FASEB J. Pierce now sold as Thermo Scientific
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
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 HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by HEMMERSBACH, R.
Right arrow Articles by HÄDER, D.-P.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by HEMMERSBACH, R.
Right arrow Articles by HÄDER, D.-P.
(The FASEB Journal. 1999;13:S69-S75.)
© 1999 FASEB

Graviresponses of certain ciliates and flagellates

R. HEMMERSBACH*,1 and D.-P. HÄDER{dagger}

* Institute of Aerospace Medicine, German Aerospace Research Establishment, 51170 Köln; and
{dagger} Institute for Botany and Pharmaceutical Biology, University of Erlangen, Germany

1Correspondence: Institute of Aerospace Medicine, DLR (German Aerospace Research Establishment), 51140 Köln, Under Höhe, Germany. E-mail: Ruth.Hemmersbach{at}DLR.DE


   ABSTRACT
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
METHODS FOR CHANGING THE...
GRAVIRESPONSES UNDER VARIABLE...
EXPERIMENTS IN DENSITY-ADJUSTED...
MODELS FOR GRAVISENSING
ENERGETIC CONSIDERATIONS
SIGNAL TRANSDUCTION
PERSPECTIVES
REFERENCES
 
Protozoa are eukaryotic cells and represent suitable model systems to study the mechanisms of gravity perception and signal transduction due to their clear gravity-induced responses (gravitaxis and gravikinesis). Among protists, parallel evolution for graviperception mechanisms have been identified: either sensing by distinct stato-organelles (e.g., the Müller vesicles of the ciliate Loxodes) or by sensing the density difference between the whole cytoplasm and the extracellular medium (as proposed for Paramecium and Euglena). These two models are supported by experiments in density-adjusted media, as the gravitaxis of Loxodes was not affected, whereas the orientation of Paramecium and Euglena was completely disturbed. Both models include the involvement of ion channels in the cell membrane. Diverse experiments gave new information on the mechanism of graviperception in unicellular systems, such as threshold values in the range of 10% of gravity, relaxation of the responses after removal of the stimulus, and no visible adaptation phenomena during exposure to hypergravity or microgravity conditions for up to 12 days.—Hemmersbach, R., Häder, D.-P. Graviresponses of certain ciliates and flagellates.


Key Words: gravitaxis • gravikinesis • gravity sensing • microgravity • protists


   INTRODUCTION
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
METHODS FOR CHANGING THE...
GRAVIRESPONSES UNDER VARIABLE...
EXPERIMENTS IN DENSITY-ADJUSTED...
MODELS FOR GRAVISENSING
ENERGETIC CONSIDERATIONS
SIGNAL TRANSDUCTION
PERSPECTIVES
REFERENCES
 
THROUGHOUT EVOLUTION gravitational acceleration has been constantly present, thus representing one of the most important stimuli acting on living systems. Therefore it is not astonishing that knowing up and knowing down is not only restricted to complex organisms but was already developed by unicellular organisms. Well-known examples are the gravity-oriented behavior (gravitaxis) and the recently identified gravity-induced velocity regulation (gravikinesis) of some protists (1 , 2 ). There is a long-lasting discussion concerning the underlying mechanism of the graviresponses, either postulating a pure physical one or a physiological one (for review see refs. 1-4 ). In the case of an asymmetrical mass distribution, e.g., due to a heavier posterior part, a cell can be passively aligned in the gravity field. In contrast, a physiological mechanism is based on a signal transduction chain and thus on the existence of a physiological receptor. With new experimental approaches under changed gravitational stimulation (microgravity to hypergravity), experiments in density-adjusted media, and analysis of high cell numbers providing statistically secured data (5) , a discrimination between physics and physiology of the graviresponses becomes possible (6) . The results obtained so far are in favor of a physiological guided mechanism of the graviresponses which, however, do not exclude a coexisting physical mechanism (e.g., a heavier posterior part of the cell equals a buoy effect). This report gives an overview of our current knowledge on graviresponses in certain protists.


