Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Two quantitative assays for chemotaxis inParamecium

  • Published:
Journal of comparative physiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Summary

We present two new methods to quantify the attraction and repulsion ofParamecium aurelia by chemicals. These are a T-maze assay and a countercurrent separation assay.

In the T-maze assay, cells were placed in one arm of a three-way stopcock. The cells were then allowed to enter the other two arms, one of which contained an attractant or repellent. The ratio of cells collected from these two arms was an index of chemotaxis. The reproducibility of this method was demonstrated, using potassium acetate to study attraction (positive chemotaxis), and quinine-HCl to study repulsion (negative chemotaxis). This method is rapid and convenient.

The countercurrent separation assay was adapted from the method of Dusenbery (1973), originally used to study behavior in nematodes. Animals were injected into the center of a slanted tube through which two solutions of different densities were pumped in opposite directions. One solution contained an attractant or repellent. Animals emerging from the tube in each of the two solutions were counted. These counts were used to measure the extent of chemotaxis. This method is useful for studying attraction in populations of over 104 paramecia and for isolating mutants defective in chemotaxis.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Adler, J.: Chemoreceptors in bacteria. Science166, 1588–1597 (1969)

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Adler, J., Hazelbauer, G.L., Dahl, M.M.: Chemotaxis toward sugars inEscherichia coli. J. Bact.115, 824–847 (1973)

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Dahlquist, F.W., Lovely, P., Koshland, D.E.: A quantitative analysis of bacterial migration in chemotaxis. Nature (Lond.)236, 120–123 (1972)

    Google Scholar 

  • Dryl, S.: Antigenic transformation ofParamecium aurelia after homologous antiserum treatment during autogamy and conjugation. J. Protozool.6, Suppl. 25 (1959)

    Google Scholar 

  • Dryl, S.: Contributions to mechanism of chemotactic response inParamecium caudatum. Anim. Behav.11, 393 (1963)

    Google Scholar 

  • Dryl, S.: Chemotaxis in ciliate protozoa. In: Behavior of micro-organisms (Perez-Miravete, A. ed.), p. 16–30. New York: Plenum Press 1973

    Google Scholar 

  • Dusenbery, D. B.: Countercurrent separation: a new method for studying behavior of small aquatic organisms. Proc. nat. Acad. Sci. (Wash.)70, 1349–1352 (1973)

    Google Scholar 

  • Dusenbery, D.B.: Analyses of chemotaxis in the nematodeCaenorhabditis elegans by counter-current separation. J. exp. Zool.188, 41–48 (1974)

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Eckert, R.: Bioelectric control of ciliary activity. Science176, 473–481 (1972)

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Fraenkel, G. S., Gunn, D. L.: The orientation of animals, p. 10. New York:Dover Publications Inc. 1961

    Google Scholar 

  • Hazelbauer, G. L., Mesibov, R. E., Adler, J.:Escherichia coli mutants defective in chemotaxis toward specific chemicals. Proc. nat. Acad. Sci. (Wash.)64, 1300–1307 (1969)

    Google Scholar 

  • Jennings, H. S.: Behavior of the lower organisms, p. 61. Bloomington: Indiana Univ. Press 1967

    Google Scholar 

  • Konijin, T. M., van de Mune, J. G. C., Bonner, J. T., Barkley, D. S.: The acrasin activity of adenosine—3′, 5′—cyclic phosphate. Proc. nat. Acad. Sci. (Wash.)58, 1152–1154 (1967)

    Google Scholar 

  • Kung, C., Chang, S.-Y., Satow, Y., Van Houten, J., Hansma, H.: Genetic dissection of behavior inParamecium. Science188, 898–904 (1975)

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Nakatani, I.: Chemotactic response ofParamecium caudatum. J. Fac. Sci. Hokkaido Univ., Ser. VI Zool.16, 553–563 (1968)

    Google Scholar 

  • Nakatani, I.: Effects of various chemicals on the behavior ofParamecium caudatum. J. Fac. Sci. Hokkaido Univ., Ser. VI Zool.17, 401–410 (1970)

    Google Scholar 

  • Sonneborn, T. M.: Methods in the general biology and genetics ofParamecium aurelia. J. exp. Zool.113, 57–145 (1950)

    Google Scholar 

  • Tsang, N., McNab, R., Koshland, D. E.: Common mechanism for repellents and attractants in bacterial chemotaxis. Science181, 60–63 (1973)

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wilkinson, P.C.: Chemotaxis and inflammation. London: Churchill Livingstone 1974

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Biological Sciences, University of California, Santa Barbara, California, USA

    Judith Van Houten & Helen Hansma

  2. Laboratory of Molecular Biology and Department of Genetics, University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin, USA

    Ching Kung

Authors
  1. Judith Van Houten
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Helen Hansma
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Ching Kung
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Additional information

The authors are grateful to S.-Y. Chang and P. Foletta for their very capable technical assistance. This work was supported in part by grants from the U.S. Public Health Service and National Science Foundation to C.K.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Van Houten, J., Hansma, H. & Kung, C. Two quantitative assays for chemotaxis inParamecium . J. Comp. Physiol. 104, 211–223 (1975). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01379461

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01379461

Keywords

Search

Navigation