Abstract
Behind the firm discrimination maintained between active and passive transport lies a definition of energetic coupling as a fusion between an exergonic chemical reaction and an uphill transport. In contrast, energetic coupling between paired chemical reactions tends. to be defined much more loosely, as if the term were merely equivalent to sequential linkage, even though the actual usage may parallel that in transport. This article argues for a sharpening of this definition through integrated consideration of chemi-chemical and chemi-osmotic coupling. Furthermore; it calls attention to the applicability of energetic coupling to both the backward and forward fluxes of the energized transport. When two parallel but distinct active transport systems act on the same solute, one is likely to operate more steeply uphill than the other. The situation then easily arises, and is probably widespread, whereby entry occurs largely by the first process and exodus by the reversal of the second, still energetically linked. In this way cases of chemi-osmoti-chemical coupling probably arise, beyond the one proposed by Mitchell. Presumably the term retention process has in the past unknowingly (and illogically) referred to the second transport process. The “uncoupling” of an active transport does not tend simply to convert it to a facilitated diffusion, and both fluxes are likely to be modified. Accordingly, measure of only one flux will not describe a change in energy transfer.
Submitted Version (
Free)
Published Version
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call