   METHODS FOR CHANGING THE GRAVITATIONAL STIMULATION
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
METHODS FOR CHANGING THE...
GRAVIRESPONSES UNDER VARIABLE...
EXPERIMENTS IN DENSITY-ADJUSTED...
MODELS FOR GRAVISENSING
ENERGETIC CONSIDERATIONS
SIGNAL TRANSDUCTION
PERSPECTIVES
REFERENCES
 
If one investigates the effect of light one can manipulate the stimulus and the same can be done with gravity. Experiments under 1-G conditions can be easily performed in horizontal microscopes. Fast-rotation of a horizontal microscope about its optical (horizontal) axis leads to the principle of a fast-rotating clinostat (7 , 8 , for review see ref. 9 ). It is assumed that a biological system is rotated (about its horizontal rotation axis) at such an angular velocity that the system can no longer perceive the rapidly turning gravity vector. The principle is based on the fact that during rotation sedimenting particles or masses (which are proposed as gravisensing structures, see below) are forced to move on circular paths, the diameter of which approaches zero at higher rotational velocities. Thus the gravity-induced relative movement of masses (sedimentation) is neutralized, which is also the fact under free-fall (microgravity) conditions. As the centrifugal force follows a gradient along a radius, it is assumed that a particle near the center of rotation is in the status of functional weightlessness. At a rotational speed of 60 rpm, which corresponds to the acceleration speed we normally apply in our experiments, a maximal residual (centrifugal) acceleration of 3 x 10-3 G is calculated for the border of the observed field (radius = 1 mm) and 4 x 10-2 G for the border of the whole observation chamber (radius = 15 mm) (10) . The validity of the simulation method finally depends on the threshold for graviperception and the perception time of the gravisensor (11) . Some results from simulation experiments could already be confirmed by experiments under real free-fall conditions (also seen below in randomization of previously gravitactic cells) (11 , for review see ref. 12 ). We had access to clinostat experiments, microgravity experiments on sounding rockets (5–12 min microgravity) and two shuttle missions (9 and 14 days). In addition, hypergravity conditions (up to 5 G) were achieved by using a centrifuge microscope on the ground, distinct acceleration steps between microgravity and 1 G by using the same device in space (13) .


   GRAVIRESPONSES UNDER VARIABLE ACCELERATIONS
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
METHODS FOR CHANGING THE...
GRAVIRESPONSES UNDER VARIABLE...
EXPERIMENTS IN DENSITY-ADJUSTED...
MODELS FOR GRAVISENSING
ENERGETIC CONSIDERATIONS
SIGNAL TRANSDUCTION
PERSPECTIVES
REFERENCES
 
Observation under 1 g and under controlled environmental conditions (e.g., isothermal conditions and homogeneous illumination) reveal the two gravity-dependent responses of protists: gravitaxis and gravikinesis. Gravitaxis is defined as an orientation with respect to the gravity vector. Although most of the investigated protists, such as Paramecium (14 , for review see 1 , 2 ), Didinium (15) , Tetrahymena (16) , Euglena (17-19) , Cryptomonas (20) , and Chlamydomonas (21 , 22 ), preferentially show negative gravitaxis, a few such as Loxodes prefer a positive gravitaxis or bimodal distribution, i.e. the occurrence of positive and negative gravitaxis within the same culture (23-25) (Fig. 1 ). It is known that the precision of the gravitactic orientation of Loxodes depends on the overall oxygen concentration within the medium. Thus, the microaerophilic Loxodes, predominantly found in the sediment of lakes, shows positive gravitaxis and bimodal distributions under oxic conditions (>10% atmospheric saturation), and negative gravitaxis under anaerobic conditions (<5% atmospheric saturation) (23) , indicating the ecological significance of gravitaxis. A correlation between oxygen concentration and the sign of gravitaxis does not exist for Euglena but is conversely discussed for Paramecium (26 , 27 ). Whereas Hemmersbach et al. showed that the gravitactic response of Paramecium depends on the oxygen tension (a precise negative gravitaxis in low-oxygen conditions, which changes to a random distribution if the oxygen concentration is increased) (26) , this correlation was not supported by Machemer et al. (27) . It remains to be shown whether the controversial results were due to a different gas permeability of the materials of theobservation chambers. Switches in the sign from negative to positive gravitaxis were observed for Euglena by the influence of micromolar concentrations of heavy metal ions such as copper or mercury (28) , culture age (29) , and temperature (30) and for Paramecium by temperature (31) and ultraviolet radiation (32) , without detectable changes in cell morphology and via an as yet unknown mechanism. Besides these switches in the sign of gravitaxis, a further argument against a pure physical mechanism is the variable orientation of the longitudinal axis of immobilized Paramecium cells during sedimentation (33) .



View larger version (11K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Figure 1. Circular histograms of spatial orientation: a) negative gravitaxis of Paramecium biaurelia, b) positive gravitaxis of Loxodes striatus, c) bimodal distribution of Loxodes striatus. Each histogram represents >1000 tracks.

