REQUIREMENTS FOR VITAMIN E 747 



pig is gi^'ell as 6 nig. per animal every other day.'"'^ Dju and co-workers^' ^ 

 reported that the laying hen requires 1.2 mg. vitamin E per day. It 

 seems probable that the requirement for vitamin E, like that of other 

 Adtamins, can best be related to some physiologic function rather than to 

 that of the whole body weight. Karris'**^ plotted the vitamin E require- 

 ments for various species of animals, on the basis of adapted \^alues cited 

 for: rats;209.2ii,2i3,464 uiicQ]-'--^'^ chicks ;'«-', sh, 469 ducklings ;*7'' guinea 

 pjgg.467,471 ehickens;^72 iambs;-^« dogs;''^^ calves;"^ rabbits;-"'4«6.474,475 

 and goats. ■'^'' 



It is known that the aljsorption of fats from the gastrointestinal tract 

 is best related to surface area*^^ (See The Lipids, Vol. II, pp. 128, 129). 

 This ^'alue may be obtained by multiplying Aveight to the 0.67 power by a 

 constant which \'aries with each species. MacKay and Bergman'*^^ re- 

 ported that surface area is the most satisfactory constant for determining 

 absorption of glucose. Brody*^^ stated that various functions and reac- 

 tions of the body are related, not to body weight itself, but to the 0.7 

 power of the body weight. He designated this function of the body weight 

 (wgt."-'') as the "phj^siological weight," as contrasted with wgt.'-", which is 

 referred to as "physical" or "gra\dtational" weight. Factors such as basal 

 metabolism, endogenous nitrogen excretion, milk energy production, egg 

 energy production and related phenomena all appear to vary as the 0.7 

 power of body weight. ^*^ 



Harris^^^ found that, when the log dose of the daily requirement of 

 vitamin E was plotted against the log of bod}' weight, the points fell along 

 a relatively straight line, the slope of which was 0.73. This value is not 

 significantly different from Brody's value of 0.7. It is therefore believed 

 that the requirement of different species of lower animals for vitamin E 

 can be deduced from the weight. °-''^ 



^" F. A. Farmer, B. C. Mutch, J. M. Bell, L. D. Woolsev, and E. W. Crampton, 

 J. Xuirition, 42, 309-318 (1950). 



*^ P. L. Harris, Ann. New York Acad. Sci., 52, 240-242 (1949). 



«9 H. Patrick and C. L. Morgan, Poultry Set., 23, 525-528 (1944). 



«" A. M. Pappenheimer, Proc. Soc. Exptl. Biol. Med., 45, 457-459 (1940). 



«i N. Shimotori, G. A. Emerson, and H. M. Evans, Science, 90, 89 (1939). 



^''^ M. Y. Dju, Unpublished results cited by P. L. Harris, Ann. New York Acad. Sci., 52, 

 240-242(1949). 



^" D. B. Parrish, G. H. Wise, and J. S. Hughes, /. Dairy Sci., 30, 849-860 (1947). 



"^ E. L. Hove and P. L. Harris, /. Nutrition, 33, 95-106 (1947). 



«=S. H. Eppstein and S. Morgulis, J. Nutrition, 23, 473-482 (1942). 



"^ D. A. Spencer, Food & Life, U. S. Printing Office House Doc, 28, 758-762 (1939); 

 cited by P. L. Harris, Ann. Netv York Acad. Sci., 52, 240-242 (1949), p. 241. 



*■' H. J. Deuel, Jr., L. Hallman, and A. Leonard, /. Nutrition, 20, 215-226 (1940). 



««E. M. MacKay and H. C. Bergman, J. Biol. Chem., 101, 453-462 (1933). 



*" S. Brod}', Bioenergetics and Growth, Reinhold, New York, 1945. 



