Display Settings:

Format

Send to:

Choose Destination
We are sorry, but NCBI web applications do not support your browser and may not function properly. More information
Adv Physiol Educ. 2010 Dec;34(4):174-85. doi: 10.1152/advan.00092.2010.

Diffusive insights: on the disagreement of Christian Bohr and August Krogh at the Centennial of the Seven Little Devils.

Author information

  • Department of Neuroscience and Pharmacology, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark. gjedde@sund.ku.dk

Abstract

The year 2010 is the centennial of the publication of the "Seven Little Devils" in the predecessor of Acta Physiologica. In these seven papers, August and Marie Krogh sought to refute Christian Bohr's theory that oxygen diffusion from the lungs to the circulation is not entirely passive but rather facilitated by a specific cellular activity substitute to secretion. The subjects of the present reevaluation of this controversy are Christian Bohr, Professor and Doctor of Medicine (1855-1911), nominated three times for the Nobel Prize; August Krogh, Doctor of Philosophy (1874-1949), Christian Bohr's assistant and later Nobel Prize laureate (1920); and Marie Krogh, née Jørgensen, Doctor of Medicine and wife of August Krogh (1874-1943). The controversy concerned is the transport of oxygen from the lungs into the bloodstream: are passive transport and diffusion capacity together sufficient to secure the oxygen supply in all circumstances or is there an additional specific ("energy consuming" or "active") mechanism responsible for the transport of oxygen from the alveoli into the bloodstream? The present discussion purports to show that the contestants' views were closer than the parties themselves and posterity recognized. Posterity has judged the dispute unilaterally from the Nobel laureate's point of view, but it is evident that August Krogh's Nobel Prize was awarded for the discovery of a cellular activity (Christian Bohr's expression), represented by Krogh's discovery of capillary recruitment. Christian Bohr appears to have been correct in the narrower sense that the diffusion capacity at rest is not great enough to explain the transport during work; a special mechanism intervenes and optimizes the conditions under which diffusion acts. August Krogh, of course, was right in the wider sense that the transport mechanism itself is always entirely passive.

PMID:
21098384
[PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
Free full text
PubMed Commons home

PubMed Commons

0 comments
How to join PubMed Commons

    Supplemental Content

    Icon for HighWire
    Loading ...
    Write to the Help Desk