Some protozoa have the additional ability to counterbalance sedimentation due to a gravity-dependent modification of their swimming velocity (gravikinesis). Cell sedimentation is compensated due to an increase in propulsion in upward-swimming cells and a decrease in downward swimming ones (34-36) . Gravikinetic values can be calculated from upward and downward swimming velocities and the sedimentation velocity according to Machemer et al. (34) . Gravikinetic values have been identified so far for different ciliates (e.g., Paramecium, Tetrahymena, and Loxodes) (34 , 36 , 37 , 38 ), whereas the gravitactic flagellate Euglena does not show any gravikinesis (39) .

In some cases graviresponses become more obvious under increased gravitational stimulation (centrifugation) (13 , 15 , 40 ). The response time to the increased acceleration is in the second range, because already within the first 20 s [the minimum period for our image analysis system (5) needed for the registration of a sufficient number of cells for statistical analysis] after onset of centrifugation an increase in the precision of gravitaxis and in gravikinesis of Paramecium is registered (13) . The fact that the gravikinetic response is slightly delayed compared to the gravitactic response indicates different time courses of both events and probably different mechanisms (13 , 15 ). Paramecium cells do not adapt to altered gravitational stimulation. Repetitive stimulation between 1 and 5 G maintained their reactivity and showed the above-mentioned characteristic graviresponses (13) .

Experiments in microgravity (free fall) on drop towers, sounding rockets, or on board a space shuttle have indicated that indeed the gravity vector on earth is an important guiding stimulus, especially in darkness, for the orientation and speed regulation of gravisensitive protists (2 , 10 , 37 , 39 , 41 ). The results are supported by experiments using a fast-rotating clinostat. After onset of microgravity the protists continue to swim on straight swimming paths and their graviresponses (gravitaxis and gravikinesis) relax after some time. Although relaxation of the negative gravitaxis of Paramecium was incomplete in the 4.6-s course of free fall in a drop tower (37) and even during 10 s of free fall in a drop shaft (42) , random swimming of the cells was observed in a sounding rocket experiment after 80 s in microgravity (Fig. 2 ) (10) . Straight swimming paths and lack of directional turns or of backward swimming of Paramecium indicate that no depolarization of the cell membrane to the amount of an action potential is induced (10) . The transiently increased swimming velocity of Paramecium under the conditions of microgravity indicate a hyperpolarization of the cell membrane. After 3 min the mean swimming velocity in microgravity does not differ from the mean swimming velocity of horizontally swimming cells in 1 G (36 , 37 ). This was predicted by Bräucker et al. and Machemer et al. (15 , 37 ) because de- and hyperpolarizing receptor responses neutralize under 1 G in horizontally swimming cells (see Fig. 5 ), thus corresponding to the gravity-independent swimming velocity. In contrast to the comparable gravitactic response in microgravity and on a fast-rotating clinostat, the gravikinetic response of the cells differs as the mean swimming velocity remains elevated during the clinostat experiments (36) . This might be an indication that Paramecium is still mechanically stimulated and that the cells can differentiate between fast rotation on a clinostat and real microgravity. Further experiments will show whether the differences in response are based on different mechanisms for gravitaxis and gravikinesis. Cultivation of Paramecium, Euglena, and Loxodes for several generations in space for a maximum of 12 days did not affect the graviresponses, as shown by threshold experiments in-flight (see below) and post-flight behavioral analyses, thus indicating no adaptation to the microgravity environment within this time frame (41 , 43 , 44 ).



View larger version (14K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Figure 2. Circular histograms of spatial orientation of Paramecium: negative gravitaxis under 1-G conditions (a, b) and random distribution in microgravity (c) and in simulated weightlessness on a fast-rotating clinostat (d). Each histogram represents >500 tracks.



View larger version (9K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Figure 5. Model for explanation of the gravikinetic behavior of Paramecium based on electrophysiological data. Symbols represent the bipolar distribution of mechanosensitive ion channels in the cell membrane: Ca2+ (diamonds) and K+ (parallel bars) channels. Arrows within the cell indicate the site of deformation during upward (a), horizonal (b), and downward swimming (c), thus leading to an enhanced (a), no (b), or reduced gravikinetic response (c). [Modified from Bräucker et al. (15) ].

To gain the first information on the sensitivity of the model systems, the minimal acceleration that induces the graviresponses was determined. Such threshold experiments can only be performed in space by using a centrifuge microscope for the application of acceleration profiles. Thus, cell cultures were observed under increasing or decreasing acceleration profiles between 1 x 10-4 and 1.5 G providing the following values: Paramecium biaurelia, 0.35 G (43 , 45 ); Euglena gracilis, 0.16 G (41) and 0.12 G (46) ; and Loxodes striatus, <= 0.15 G (45) . Similar results were obtained for cells independent of whether they were subjected to increasing or decreasing acceleration profiles and for cells that had been cultivated in microgravity for increasing periods of time (up to 12 days). Again, these results indicate no adaptation of cells to microgravity, even though they underwent several divisions under this condition. Of special interest is the direct comparison between Paramecium and Loxodes and thus the higher sensitivity of Loxodes, as these ciliates were observed in parallel under identical experimental conditions.


   EXPERIMENTS IN DENSITY-ADJUSTED MEDIA
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
METHODS FOR CHANGING THE...
GRAVIRESPONSES UNDER VARIABLE...
EXPERIMENTS IN DENSITY-ADJUSTED...
MODELS FOR GRAVISENSING
ENERGETIC CONSIDERATIONS
SIGNAL TRANSDUCTION
PERSPECTIVES
REFERENCES
 
If gravity is perceived due to the density difference between the cytoplasm and the surrounding medium, the response should disappear in density-adjusted media (Fig. 3 ). This is exactly observed with Paramecium and Euglena under these experimental conditions (45 , 47 , 48 ). Increasing density of the medium impaired their gravitaxis and orientation was completely disturbed under isodensity conditions in Paramecium and Euglena (1.04 g/cm3). The results indicate the participation of the membrane in graviperception (35) . Exposing Loxodes to an increased density of the medium, no change in gravitaxis can be observed, thus proving the existence of an internal gravisensor (45) . The development of a stato-organelle is essential for Loxodes because it preferentially lives in the sediment of lakes, where the density of the medium often exceeds the density of the cell.



View larger version (72K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Figure 3. Models for gravisensing: (a, b) in the case of an internal gravisensor (R) gravitaxis (shown here for negative gravitaxis) persists in density-adjusted media; (c, d) in the case that perception occurs on the level of the cell membrane or in the case of a passive orientation mechanism, gravitactic orientation disappears.


   MODELS FOR GRAVISENSING
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
METHODS FOR CHANGING THE...
GRAVIRESPONSES UNDER VARIABLE...
EXPERIMENTS IN DENSITY-ADJUSTED...
MODELS FOR GRAVISENSING
ENERGETIC CONSIDERATIONS
SIGNAL TRANSDUCTION
PERSPECTIVES
REFERENCES
 
Loxodes received attention because it bears statocyst-like organelles (Müller vesicles), three to six per cell (Fig. 4 ), already proposed by Penard (49) to function as mechanoreceptors due to their morphology. These organelles are specialized vacuoles (7–10 µm in diameter) containing a heavy body of BaSO4 (3–3.5 µm in diameter, density 4.5 g/cm3), the Müller body, fixed to a modified ciliary stalk (50 , 51 ). Concerning the mechanism, it is proposed, in analogy to the graviperception of metazoa, that gravity is perceived by bending of a ciliary complex, which changes the membrane potential, which in turn determines the activity of the cilia and thus the swimming activity of the cell (51 , 52 ). Cultivation for up to 12 days in space did not affect the general morphology of the Müller vesicles, although there were first indications for less mineralization in Loxodes cells under microgravity without impact on the graviresponse, which was tested after the mission on the ground (44) . Destruction of the Müller vesicles by means of laser beams leads to a loss of orientation capacity of Loxodes (45) , clearly demonstrating their role as organelles of gravisensing and thus analog function to the gravisensor in vertebrates. Probably this type of organelle is not widespread in protozoa and general cell structures are discussed as gravisensors in other systems.



View larger version (175K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Figure 4. Scanning electron micrograph of a replica of a ruptured Loxodes striatus. Arrows indicate the barium sulfate granula of three Müller vesicles. Scale bar: 1 µm.

In the cases of Paramecium and Euglena it is postulated that the hydrostatic pressure difference between cytoplasm and medium induces opening of specific, unevenly distributed ion channels in the cell membrane, which in turn (in consequence of the changed membrane potential) regulate the direction and the frequency of the ciliary (flagellar) beat. The postulated organization fits very well in the characteristic, bipolar distribution of mechanosensitive ion channels in Paramecium as revealed by electrophysiological studies: mechanosensitive K+ channels are located posterior and mechanosensitive Ca2+ channels anterior (53 , 54 ) (Fig. 5 ). Stimulation of these channels leads to a hyperpolarization-induced increased forward swimming velocity during upward swimming, and to a depolarization-induced decreased swimming velocity during downward swimming, which is exactly observed during gravikinesis. No gravikinesis is observed in horizontally swimming cells as de- and hyperpolarizing responses neutralize (15) . Whether gravitaxis is regulated by the same mechanism is still unclear. Future studies have to show whether the mechanosensitive ion channels in the plasma membrane are identical with gravireceptor channels (55) . So far, no gravireceptor potential has been recorded.

