Methodisches zur Isolierung der Glutaminsäure-Antipoden. 6. Mitteilung über die Chemie der Tumoren

Publisher Website
Google Scholar
Abstract
Chibnall and coworkers (Nature, 145: 311 (1940)) were unable to isolate more than traces of d-glutamic acid from tumor proteins, which may be due to the fact that the Foreman method used by them tends to isolate 1-glutamic acid. Kogl believes that the small amts. (up to 2%) of d-glutamic acid isolated by them from plant and normal animal tissues may have merely a physiological significance. He does not believe that they have produced any valid evidence against his theory that a high conc. of d-glutamic acid in tumor proteins is a criterion of malignancy. (Hoppe-Seyler''s Zeitschr. Physiol. Chem. 263: 107 (1940) and 264: 108 (1940)). To verify the theory, 1-glutamic acid was first precipitated from normal pig kidney and calf lung hydrolyzates, and known amts. of d,l-glutamic acid added to the filtrates. By the Foreman precipitation, 94% of the added l-form was recovered, and about 40% of the d-form. More of the d-form was isolated as the glutamic acid-HCl from the filtrate. From Brown-Pearce tumors, 8.4% l-glutamic acid was isolated by the Foreman method. The filtrate was then treated with HCl, and 0.9% 1-glutamic acid, and 3.6% d-glutamic acid obtained. C, H and N analysis are reported.

This publication has 1 reference indexed in Scilit: