The Nature of Animal LightHarvey, E. Newton (Edmund Newton)
Science
The Nature of Animal Light
Harvey, E. Newton (Edmund Newton)
Phosphorescence
Fortunately biological science has advanced beyond the stage where a
living process can be explained by calling it a vital process, and we
must fall back upon the idea of a photogen oxidizing with light
production. Indeed, it is now possible to go much further than this and
describe the properties of the photogen, but we must not lose sight of
the fact that it was recognized very early in the history of
Bioluminescence, that water, oxygen, and a photogenic substance were
necessary for light production.
A very great advance in our knowledge of the chemistry of the problem
was made by Dubois in 1885. He showed that if one dips the luminous
organ of _Pyrophorus_ in hot water, the light disappears and will not
return again. Also if one grinds up a luminous organ the mass will glow
for some time but the light soon disappears. If one brings the
previously heated organ in contact with the unheated triturated organ it
will again give off light. Later, Dubois showed that the same experiment
could be performed with the luminous tissues of _Pholas dactylus_. A
hot-water extract of the luminous tissue, and a cold-water extract of
the luminous tissue, allowed to stand until the light disappears, will
again produce light if mixed together. Dubois (1887 _b_) advanced the
theory that in the hot-water extract there is a substance, luciferin,
not destroyed by heating, which oxidizes with light production in the
presence of an enzyme, luciferase, which is destroyed on heating. The
luciferase is present together with luciferin in the cold-water extract,
but the luciferin is soon oxidized and luciferase alone remains. Mixing
a solution of luciferin and luciferase always results in light
production until the luciferin is again oxidized. Similar substances
have been found by me in the American fireflies, _Photinus_ and
_Photuris_, the Japanese firefly, _Luciola_, and in the ostracod
crustacean, _Cypridina hilgendorfii_. Crozier[6] reports that they exist
also in _Ptychodera_, a balanoglossid. I have been unable to demonstrate
their existence in luminous bacteria; in the annelid, _Chætopterus_; the
pennatulids, _Cavernularia_ and _Pennatula_; the squid, _Watasenia_;
and the fish, _Monocentris japonica_. E. B. Harvey (1917) could not
demonstrate them in _Noctiluca_. There are several reasons why the
existence of such bodies might be difficult to demonstrate, but these
reasons cannot be considered here. We thus see that the photogen is in
reality of dual nature, that two substances are necessary for light
production and that they may be very readily separated because of
difference in resistance to heating. In this respect Bioluminescence is
similar to some other biological processes, notably to certain immune
reactions and to certain enzyme actions.
[6] Private communication.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account