Differences in Resistance of Bloods 



37 



fragment). Even after removal of the adrenal remnant typical 

 reactions were obtained. 



We must accordingly conclude that Anrep's experiments do 

 not constitute a proof that the epinephrin output is reflexly in- 

 creased by stimulation of the central end of the sciatic. 



Stimulation of the splanchnic, with either the corresponding 

 or both adrenals eliminated, frequently gave good reactions. We 

 do not doubt, however, that since splanchnic stimulation is known 

 to increase the epinephrin output, such increase with direct stimu- 

 lation of the peripheral secretory nerves, when the adrenals are 

 intact, can be a factor in the reaction as obtained in this way. 



13 (1973) 



Lasting individual differences in the resistance of normal bloods 



to shaking. 



By OSWALD H. ROBERTSON and PEYTON ROUS 

 [From the Rockefeller Institute, Neiv York City] 



In previous papers observations have been recorded which in- 

 dicate that the normal destruction of red cells is accomplished, 

 in part at least, by a fragmentation of the elements while cir- 

 culating 1 . It has seemed possible that the behavior of cells 

 shaken in vitro may yield some indication of their resistance 

 to the fragmenting process. 



Marked differences in the red cells from different species 

 have already been disclosed by the shaking method 2 . Further 

 observations have now been made. Shaking which suffices to 

 liberate 10-25 per cent, of the hemoglobin contained in a sus- 

 pension of washed cells of the rat brings out only 4 per cent, of 

 the pigment from an average specimen of rabbit cells, 1 per cent, 

 from monkey blood, and a mere trace from human blood. Dog 

 corpuscles are among the most labile, as many investigators can 

 attest who have striven to obtain plasma untinted by hemolysis. 



The variation in the resistance of individual bloods of a single 

 species, the rabbit for example, are by no means inconsiderable. 



1 Eous, Peyton, and Robertson, O. H., Jour. Exper. Med., 1917, xxv, 651. 



2 Rous, Peyton, and Turner, J. R., Jour. Exper. Med., 1916, xxiii, 219 

 and 239. 



