts of these articles, or use them for any other lawful purpose, without asking priorpermission from the publisher or the author.This Article is brought to you for free and open access by ScholarWorks@UARK. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal of the Arkansas Academyof Science by an authorized editor of ScholarWorks@UARK. For more information, please contact scholar@uark.edu, ccmiddle@uark.edu.Recommended CitationAbbott, Cyril E. (1947) "Comparison Between the Reducing Action of Monosaccharide Sugars and Their Efficacy in Supporting theLife of Lucilia Sericata Meig," Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science: Vol. 2 , Article 15.Available at: http://scholarworks.uark.edu/jaas/vol2/iss1/1545A COMPARISON BETWEEN THE REDUCING ACTION OF MONOSACCHARI DESUGARS AND THEIR EFFICACY IN SUPPORTINGTHE LIFE OF LUCILIA SERICATA MEIG.C. E. Abbott, Harding College, SearoyNeither the materials nor the techniques presented In thispaper are wholly original. Only the method of comparison and theexact chemical methods can make any claim to originality: the re-sults, and the conclusions one may draw from them, might well havebeen predicted from results obtained by many students In variousways, as willappear from the brief outline which follows.In 1927, Bertolf reared honey bee larvae on pure sugars. Hefound that, so far as the monosaccharlde hexoses are concerned,fructose, glucose, and galactose support life In the order given.Fraenkel (1936) found that the adults of Calliphora erythrocephalasurvive equally well on all three of the sugars named and severalothers also: a situation which certainly does not obtain in thecase of Luc ilia sericata. Loefer (1935) found that the protozoan,Chlorogonium euchlorum, exhibits an acceleration of growth In thepresence of both fructose and galactose but for some reason glu-cose has less effect.Much evidence indicates that fructose Is a highly efficientnutrient for many animals. Thus Rowe, McManus, and Plummer (1935)found that, as concerns the ovarian function In young women, thereIs a much greater tolerance for fructose than for galactose. Thisis in line with the clinical use of fructose for diabetics.Weinbach and Calvin (1935) found that the relative reducingpower of the monosaccharides is fructose, glucose, galactose, Inthe order given, and Watchporn and Holmes (1931) had previouslydemonstrated that fructose is effective In reducing the productionof urea by embryonic kidneys, although the effect of galactose Inthis respect, is irregular, and xylose has no Inhibiting effect.Apparently the effect of glucose was not tested.This outline Is by no means a complete account of this mostinteresting problem. For such a review the reader is referred toTraeger's (1941) excellent discussion, and to the more recenttexts on biochemistry.The adult "greenbottle" fly, Luc ilia sericata Is incapable ofsurviving upon pure proteins, and evidently depends upon those in-gested in the larval state. The chief function of protein Ingest-ed by adult flies is the formation of eggs: without It, eggs donot develop. On the other hand.Luci Ii a survives for varying per-iods of time on pure carbohydrates-, especially sugars. The sugarmost effective In prolongllng life Is fructose, which, in pureform, enables 70% of the flies to survive 33 days. On a diet ofconcentrated glucose flies live about 29 days; while galactosesupports life no more than 14 days at most. Icannot agree withCrow (1932) who maintains that this species may live from 6 to 8days on water alone: repeated experiments under widely varyingconditions always brought 100% mortality no later than the fifthday.When fed sugars Inmolar dilutions, the time of survival de-pends Inpart, of course, upon the dilution of the sugar, but itis also a function of the species of sugar; so that Ifthe samemolar concentration of two different sugars Is employed In feedingtwo different groups of flies, there Is still a divergence betweenthem as concerns the duration of life. Moreover this divergence45Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science, Vol. 2 [1947], Art. 15Published by Arkansas Academy of Science, 194746becomes greater as the molar concentration Increases, as Is Illus-trated in Table I.Table I Survival of Lucilia on MonosaccharidesDay3 Surviving On:Molar Cone. Fructose I Glucose I Galactose1/64 7.0 6.0 6.01/48 7.5 7.0 6.51/32 10.5 9.5 7.51/24 14.0 13.0 9.01/16 20.0 18.5 11.01/8 29.0 27.0 14.0Since fructose, glucose, and galactose all reduce alkalinecuprlc sulphate solutions, one would naturally expect them to havea similar effect upon respiratory enzymes and pigments, and uponany substance which has the properties of such enzymes and pig-ments. Methylene blue, an efficient hydrogen acceptor, is onesuch substance. Itoxidizes fructose very rapidly, glucose some-what more slowly, while galactose requires a considerable time foroxidation. The reactions are more or less reversible, especiallyIn the presence of free oxygen. Nearly four times as much glucose(20.08 mgs.) as fructose (5.94 mgs.) Is required to reduce equiva-lent quantities of methylene blue in a given