Cargando…

DO SPECIES LACKING A GALL BLADDER POSSESS ITS FUNCTIONAL EQUIVALENT?

In a previous paper the point has been brought out that the influence of the gall bladder upon the bile differs entirely from that of the ducts, the one organ acting to concentrate the secretion markedly and the other to dilute it slightly. The question arises, in species lacking a gall bladder, whe...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor principal: McMaster, Philip D.
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: The Rockefeller University Press 1922
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2128102/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19868592
_version_ 1782141994634575872
author McMaster, Philip D.
author_facet McMaster, Philip D.
author_sort McMaster, Philip D.
collection PubMed
description In a previous paper the point has been brought out that the influence of the gall bladder upon the bile differs entirely from that of the ducts, the one organ acting to concentrate the secretion markedly and the other to dilute it slightly. The question arises, in species lacking a gall bladder, whether the concentrating function of this organ will be found lodged in the ducts. To test the point, observations have been made upon the mouse and rat, since these animals though so nearly related have, the mouse, a gall bladder and the rat, none. The normal bile was first studied. Both animals were found to secrete larger quantities than do cats and dogs, but less than the guinea pig and rabbit. Methods were worked out for the quantitation of the pigment which was used as the index to changes in concentration. Bladder bile of the mouse was regularly found to be more concentrated than that collected from the common duct of the same animal. The bile collecting during stasis regularly showed a great increase in pigment content, such as in other species is brought about by the action of the gall bladder. In the rat, on the other hand, stasis bile never became more concentrated in pigment than the normal. The gall bladder, then, is not only absent from the rat in form, but in one at least of its important functions. That its other obvious function—that of a reservoir—cannot be assumed in the rat by the ducts would seem to be indicated, not only by the small size of these channels, but by the recent observation of Mann that the tonus of the sphincter of Oddi is almost negligible in the rat, in contradistinction to animals which possess a gall bladder. It is an interesting fact that the bile of the rat, which as has been said, undergoes no condensation of bulk after leaving the liver, contains on the average eight times as much pigment as does the liver bile of the mouse which is submitted to concentration. Whether it is correspondingly strong in substances useful for digestion, and therefore ab initio requires no concentration, is a matter upon which little can be said at present. However, in this connection the fact that the bulk of bile secreted per gram of liver weight is identical in both animals may be significant. Although this output is the same, the mouse liver when compared with the body weight (1 to 14.6) is relatively larger than that of the rat (1 to 21.7), so that the mouse secretes somewhat more bile per 100 gm. of body weight. This bile as it comes from the liver is but one-eighth as strong at least in pigment as rat bile, but the concentrating activity of the gall bladder is so great that the products yielded to the intestine may become not dissimilar.
format Text
id pubmed-2128102
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 1922
publisher The Rockefeller University Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-21281022008-04-18 DO SPECIES LACKING A GALL BLADDER POSSESS ITS FUNCTIONAL EQUIVALENT? McMaster, Philip D. J Exp Med Article In a previous paper the point has been brought out that the influence of the gall bladder upon the bile differs entirely from that of the ducts, the one organ acting to concentrate the secretion markedly and the other to dilute it slightly. The question arises, in species lacking a gall bladder, whether the concentrating function of this organ will be found lodged in the ducts. To test the point, observations have been made upon the mouse and rat, since these animals though so nearly related have, the mouse, a gall bladder and the rat, none. The normal bile was first studied. Both animals were found to secrete larger quantities than do cats and dogs, but less than the guinea pig and rabbit. Methods were worked out for the quantitation of the pigment which was used as the index to changes in concentration. Bladder bile of the mouse was regularly found to be more concentrated than that collected from the common duct of the same animal. The bile collecting during stasis regularly showed a great increase in pigment content, such as in other species is brought about by the action of the gall bladder. In the rat, on the other hand, stasis bile never became more concentrated in pigment than the normal. The gall bladder, then, is not only absent from the rat in form, but in one at least of its important functions. That its other obvious function—that of a reservoir—cannot be assumed in the rat by the ducts would seem to be indicated, not only by the small size of these channels, but by the recent observation of Mann that the tonus of the sphincter of Oddi is almost negligible in the rat, in contradistinction to animals which possess a gall bladder. It is an interesting fact that the bile of the rat, which as has been said, undergoes no condensation of bulk after leaving the liver, contains on the average eight times as much pigment as does the liver bile of the mouse which is submitted to concentration. Whether it is correspondingly strong in substances useful for digestion, and therefore ab initio requires no concentration, is a matter upon which little can be said at present. However, in this connection the fact that the bulk of bile secreted per gram of liver weight is identical in both animals may be significant. Although this output is the same, the mouse liver when compared with the body weight (1 to 14.6) is relatively larger than that of the rat (1 to 21.7), so that the mouse secretes somewhat more bile per 100 gm. of body weight. This bile as it comes from the liver is but one-eighth as strong at least in pigment as rat bile, but the concentrating activity of the gall bladder is so great that the products yielded to the intestine may become not dissimilar. The Rockefeller University Press 1922-01-31 /pmc/articles/PMC2128102/ /pubmed/19868592 Text en Copyright © Copyright, 1922, by The Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research New York This article is distributed under the terms of an Attribution–Noncommercial–Share Alike–No Mirror Sites license for the first six months after the publication date (see http://www.rupress.org/terms). After six months it is available under a Creative Commons License (Attribution–Noncommercial–Share Alike 4.0 Unported license, as described at http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
McMaster, Philip D.
DO SPECIES LACKING A GALL BLADDER POSSESS ITS FUNCTIONAL EQUIVALENT?
title DO SPECIES LACKING A GALL BLADDER POSSESS ITS FUNCTIONAL EQUIVALENT?
title_full DO SPECIES LACKING A GALL BLADDER POSSESS ITS FUNCTIONAL EQUIVALENT?
title_fullStr DO SPECIES LACKING A GALL BLADDER POSSESS ITS FUNCTIONAL EQUIVALENT?
title_full_unstemmed DO SPECIES LACKING A GALL BLADDER POSSESS ITS FUNCTIONAL EQUIVALENT?
title_short DO SPECIES LACKING A GALL BLADDER POSSESS ITS FUNCTIONAL EQUIVALENT?
title_sort do species lacking a gall bladder possess its functional equivalent?
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2128102/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19868592
work_keys_str_mv AT mcmasterphilipd dospecieslackingagallbladderpossessitsfunctionalequivalent