Channel blockers specifically inhibiting mechanosensitive ion channels need to be identified. Low concentrations of gadolinium (100 µM), known to affect stretch-sensitive ion channels, inhibited negative gravitaxis in Euglena (47 , 48 ) but had no effect on Paramecium (R. Hemmersbach, unpublished observation). Manipulation of the membrane potential by the lipophilic cation triphenylmethylphosphonium (TPMP+) resulted in a loss of gravitaxis of Euglena, whereas phototaxis was not affected, thus indicating the involvement of the membrane in the gravity signal transduction chain (47 , 48 ).


   ENERGETIC CONSIDERATIONS
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
METHODS FOR CHANGING THE...
GRAVIRESPONSES UNDER VARIABLE...
EXPERIMENTS IN DENSITY-ADJUSTED...
MODELS FOR GRAVISENSING
ENERGETIC CONSIDERATIONS
SIGNAL TRANSDUCTION
PERSPECTIVES
REFERENCES
 
Regarding the high density of 4.5 g/cm3 in the statoliths of the Müller body of Loxodes and assuming that the vacuolar fluid has a density similar to water, the organelle should be able to signal the cell its spatial orientation within 0.2 s (51) . Using heavy minerals is a general concept in gravisensors, such as barium sulfate in the statoliths of the Chara rhizoid (56) , strontium sulfate in the Müller bodies of Remanella (seawater representative of the family Loxodidae) (57) , or calcium carbonate within the vestibular system (58) .

But what about other cell systems, which do not have such a specialized gravireceptor? Is the pressure of the cytoplasm on the lower membrane sufficient to open mechanosensitive ion channels? Regarding the cell size of 200 µm of a Paramecium cell and its cell density 4% higher than the density of fresh water, a pressure of 0.1 Pa was calculated to act on the lower plasma membrane (34) . One nanometer of membrane deformation corresponds to 10-19 J, which is 50 times above the thermal noise and thus suitable as a potential stimulus. However, in the case of smaller gravitactic cells such as Euglena (30 µm) and Tetrahymena (75 µm) the work for channel gating comes close to thermal noise level (10-21 J). The threshold experiments also revealed that even 10% of gravity leads to a graviresponse. As a consequence, a system, such as the Ca2+-sensitive filament system in the cortex of a Paramecium, has to be postulated for focusing the weak gravitational forces to transduction channels and amplification of the signal (55) .


   SIGNAL TRANSDUCTION
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
METHODS FOR CHANGING THE...
GRAVIRESPONSES UNDER VARIABLE...
EXPERIMENTS IN DENSITY-ADJUSTED...
MODELS FOR GRAVISENSING
ENERGETIC CONSIDERATIONS
SIGNAL TRANSDUCTION
PERSPECTIVES
REFERENCES
 
A few studies showed changes in cyclic nucleotide levels in human cell lines (59 , 60 ). It was demonstrated that alteration of the gravitational stimulation (microgravity to hypergravity) has an important impact on intracellular cAMP production. It would be interesting to know whether this effect is also found in a cell system with obvious graviresponses, such as Paramecium, also keeping in mind that a direct regulation of ion channels by cyclic nucleotides might influence the mechanical properties of the cell membrane (61) . Second messengers might be involved in the modulation of the ciliary beat in the gravity field. As a consequence, second messenger levels might decrease the more cells are aligned in the gravity field, which is in agreement with our first biochemical data gathered under hypergravity conditions (62) .


   PERSPECTIVES
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
METHODS FOR CHANGING THE...
GRAVIRESPONSES UNDER VARIABLE...
EXPERIMENTS IN DENSITY-ADJUSTED...
MODELS FOR GRAVISENSING
ENERGETIC CONSIDERATIONS
SIGNAL TRANSDUCTION
PERSPECTIVES
REFERENCES
 
Protists represent suitable model systems to study the influence of gravity on the cellular level. Considerable amounts of data have been obtained revealing the evolution of two principles in gravisensing. In addition to behavioral responses protists offer the advantage to investigate further cellular events under changed gravitational stimulation such as cell proliferation, mineralization, aging, as well as interaction between organisms in ecosystems. Short-term experiments in microgravity did not show any adaptation phenomena within these gravisensitive systems. Experiments in prolonged microgravity on the space station will offer the unique chance to perform multi-generation experiments in a gravity-free environment. If these experiments are supported by ground-based studies, our knowledge on the impact of gravity on evolution, development, and signal transduction pathways will be increased. Future experiments will clarify whether only free-living cells can directly perceive gravity or even every cell within our body. Further experiments and suitable test parameters will show whether results in microgravity can be extrapolated from hypergravity experiments. This cannot be predicted per se because removal of a stimulus might represent a new, unpredictable stimulus situation.


   ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
 
The microgravity experiments were financially supported by Deutsches Zentrum für Luft- und Raumfahrt (DARA, Grant no. 50WB9406-ZA).


   REFERENCES
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
METHODS FOR CHANGING THE...
GRAVIRESPONSES UNDER VARIABLE...
EXPERIMENTS IN DENSITY-ADJUSTED...
MODELS FOR GRAVISENSING
ENERGETIC CONSIDERATIONS
SIGNAL TRANSDUCTION
PERSPECTIVES
REFERENCES
 

  1. Machemer, H., Bräucker, R. (1992) Graviperception and graviresponses in ciliates. Acta Protozool 31,185-214[Medline]
  2. Hemmersbach, R., Volkmann, D., Häder, D.-P. (1999) Graviorientation in protists and plants. J. Plant Physiol. 154,1-15[Medline]
  3. Bean, B. (1984) Microbial geotaxis. Colombetti, G. Lenci, F. eds. Membranes and Sensory Transduction ,163-198 Plenum Press New York.
  4. Häder, D.-P., Hemmersbach, R. (1997) Graviperception and graviorientation in flagellates. Planta 203,S7-S10[Medline]
  5. Häder, D.-P., Vogel, K. (1991) Simultaneous tracking of flagellates in real time by image analysis. J. Math. Biol. 30,63-72
  6. Machemer, H., Bräucker, R. (1996) Gravitaxis screened for physical mechanisms using g-modulated orientational cellular behaviour. Micrograv. Sci. Tech. 5,221-231
  7. Muller, H. J. (1959) Approximation to a gravity-free situation for the human organism achievable at moderate expense. Science 128,772
  8. Briegleb, W. (1988) Ground-borne methods and results in gravitational cell biology. Physiologist 31,44-47
  9. Briegleb, W. (1992) Some qualitative and quantitative aspects of the fast-rotating clinostat as a research tool. ASGSB Bull 5,23-30[Medline]
  10. Hemmersbach-Krause, R., Briegleb, W., Häder, D.-P., Vogel, K., Grothe, D., Meyer, I. (1993) Orientation of Paramecium under the conditions of weightlessness. J. Euk. Microbiol. 40,439-446[Medline]
  11. Klaus, D. M., Todd, P., Schatz, A. (1998) Functional weightlessness during clinorotation of cell suspensions. Adv. Space Res. 21,1315-1318[Medline]
  12. Cogoli, M. (1992) The fast-rotating clinostat: a history of its use in gravitational biology and a comparison of ground-based and flight experiment results. ASGSB Bull 5,59-68[Medline]
  13. Hemmersbach, R., Voormanns, R., Häder, D.-P. (1996) Graviresponses in Paramecium biaurelia under different accelerations—studies on the ground and in space. J. Exp. Biol. 199,2199-2205[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  14. Jennings, H. S. (1906) Behavior of the Lower Organisms Indiana University Press Bloomington.
  15. Bräucker, R., Machemer-Röhnisch, S., Machemer, H. (1994) Graviresponses in Paramecium caudatum and Didinium nasutum examined under hypergravity conditions. J. Exp. Biol. 197,271-294[Abstract]
  16. Winet, H., Jahn, T. L. (1974) Gravitaxis in protozoa. I. A propulsion-gravity model for Tetrahymena ciliata. J. Theor. Biol. 46,449-465[Medline]
  17. Aderhold, R. (1888) Beiträge zur Kenntnis richtender Kräfte bei der Bewegung niederer Organismen. Jenaische Zeitschr. Med. Naturwiss. 22,311-342
  18. Creutz, C., Diehn, B. (1976) Motor responses to polarized light and gravity sensing in Euglena gracilis. J. Protozool. 23,552-556
  19. Häder, D.-P. (1987) Polarotaxis, gravitaxis and vertical phototaxis in the green flagellate, Euglena gracilis. Arch. Microbiol. 147,179-183[Medline]
  20. Rhiel, E., Häder, D.-P., Wehrmeyer, W. (1988) Diaphototaxis and gravitaxis in a freshwater Cryptomonas. Plant Cell Physiol 29,755-760[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  21. Bean, B. (1977) Geotactic behavior of Chlamydomonas. J. Protozool. 24,394-401[Medline]
  22. Kessler, J. O. (1986) The external dynamics of swimming microorganisms. Round, F. E. Chapman, D. J. eds. Progress in Phycological Research ,258-307 Biopress Oxford.