time.In order to obtain a reliable comparison of the reducing ac-tion of the three sugars, a given unit of methylene blue solutionwas mixed with a measured quantity of sugar of known concentra-tion, and the time required for reduction at constant temperaturecarefully recorded. This was repeated with each sugar, and In or-der to make the comparison more complete, several "standard" con-centrations of the sugars were used. Preliminary tests indicatedthat the most desirable concentrations were molar dilutions: .02,.04, .06, .08, and .10. In practice, 5 ml. of each was added tofive marked test tubes. To each tube 10 ml. of the dye was then'quickly added, and the tubes simultaneously Immersed In a waterbath of 40° C.The stock solution used In the tests was made by dissolving0.00047 gms. of the dye In 500 ml. of water to which 1.0 gm. ofsodium hydroxide had been added. Methylene blue Is reduced onlyinalkaline solution.- ItIs usually comparatively easy to timethe reduction of methylene blue because the color disappears rap-Idly and completely. The results of the tests are given in thefollowing table.Table II Reduction of Methylene Blue by MonosaccharidesTime Of Reduction In Minutes By;Molar Cone. Fructose I Glucose 1 Galactose0702 §To ISTO 15700.04 6.0 8.0 12.00.06 5.0 6.0 9.00.08 4.5 5^0 7^00.10 4.0 4.0 6.046Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science, Vol. 2 [1947], Art. 15http://scholarworks.uark.edu/jaas/vol2/iss1/1547One should notice that difference In reduction time for dif-ferent sugars Is much greater at very low concentrations than It IsIn solutions containing the sugar In more concentrated form. Thesignificance of this Is not entirely evident, but It seems to becharacteristic, because Itappears consistently, even when sub-stances other than methylene blue are used. This Is Indicated onTable III,which consists of data relative to the reduction ofhaemoglobin.Table III Reduction of Haemoglobin by MonosaccharidesTime Of Reduction In Minutes By:Molar Cone . Fructose | Glucose | ' Oalectose0.02 14.0 16.0 20.00.04 9.0 10.0 12.00.06 7.0 7.5 9.00.08 6.0 6.5 7.00.10 5.0 5.0 6.0The hoemoglobin solution was prepared by dissolving In 500ml.of water 1.0 gm. of dry, powdered haemoglobin and 1.0 gm.of sodiumhydroxide. The preparation was filtered before use. The reduc-tion of haemoglobin Is more difficult to observe because thechange In color Is from a yellow amber to a cherry red, and thechange Is often so gradual that It Is dlffucult to determine thetime at which reduction begins and whether or'not Ithas been com-pleted. Only by repeating the experiments many times could re-liable conclusions be made as to the reduction time.Peptone, gelatine and egg albumin did not reduce either »•«methylene blue or haemoglobin, even when the solutions were heat-ed to the boiling point and then allowed to stand for twenty-fourhours .All of the evidence presented seems to Indicate that there Isa close relationship between the ease with which a carbohydrate Isoxidized In the animal body and Its ability to support the life ofthe organism. That this Is likewise related to the fact that pro-teins are not oxidized readily seems probable. Of course the onlyway one could finally determine whether or not the oxidation ofcarbohydrates "spares protein" in proportion to the ease withwhich a given carbohydrate is oxidized would be to run nitrogendeterminations on flies fed specific sugars. Apparently this hasnot been done. Evidently Luc 1 1ia lacks the chemical machinery forconverting Ingested proteins Into materials which are easily oxi-dized.One conclusion seems inevitable: there is no direct rela-tionship between the ease with which a sugar is oxidized and itschemical relationship to other sugars. Glucose and galactose arestereolsomerlc aldoses, yet they are not oxidized with anythinglike equal speed, either In vitro or in the animal body. On theother hand fructose, which Is a ketose sugar, Is oxidized moreeasily than either of them.47Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science, Vol. 2 [1947], Art. 15Published by Arkansas Academy of Science, 194748Literature CitedBertolf, L. M. 1927. Jour. Agr. Res., 35.Crow, Selma. 1932. Physlol. Zool., 5:16-35.Fraenkel, G. 1936. Nature, 137: 237.Loefer, J. B. 1935. Arch. Protlst., 84: 456-471.Rowe, A. W., M. A. McManus, and A. J. Plummer, 1935. Jour. Amer.Med. Assoc, 104: 451-453.Trager, W. 1941. Physlol. Rev., 21: 1-30.Welnbach, A. P., and D. B. Calvin, 1935. science, 81: 407-408Watchporn, E. and B. E. Holmes, 1931. Biochem. Jour., 25: 843-848.48Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science, Vol. 2 [1947], Art. 15http://scholarworks.uark.edu/jaas/vol2/iss1/1549Journal of the Arkansas Academy of Science, Vol. 2 [1947], Art. 15Published by Arkansas Academy of Science, 1947

https://scholarworks.uark.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1075&amp;context=jaas

Comparison Between the Reducing Action of Monosaccharide Sugars and Their Efficacy in Supporting the Life of Lucilia Sericata Meig

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

UARK (University of Arkansas )

ScholarWorks@UARK