104 UREA. HIPPURIC ACID. AMINOACIDS 



(v. supra., p. 82) that, after ingestion of a meal rich in 

 protein, deamidization processes may begin at once in the in- 

 testinal wall, and the portal blood thereby loaded with am- 

 monium salts passes to the liver,where these are transformed 

 into urea. 12 But what if the liver be excluded or so seriously 

 altered that formation of urea does not take place in the 

 organ as normally from the ammonia which is swept into it 

 with the portal blood? In that case the general circulation, 

 of course, will next be flooded with ammonia, probably in the 

 form of carbonate. As doubtless the liver does not monop- 

 olize the matter of forming urea, a part is probably taken 

 up by other organs and in them changed into urea, while an- 

 other portion of the ammonia may perhaps be rendered inert 

 by acids which the organism mobilizes. We know that the 

 organism protects itself against an excess of acid by mobil- 

 ization of alkaline material ; and it is perhaps possible, vice 

 versa, that it may protect itself against an alkaline excess by 

 mobilization of acid substances, or possibly by elaboration of 

 unusual kinds and quantities of acids, as in the acidosis 

 actually seen in a number of hepatic affections (icterus 

 catarrhalis) . 13 If, however, both methods of protection are 

 insufficient or act too slowly, the result may ultimately be an 

 alkaline intoxication, an "alkalosis." The author wishes, 

 however, not to be misunderstood as saying that this is 

 actually true; these suggestions are presented only in the 

 way of tentative explanation. 



The important part taken by ammonia in correction of 

 excessive acidity in the living body was clearly recognized a 

 number of years ago by Walter, in Schmiedeberg's labora- 

 tory. The usually more marked acid-resistance of carni- 

 vores, in contrast with vegetarian animals, is apparently 



U K. Kowalevsky and M. Markiewicz, Biochem. Zeitschr., 4, 196, 1907; cf. 

 therein the older literature, especially in reference to the differences of view of 

 Salaskin and Zaleski and of Biedl and Winterberg. 



U N. Janney (F. v. Muller's Clinic, Munich), Zeitschr. f. physiol. Chem., 

 76, 99, 1911. 



