DILUTION 233 



On surveying these tables several striking facts are immedi- 

 ately revealed. In the first place the ratio of the value of p (w + v) 

 for monacid bases to its value for diacid bases is, in every case 

 (Cf. Tables XXIV and XXV) exceedingly close to the ratio 2:1. 

 This may be interpreted in either of two ways; either the equiva- 

 lent velocity of the protein ions which are yielded by the salts 

 of monacid bases is twice as great as that of the ions which are 

 jdelded by the salts of diacid bases, or else one equivalent of a 

 monacid base gives rise to twice as many equivalents of protein 

 salt as one equivalent of a diacid base. We have seen that the 

 protein salts dissociate into two heavy protein ions and, as Bredig 

 has shown (1), the equivalent velocities of heavy ions approach 

 a constant minimum. The former of the above alternatives may 

 therefore be dismissed, and we must conclude that p, the number 

 of equivalents of protein salts to which one equivalent of base 

 gives rise, is twice as great for the monacid as for the diacid bases. 



Reverting to the hypothesis developed in the preceding chap- 

 ters, it appears that the monacid bases form salts with proteins 

 in the following way : 



H 



++ I 



-COH.N- + NaOH = - CONa + ^N- 



I 

 OH 



from which it is evident that for the salts of the monacid bases 

 p must be 2, i.e., one equivalent of a monacid base, when united 

 with protein, yields 2 equivalents of the protein salt. We must 

 conclude, then, that one equivalent of diacid base gives rise to 

 only one equivalent of protein salt. The most natural assumption 

 regarding the mode of combination of the proteins with diacid 

 bases, pursuing the above hypothesis, would be to suppose that 

 it takes place in accordance with the equation: 



H 



-C0++. I 



2-COH.N- +Ca(0H)2= ^Ca + 2<^N- 



-C0++/ I 



OH 



upon which supposition each equivalent of the diacid base would 

 give rise to just the same number of equivalents of protein salt 

 as an equivalent of a monacid base, namely 2. This is evidently 



