spacer gif spacer gif spacer gif spacer gif spacer gif
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


spacer gif
     Home     Help     Feedback     Subscriptions     Archive     Search     Table of Contents    

First published online July 20, 2007
Journal of Experimental Biology 210, 2691-2699 (2007)
Published by The Company of Biologists 2007
doi: 10.1242/jeb.003715
This Article
Right arrow Summary Freely available
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Fraser, K. P. P.
Right arrow Articles by Peck, L. S.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Fraser, K. P. P.
Right arrow Articles by Peck, L. S.

Growth in the slow lane: protein metabolism in the Antarctic limpet Nacella concinna (Strebel 1908)

Keiron P. P. Fraser*, Andrew Clarke and Lloyd S. Peck

British Antarctic Survey, Natural Environment Research Council, High Cross, Madingley Road, Cambridge, CB3 OET, UK


Figure 1
View larger version (12K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Fig. 1. Intracellular free-pool (FPSR) and protein-bound (SR) specific radioactivities in Nacella concinna at Rothera Research Station, Adelaide Island, Antarctica. (A) Summer intracellular free-pool (y=1037–0.9092x, r2=44.4%, P<0.01). Letter A signifies data points that are significantly different to each other. (B) Winter intracellular free-pool. (C) Summer protein incorporated (y=–0.175+0.00538x; r2=0.67). (D) Winter protein incorporated (y=–0.134+0.005x; r2=0.67). All values are mean ± s.e.m. Each data point represents values from five (summer, 1 and 2 h; winter, 1 h time course) or six animals (summer, 4 h; winter, 2 and 4 h time course). Fitted regression lines were highly significant (P<0.001) with intercepts not significantly different to zero.

 

Figure 2
View larger version (14K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Fig. 2. The effect of temperature on protein and RNA metabolism in Nacella concinna, Rothera Research Station, Adelaide Island, Antarctica. (A) Fractional protein synthesis rate (ks; ANOVA, F=10.38, P<0.001); (B) absolute protein synthesis rate (As; ANOVA, F=4.80, P<0.01); (C) RNA:protein ratio (ANOVA, F=56.01, P<0.001); (D) RNA activity (kRNA; ANOVA, F=36.64, P<0.001). Bars with the same letter are significantly different to each other. For each bar, N=6, except for 6°C fractional and absolute protein synthesis rates, where N=5.

 

Figure 3
View larger version (7K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Fig. 3. The relationship between mass standardised protein synthesis retention efficiency (PSRE) and temperature in a range of ectotherm species. Temperatures are presented as an Arrhenius plot. The regression line was fitted using least-squares regression analysis (y=449.9–114.9x, r2=28.8%, P<0.05). For data sources, see Table 5.

 




© The Company of Biologists Ltd 2007