  23. Fenchel, T., Finlay, B. J. (1984) Geotaxis in the ciliated protozoon Loxodes. J. Exp. Biol. 110,17-33[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  24. Machemer-Röhnisch, S., Bräucker, R., Machemer, H. (1993) Neutral gravitaxis of gliding Loxodes exposed to normal and raised gravity. J. Comp. Physiol. A 171,779-790
  25. Hemmersbach-Krause, R., Briegleb, W. (1992) Gravitational effects on Paramecium and Loxodes. Physiologist 35,23-26
  26. Hemmersbach-Krause, R., Briegleb, W., Häder, D.-P. (1991) Dependence of gravitaxis in Paramecium on oxygen. Eur. J. Protistol. 27,278-282
  27. Machemer, H., Machemer-Röhnisch, S., Bräucker, R. (1993) Velocity and graviresponses in Paramecium during adaptation and varied oxygen concentrations. Arch. Protistenk. 143,285-296
  28. Stallwitz, E., Häder, D.-P. (1994) Effects of heavy metals on motility and gravitactic orientation of the flagellate, Euglena gracilis. Eur. J. Protistol. 30,18-24[Medline]
  29. Häder, D.-P., Lebert, M., DiLena, M. R. (1987) Effects of culture age and drugs on phototaxis in the green flagellate, Euglena gracilis. Plant Physiol. Life Sci. Adv. 6,169-174
  30. Freiberger, N., and Hemmersbach, R. (1998) Influence of low temperature on the graviresponses of protists. J. Eukaryot. Microbiol. (Abstract). In press
  31. Moore, A. (1903) Some facts concerning geotropic gatherings of paramecia. Am. J. Physiol. 9,238-244
  32. Fox, H. M. (1925) The effect of light on the vertical movement of aquatic organisms. Proc. Camb. Phil. Soc. Biol. Sci. 1,219-224
  33. Kuznicki, L. (1968) Behavior of Paramecium in the gravity field. I. Sinking of immobilized specimens. Acta Protozool 6,109-117
  34. Machemer, H., Machemer-Röhnisch, S., Bräucker, R., Takahashi, K. (1991) Gravikinesis in Paramecium: theory and isolation of a physiological response to the natural gravity vector. J. Comp. Physiol. A 168,1-12
  35. Ooya, M., Mogami, Y., Izumi-Kurotani, A., Baba, S. A. (1992) Gravity-induced changes in propulsion of Paramecium caudatum: A possible role of graviperception in protozoan behaviour. J. Exp. Biol. 163,153-167[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  36. Hemmersbach-Krause, R., Briegleb, W., Vogel, K., Häder, D.-P. (1993) Swimming velocity of Paramecium under the conditions of weightlessness. Acta Protozool 32,229-236[Medline]
  37. Machemer, H., Bräucker, R., Murakami, A., Yoshimura, K. (1993) Graviperception in unicellular organisms: a comparative behavioural study under short-term microgravity. Micrograv. Sci. Technol. 5,221-231
  38. Bräucker, R., Machemer-Röhnisch, S., Machemer, H., Murakami, A. (1992) Gravity-controlled gliding velocity in Loxodes. Eur. J. Protistol. 28,238-245
  39. Vogel, K., Hemmersbach-Krause, R., Kühnel, C., Häder, D. P. (1993) Swimming behavior of the unicellular flagellate, Euglena gracilis, in simulated and real microgravity. Micrograv. Sci. Technol. 4,232-237
  40. Lebert, M, . D.-P. Häder (1997) Effects of hypergravity on the photosynthetic flagellate, Euglena gracilis. J. Plant Physiol. 150,153-159[Medline]
  41. Häder, D.-P., Rosum, A., Schäfer, J., Hemmersbach, R. (1996) Graviperception in the flagellate Euglena gracilis during a shuttle space flight. J. Biotech. 47,261-269[Medline]
  42. Bräucker, R., Murakami, A., Ikegaya, K., Takahashi, K., Machemer-Röhnisch, S., Machemer, H. (1998) Relaxation and activation of graviresponses in Paramecium. J. Exp. Biol. 201,2103-2113[Abstract]
  43. Hemmersbach, R., Voormanns, R., Briegleb, W., Rieder, N., Häder, D.-P. (1996) Influence of accelerations on the spatial orientation of Loxodes and Paramecium. J. Biotech. 47,271-278[Medline]
  44. Hemmersbach, R., Tairbekov, M., Gawrilowa, O., Rieder, N., Send, W., Bromeis, B., Wilczek, M., Mulisch, M. (1998) Morphology and physiology of Loxodes after cultivation in space. ESA SP (Special Publication 222)
  45. Hemmersbach, R., Voormanns, R., Bromeis, B., Schmidt, N., Rabien, H., Ivanova, K. (1998) Comparative studies of the graviresponses of Paramecium and Loxodes. Adv. Space Res. 21,1285-1289[Medline]
  46. Häder, D.-P, Porst, M., Tahedl, H., Richter, P., Lebert, M. (1997) Gravitactic orientation in the flagellate Euglena gracilis. Micrograv. Sci. Technol. 10,53-57
  47. Lebert, M., Häder, D.-P. (1996) How Euglena tells up from down. Nature 379,590[Medline]
  48. Lebert, M., Richter, P., Häder, D.-P. (1997) Signal perception and transduction of gravitaxis in the flagellate Euglena gracilis. J. Plant Physiol. 150,685-690
  49. Penard, E. (1917) Le genre Loxodes. Rev. Suisse de Zool. 25,453-489
  50. Rieder, N. (1977) Die Müllerschen Körperchen von Loxodes magnus (Ciliata, Holotricha): Ihr Bau und ihre mögliche Funktion als Schwererezeptor. Verh. Dt. Zool. Ges., 254
  51. Fenchel, T., Finlay, B. J. (1986) The structure and function of Müller vesicles in loxodid ciliates. J. Protozool. 33,69-76
  52. Neugebauer, D.-C., Machemer, H. (1997) Is there an orientation-dependent excursion of the Müller body in the "statocystoid" of Loxodes?. Cell Tissue Res. 287,277-582
  53. Machemer, H., Deitmer, J. W. (1985) Mechanoreception in ciliates. Autrum, H. Ottoson, D. Perl, E. R. Schmidt, R. F. Schimazu, H. Willis, H. D. eds. Progress in Sensory Physiology ,81-118 Springer-Verlag Berlin.
  54. Naitoh, Y. (1984) Mechanosensory tranduction in protozoa. Colombetti, G. Lenci, F. eds. Membranes and Sensory Transduction ,113-134 Plenum Press New York.
  55. Machemer-Röhnisch, S., Machemer, H., Bräucker, R. (1996) Electric-field effects on gravikinesis in Paramecium. J. Comp. Physiol. A 179,213-226
  56. Sievers, A., Volkmann, D. (1979) Gravitropism in single cells. Encyclopedia of Plant Physiology, N S Vol. 7, Physiology of Movements (Haupt, W., and Feinleib, M. E., eds) pp. 567–572, Springer-Verlag, Berlin.
  57. Bedini, C., Lanfranchi, A., Nobili, R. (1973) The ultrastructure of the Müller body in Remanella. J. Protozool. 24,394-401
  58. Neubert, J., Schatz, A., Bromeis, B., Linke-Hommes, A. (1998) Effects of gravity on the early development. Adv. Space Res. 22,265-271[Medline]
  59. Meli, A., Perella, G., Curcio, F., Hemmersbach, R., Neubert, J., and Ambesi Impiombato, F. S. (1998) Response of thyrotropin of normal thyroid follicular cell strain FRTL5 in hypergravity. Biochimie, in press
  60. Kumei, Y., Whitson, P. A., Sato, A., Cintron, N. M. (1991) Hypergravity signal transduction in HeLa cells with concomitant phosphorylation of proteins immunoprecipitated with anti-microtubule-associated protein antibodies. Exp. Cell Res. 192,492-496[Medline]
  61. Schultz, J. E., Guo, Y. L., Kleefeld, G., Völk, H. (1997) Hyperpolarization- and depolarization-activated Ca2+-currents in Paramecium trigger behavioral changes and cGMP formation independently. J. Membr. Biol. 156,251-259[Medline]
  62. Hemmersbach, R., Voormanns, R., Rabien, R., Bromeis, B., and Ivanova, K. (1996) Graviperception and signal transduction in unicellular organisms. ESA SP-390 (Special Publication), 193–197



This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Biol. Reprod.Home page
J. S. Tash, S. Kim, M. Schuber, D. Seibt, and W. H. Kinsey
Fertilization of Sea Urchin Eggs and Sperm Motility Are Negatively Impacted under Low Hypergravitational Forces Significant to Space Flight
Biol Reprod, October 1, 2001; 65(4): 1224 - 1231.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
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 HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by HEMMERSBACH, R.
Right arrow Articles by HÄDER, D.-P.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by HEMMERSBACH, R.
Right arrow Articles by HÄDER, D.-P.


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS