Kenneth Stewart Cole, July 10, 1900April 18, 1984 | By Sir Andrew Huxley | Biographical Memoirs

|

Kenneth Stewart Cole
July 10, 1900 April 18, 1984
By Sir Andrew Huxley
|
KENNETH STEWART COLE's training was in classical
physics and electrical engineering but he turned
his skills to the investigation of the electrical properties of living
tissues. Through an impressive combination of theoretical and
experimental approaches, he made major contributions to our
understanding of the surface membranes of many types of cells, and
especially of the changes undergone by the electrical properties of the
membranes of excitable cells when activated. In particular, his
demonstration in 1938 (with H.J. Curtis) of a large increase in membrane
conductance during the passage of a nerve impulse, without change of
capacitance, was a major landmark.
Kenneth Cole, known to his wife as Ken but
to all his friends as Kacy, was born on 10 July 1900 at Ithaca, New
York. His father, Charles Nelson Cole, was at that time an instructor in
Latin at Cornell University; two years later the family moved to
Oberlin, Ohio, as his father took a post at Oberlin College, of which he
later became Dean. Cole's mother was Mabel Stewart; both his parents
came from Urbana, Illinois. There was one younger brother, Robert, with
whom he remained very close throughout his life despite a large
difference in age; they were joint authors of four papers published
between 1936 and 1942.
In 1932, Cole married
Elizabeth Evans Roberts, an attorney. Later, her work was mostly
concerned with civil rights and in 1956 she joined the staff of the new
Civil Rights Commission; in this work she made many journeys to the
South investigating the validity of racial segregation complaints. She
died in 1966. They had one son and one daughter, both still living.
From his early years he had strong interests in
electricity: he records that as a youngster he 'produced sparks and
shocks with worn out parts from the telephone company and put together a
licensed wireless station with a Ford spark coil and galena (for a
detector) begged from the head of the Geology Department' (Cole 1979).
He majored in physics at Oberlin College, but delayed completion of the
course by working for more than a year in the General Electric Research
Laboratory at Schenectady. Here he met, and was much influenced by,
Irving Langmuir, whose famous work on surface films at an air-water
interface may well have been one of the origins of Cole's interest in
the surface membranes of living cells. For his Ph.D. he moved to Cornell
where he developed an electron spectrograph and studied the photographic
action of electrons under the supervision of F.K. Richtmyer, at the same
time as holding an instructorship (1922-1926).
His
switch of interest to biological objects that could be investigated by
physical, especially electrical, techniques was kindled by summer visits
that he made during this period. In 1923 he spent some weeks at the
Cleveland Clinic with H. Fricke, who was just completing his
epoch-making measurements of the electrical capacitance of the surface
membrane of red blood corpuscles, using a high-frequency alternating
current bridge (Fricke 1923, 1925). He records (Cole 1979) that he
became committed to biology after spending the next summer at the Marine
Biological Laboratory at Woods Hole on Cape Cod, Massachusetts, where he
worked on heat production by the eggs of the sea urchin Arbacia
under C.G. Rogers. His interest in the electrical properties of living
things was probably stimulated by his lifelong friendship with W.J.V.
Osterhout, which began during this visit to Woods Hole.
After completing his Ph.D. Cole was awarded a
postdoctoral fellowship by the National Research Council to use Fricke's
method to determine the membrane capacity of sea-urchin eggs. He held
this fellowship (1926-1928) at Harvard, and went to Woods Hole for his
experiments. During this period he also did important theoretical work
on the impedance of a suspension of spherical cells and on the
representation of impedances by plotting reactance against resistance.
He spent the year 1928-29 in theoretical work on
cell membranes at Leipzig in the laboratory of Debye, supported by a
fellowship from the General Education Board. He made himself familiar
with the theory, due to Nernst and Planck, of the potential differences
generated by diffusion between two different electrolyte solutions--very
relevant to the potentials across biological membranes. During this
time, L.E. Sutton, F.R.S., was also in Debye's laboratory, and he and
Cole jointly made suggestions for the improvement of the centrifuge
microscope developed by E. Newton Harvey, whom Cole had met at Woods
Hole.
Cole returned to the U.S.A. to take up two
posts associated with Columbia University, New York: as Assistant
Professor (later Associate Professor) in the Department of Physiology
(1929-46) and as Consultant Physicist at the Presbyterian Hospital
(1929-42). His duties were varied: calibrating radiotherapy machines;
advising on safety when using cyclopropane as an anaesthetic (there had
been an explosion in an operating theatre); overhauling a medical
physiology teaching laboratory; and giving a few lectures. He
collaborated with surgeons in developing an operation for aortic
aneurysm using an electrically heated wire. In his own research, he
continued his investigations, both theoretical and experimental, on the
electrical properties of animal and plant tissues, using at first what
he describes as a 'crude' bridge; in 1935 he settled down to designing
and building a high-precision alternating current bridge which could be
used quickly over a wide range of frequencies and which he used in his
famous demonstration of the decrease in membrane resistance of nerve
during the passage of an impulse. He also built an apparatus with which
he measured the surface tension and elasticity of the surface membrane
of sea-urchin eggs, following up observations that Newton Harvey had
made with the centrifuge microscope that Cole had helped to design.
Cole spent most of his summers working at Woods Hole
on sea-urchin eggs, on the fresh water alga Nitella and, after
1936 when he met its discoverer J.Z. Young, on the giant nerve fibre of
the squid. One summer was spent with Fricke at the Cold Spring Harbor
Laboratory on Long Island Sound, where he worked on the electrical
impedance of the marine alga Laminaria, and another summer at the
marine biology station on Bermuda.
Early in 1936,
Cole was joined by Howard J. Curtis, who had previously worked with
Fricke and was thus familiar with alternating current methods of
investigating the electrical properties of biological objects. Most of
Cole's scientific work from that date until Curtis moved to a post at
Johns Hopkins in 1942 was done in collaboration with Curtis, including
the demonstration of membrane impedance changes in the nerve membrane
during an impulse. Also in 1936, Cole visited Britain and met A.L.
Hodgkin, who later spent a year (1937-38) at the Rockefeller Institute
in New York, during which he joined Cole for a short spell at Woods Hole
to measure the D.C. resistance of the membrane of the squid giant nerve
fibre in the resting state (a quantity that could not be determined by
the A.C. methods then being used by Cole and Curtis). In 1939 they began
using internal electrodes inside the giant nerve fibre of the squid.
Cole spent 1941-2 on leave from Columbia as a
Guggenheim Foundation Fellow at the Institute for Advanced Study at
Princeton, studying literature on non-linear systems. From 1942 to 1946,
still on leave from Columbia, he was Principal Biophysicist at the
Metallurgical Laboratory, University of Chicago with Curtis as his
next-in-line; here he was in charge of research on the biological
effects of radiations and radioactive materials produced by the uranium
fission chain reaction process and was responsible for biological
aspects of safety in the Manhattan project (atomic weapon development).
D.E. Goldman told me that Cole and Szilard were among those who voted
against the decision to drop the first bomb.
In
1946, the University of Chicago set up a new Institute of Radiobiology
and Biophysics and Cole accepted appointment as Professor of Biophysics
and Physiology and head of the Institute; he was re-joined by George
Marmont, who had joined him at Columbia in the early 1940s. On a
suggestion from J. Savage, Marmont made an internal electrode to be
inserted into a squid giant fibre, with long conducting surface so as to
ensure that the internal potential was uniform within this length;
current would be fed to the electrode under feedback control and Cole
added an arrangement by which alternatively the potential of the
electrode could be controlled electronically. In the latter mode of
operation, this was the first 'voltage clamp' (a phrase that Cole did
not like). This was the method by which great advances were made in the
years after the war; unfortunately Cole contributed little to those
advances largely, it seems, because Marmont had a strong preference for
operating the equipment in the 'current clamp' mode which turned out to
be far less informative than the 'voltage clamp' (Cole 1982, p. 316).
The first experiments with this equipment were
made in the summer of 1947. Cole told Hodgkin about these experiments in
a letter later that year, and gave him full details in a visit that
Hodgkin made to the U.S.A. next spring; at this meeting Hodgkin also
told Cole of the experiments on squid nerve that he and Katz had done in
1947 establishing that the action potential is generated by sodium ions
moving down their concentration gradient. Hodgkin had already been
thinking of making a voltage clamp, but the information he was given by
Cole and Marmont was a great help and stimulus towards developing the
equipment that he used, together with Katz and myself, in the summers of
1948 and 1949.
In 1949 Cole moved again, to become
Technical Director of the Naval Medical Research Institute at Bethesda,
Maryland, close to Washington D.C. Although he had an intellectually
powerful team, including Manuel Morales, David Goldman, Terrell Hill and
John Moore, Cole's time at NMRI appears from his own account (Cole 1979,
p. 17) not to have been happy, partly on account of Senator McCarthy's
activities; nor was it scientifically very productive. As a result, Cole
moved once more, in 1959, to set up a new Laboratory of Biophysics in
the National Institute of Nervous Diseases and Blindness, National
Institutes of Health, just across the road from the NMRI. He took John
Moore with him, got an improved voltage clamp running, and produced a
series of valuable papers in 1960. He stepped aside from the headship of
the laboratory in 1966, shortly after reaching the age of 65, but
continued working there as Senior Research Biophysicist (part time from
1971). For the first semester of 1963-64 he was Regents' Professor at
the University of California at Berkeley; there he gave a course of
lectures which became the foundation for his book Membranes, ions and
impulses, published in 1968.
Cole exerted a
great influence on the development of membrane research, not only by his
discoveries, his techniques and his precise measurements but also
through his book and many general articles; through personal guidance of
many, both in his laboratory and elsewhere; and through the Training
Program on Excitable Membranes at the Marine Biological Laboratory,
Woods Hole. In a broader field, he was one of the prime movers in
establishing the Biophysical Society and the International Union of Pure
and Applied Biophysics.
| RESEARCH ON CELL
MEMBRANES
|
By far the greater part of Cole's
published scientific work was on electrical aspects of cell membranes.
This originated as an extension of the measurement of the capacitance of
suspensions of red blood corpuscles by H. Fricke, with whom Cole had
spent part of the summer of 1923. Fricke (1925) found a value of 0.81
µF cm2 for the capacitance of the surface membrane
of these cells, in close agreement with more recent determinations; he
took the dielectric constant of the lipid material of the membrane to be
3 and deduced a thickness of 3.3 nm, implying a monomolecular layer. By
the time Cole began his work on membranes, in 1926, Gorter & Grendel
(1925) had shown that the area of the monomolecular film formed on a
Langmuir trough by the membrane lipids was double the surface area of
the red blood corpuscles from which the lipids had been extracted,
showing that the membrane was a bimolecular, not a monomolecular, layer,
and that Fricke had underestimated the dielectric constant. Thus, the
outline of present-day ideas of the basic structure of cell membranes
was established just before Cole's work began.
Up
to 1936, Cole explored the linear, passive electrical properties of cell
membranes. At first, in place of the alternating current bridge used by
Fricke, he adopted the method of Philippson (1921) and measured the
ratio of mean square voltage to mean square current as a function of
frequency when the output of an oscillator was applied to the cell
suspension, using vacuum thermocouples as detectors. His first
measurements were on the eggs of the sea urchin, Arbacia
punctulata, which he chose largely because these were the objects
whose heat production he had measured in the summer of 1924 and there
were suggestions that heat was liberated by the superficial part of the
cell when it was fertilized. These eggs also had the advantage of being
spherical, so that the theoretical treatment was much simpler than for
red blood corpuscles with their shape of biconcave discs. He analysed
his results by means of an original theoretical treatment which was a
great advance on the simplified theory used earlier by Fricke and
others. His results, which turned out later to be misleading, was that
the surface capacitance of the cells varied inversely with the square
root of frequency, and he concluded that the apparent capacitance was a
'polarization capacitance', i.e. that it was due to accumulation of ions
on the two sides of the interface between cell contents and the
surrounding solution as current flowed, rather than to a dielectric
layer separating the two conducting phases. The dependence of apparent
capacitance on frequency was not a surprise as similar effects had been
found by Philippson and others when measuring the electrical properties
of various animal and vegetable tissues.
Cole's
next contribution (7)* was a theoretical treatment of the bulk
electrical properties of a cell suspension in which the surface of the
cell had a frequency-dependent capacitance with loss such that the ratio
m of the equivalent series resistance to the capacitative
reactance was independent of frequency ('constant phase angle'). He
proved a result that he had stated in a previous paper (5), namely that
when (capacitative) reactance is plotted against series resistance for a
suspension of cells with membranes showing this property, the locus as
frequency is changed in an arc of a circle with centre below the
resistance axis. Cole presented almost all his observations on the
passive electrical properties of cells in graphs of this form. In this
paper (7) he stated that many sets of observations on a wide range of
tissues, some by himself and others from the literature, could be fitted
in this way with various values of the ratio m.
Cole's next measurement on sea-urchin eggs (21) used a
different species, Hipponoë esculenta. To his surprise, the
reactance plots were semicircles with the centre on the resistance axis
(phase angle 90°), implying that the membrane capacity showed no
loss and was independent of frequency, i.e. it was an ideal capacitance.
The same result was found with the eggs of the starfish Asterias
(22) and also on re-investigation of the eggs of the sea-urchin
Arbacia (23). The reason for the low phase angle found previously
with this material was not resolved at that time; in a later review (93,
p. 32) Cole hints that it may have been due to using mixed batches of
eggs from different individuals, as both the diameter of the eggs and
the apparent capacitance vary substantially between individuals.
These experiments clarified the situation greatly as
regards uniform cells in suspension (mammalian red blood corpuscles as
well as echinoderm eggs) in showing that their membranes had a nearly
perfect capacitance such as would be expected from a thin lipid surface
membrane, but created a discrepancy between cell suspensions and whole
tissues, which gave phase angles between 55° and 78°. Cole
returned to the theory of constant phase angle behaviour in two papers
written jointly with his brother Robert H. Cole and published in 1941
and 1942 (44,48). They show that the transient response of a circuit
element of this type is a power function of time, and they discuss
several possible underlying causes for such behaviour without reaching a
definite conclusion.
Meanwhile, Cole turned his
attention from cell suspensions to excitable tissues, mostly the
fresh-water alga Nitella which has long cylindrical cells capable
of propagating a long-lasting (approximately one second) action
potential, and the giant nerve fibre of the squid to which he was
introduced by its discoverer J.Z. Young in 1936; there is also one paper
(20) on muscle. From 1936 to 1942, the greater part of this work was
done jointly with H.J. Curtis; their principal tool was the A.C. bridge
that Cole designed and built in 1935 (26).
Measurements of the resting electrical characteristics
of Nitella cells (28) and of the giant nerve fibre of the squid
(32) showed membrane properties not unlike those of other cells: a
capacitance of around 1µF cm2 with a constant
phase angle a little less than 90°. These measurements were made
with the current flow perpendicular to the long axis of the cell. In
this situation, the cell is shunted by the low resistance of the
solution in which it is immersed, and the resistance of the cell
membrane in parallel with its electrical capacity is so high as to be
effectively infinite and its actual value cannot be determined by this
technique. However, when current flow is parallel to the fibre axis,
between electrodes separated by a good many millimetres, a substantial
fraction of the current flows through the surface membrane even at low
frequencies or with direct current, and the membrane resistance can be
measured by either A.C. or D.C. methods. Nitella being a
fresh-water organism, Blinks (1930) had been able to make the external
resistance high enough so that its shunting effect was slight and a D.C.
measurement of longitudinal resistance gave the membrane resistance with
only small corrections; he found values of the order of 105
ohm cm2. The situation is much more complicated in the case
of the squid giant nerve fibre as it has to be surrounded by a layer of
salt solution of high conductivity and the passage of current through
the membrane is not uniform and is distributed over an appreciable
length of the fibre; Hodgkin had worked out a possible method and he and
Cole (36) did the experiments during Hodgkin's visit to the U.S.A. in
1938; they found a value around 103 ohm cm2.
The most widely accepted theory of excitation and
conduction in excitable cells at that time was that of Bernstein (1902)
according to which the resting potential (inside 50-100 mV negative
relative to the external solution) was a concentration potential due to
the membrane being appreciably permeable to potassium (but not to
sodium) ions while the concentration of potassium inside was around 50
times that in the external solution; excitation consisted in a great
increase of the permeability of the membrane to all ions so that the
membrane potential would fall nearly to zero. Current would then flow
from adjacent regions of the cell, causing a decrease in the absolute
value of the membrane potential there and this in turn was assumed to
cause a similar increase of permeability, which thus travelled along the
cell as a self-propagating wave. There were already hints from the work
of Lullies, Dubuisson, and especially of Blinks (1936) that the
propagated impulse was accompanied by a decrease in impedance but their
results were not quantitative and they could not distinguish fully
between changes in the capacity and the resistance of the membrane,
though Blinks's result (on Nitella) clearly showed that there was
a substantial decrease in the membrane resistance.
Cole and Curtis made a major advance in 1938 by
demonstrating, first in the long excitable cells of Nitella
(33,34) and then in the giant nerve fibre of the squid (33,35) that the
change in impedance was due to a very large drop in the resistance in
parallel with the membrane capacity while the latter hardly changed in
value. In both cases, the membrane resistance fell to a few percent of
its resting value, and the change began rapidly at the moment of the
point of inflexion half way up the rising phase of the action potential.
This is the moment when the EMF of the membrane must be undergoing a
rapid change, so the simultaneity of the resistance drop implied that it
was closely related to the change in EMF. The result was therefore a
strong confirmation of one of the essential features of Bernstein's
theory. It was important from the theoretical point of view not only for
this reason but also because it showed that the drop in resistance,
presumably due to an increase in permeability of the membrane to ions,
took place without any drastic change in the basic structure of the
membrane.
These measurements were made with
transverse current using the A.C. bridge that Cole had constructed. Both
in Nitella and in the squid nerve fibre, the membrane resistance
fell during the action potential to a value low enough to be measured
with fair accuracy by this method. It was a technical triumph to have
obtained so clear a result, especially in the case of the squid nerve
fibre whose action potential lasts for less than a millisecond: Cole and
Curtis recorded the out-of-balance signal from the bridge on a
cathode-ray oscilloscope, altered the resistance and capacity values in
the balancing arm of the bridge, and noted the two times, within the
action potential duration, when the out-of-balance signal fell to zero.
In the case of Nitella, with an action potential lasting about
one second, they had been able to photograph the Lissajous figures
created by the out-of-balance signal at a series of times within the
action potential.
The next step forward was to
take advantage of the great size of the squid fibre to put an electrode
inside so as to measure directly the potential difference across the
membrane and its change during the impulse. This was done in the summer
of 1939, simultaneously and independently by Curtis & Cole (39) at
Woods Hole and by Hodgkin and the present writer (1939, 1945) at the
laboratory of the Marine Biological Association at Plymouth. Curtis and
Cole found action potentials averaging 50 mV with some reaching 80 mV.
In this series of experiments they used platinized metal electrodes and
an amplifier without satisfactory D.C. response and were therefore
unable to measure the resting potential. For these reasons it was not
until the next season's work, with improved apparatus, that they
confirmed (49) the observation that was the most important outcome of
the measurements by Hodgkin and myself, namely that the action potential
(around 90 mV in our experiments) was much larger than the resting
potential (inside about 45 mV negative to external solution) so that the
internal potential became positive at the peak of the action potential
by some 40 or 50 mV whereas according to Bernstein's theory it should
have approached but not passed zero potential difference. The origin of
the EMF was not identified until after World War II when Hodgkin &
Katz (1949) showed that it was due to the permeability increase being
specific for sodium ions and not a generalized 'breakdown' of the
membrane as had been proposed by Bernstein and widely accepted.
The measurements by Curtis and Cole in 1940 and 1941
were not only more extensive than those of Hodgkin and myself in 1939
but their electrodes allowed a better estimate of the junction potential
where they made contact with the interior of the nerve fibre, an
important point when considering the difference between resting and
action potential. Their paper (49) did, however, contain two unfortunate
errors which, after the War, contributed to the delay in acceptance of
the idea that the 'overshoot' of the action potential (interior of fibre
becoming positive relative to external solution at the peak of the
action potential) was due to entry of sodium ions moving under the
influence of their concentration difference. The first was that they
used a variable inductance in their amplifier to compensate for the lag
caused by the high resistance of their internal electrodes combined with
the input capacitance of the amplifier; Cole (1968, p. 145) admitted
later that they must have over-compensated because they obtained much
larger action potentials than have been recorded in later years with
equipment not subject to this source of error. The action potential
illustrated in their paper had a total amplitude of 168 mV and an
overshoot of 110 mV, which could have been produced by the sodium
mechanism only if the internal sodium concentration had been many times
lower than the measured value. The other error was the statement that
the action potential as well as the resting potential was 'not
appreciably affected' by replacing the external solution with an almost
ion-free solution (isosmotic dextrose), which again would have been
impossible if the overshoot had been due to entry of sodium ions. All
subsequent work has shown that the action potential is abolished when
the fibre is surrounded by a solution free from sodium ions or a few
other ions (e.g. lithium) which are able to substitute for sodium; it is
not clear how Curtis and Cole came to make this statement.
Two important papers from the early war years showed
that the membrane of the squid fibre rectifies strongly, having a much
higher conductance for outward than for inward current. This was
demonstrated by changes in the transverse impedance during current flow
(42) and by direct measurement of the current-voltage relation using an
internal electrode for the potential measurement (43). The current was
applied through a narrow external electrode and consequently the current
density through the membrane and the potential difference across the
membrane were not uniform along the fibre; Cole deduced a relation,
sometimes known as Cole's theorem, by which they obtained current
density Im at membrane potential Vm
from the measured total current Io :
Im =
IodIo/dVm. The
resistance values at the resting potential were very low in these
experiments (23 ohm cm2 as against 1000 ohn cm2
found by Cole & Hodgkin (36)). This was evidently due to damage to
the fibre resulting from impalement by the internal electrode: when the
membrane potential was raised by inward current flow the resistance rose
to several hundred ohm cm2.
Another
observation made at this time (45) with longitudinal current flow was
that at low frequencies (a few hundred hertz), the membrane had the
characteristics of an inductance in parallel with the capacitance. This
was puzzling because, as Cole pointed out in a paper (46) discussing
these two phenomena of rectification and inductance, it is not
reasonable to suppose that the apparent inductance is due to creation of
a magnetic field. However, Cole drew attention in that paper to known
physical systems which have inductive characteristics unrelated to
magnetism and one of these was important because it suggested the
mechanism shown later to underlie the inductive behaviour of the nerve
membrane. This was the carbon filament lamp, in which the electrical
resistance falls with rise of temperature so that when a constant
voltage is applied and the filament heats up, the current rises slowly
just as it does through an inductance in series with a resistance.
During the War, it became clear both to Cole and to
Hodgkin that an understanding of the excitation process would be greatly
helped by an experiment in which the potential difference across the
membrane was controlled by the experimenter and the time course of
current through the membrane was measured; the unstable character of the
membrane which underlies the 'all-or-none' character of the propagated
impulse would be overcome if the impedance of the circuit controlling
the potential were low enough. Experiments on the squid nerve were
necessarily postponed until after the War, but in 1941 Cole suggested to
J.H. Bartlett that he should do the analogous experiment on the 'iron
wire model': it had been known for many years that an iron wire,
passivated in strong nitric or sulphuric acid, would propagate a
short-lived period of reactivity on electrical stimulation in a way that
had many analogies with nerve conduction. Bartlett (1945) used a
low-resistance potentiometer to apply step changes of potential to a
piece of iron with a small surface exposed to sulphuric acid of
appropriate concentration and recorded the current using a D.C.
amplifier and cathode-ray oscillograph.
The first
apparatus for making this type of measurement on nerve (the squid giant
fibre again) was built shortly after the War by Marmont in Cole's
Institute. He used a long internal electrode so that the internal
potential was held almost uniform over its length and the current
passing from the electrode through the membrane was controlled by a
feedback circuit; at Cole's suggestion he arranged that it was also
possible to control the current by feedback from the potential on the
internal electrode. In the latter mode, the time course of current could
be recorded when the membrane potential was caused, by a command signal,
to undergo a step change to a new constant level, a device that came to
be known as the 'voltage clamp'. The only full account of their
experiments with this equipment (in 1947) is a paper under the
authorship of Marmont alone (1949); it gives detailed descriptions of
the apparatus and of one type of experiment performed with it, in which
a stimulating pulse of current was passed through the membrane via the
internal electrode and subsequently the membrane current was held at
zero by the feedback circuit. The result was an action potential in
which the time course was not complicated by longitudinal current flow;
however, it was not very different from an ordinary propagated action
potential.
Despite Marmont's preference for the
controlled-current mode, a few records were taken in the voltage-clamp
mode; these were reported briefly by Cole (57) at a conference held in
Paris in the spring of 1949. Strikingly, these records did not show an
all-or-none response to reduction of the potential difference across the
membrane, but over a certain range of membrane potential there was a
phase of inward current that clearly would have generated an action
potential if the feedback from recorded potential had not prevented it.
The records showed qualitatively all the main features that Hodgkin and
I found in our experiments in 1948 and 1949, except that the late
outward current was not well maintained. This was due to polarization of
the electrode by the rather large current density that had to be passed
through its surface; this error was avoided in our experiments by using
two internal electrodes, one for potential measurement and the other for
passing current. The main difference between their work and ours was,
however, that they did not use solutions with altered sodium
concentration and therefore were unable to analyse the current into
components carried by sodium and by potassium ions.
In one respect, Marmont's records of 1947 were better
than ours of 1948: they showed an appreciable lag between the step of
membrane potential and the rise of the transient inward current (due to
sodium entry). At the Paris meeting, Cole cited this as evidence against
the theory that we tentatively proposed at that meeting (which made
sodium current an instantaneous function of membrane potential) whereas
we attributed the lag to instrumental delays. Later we fully confirmed
the existence of the lag as a genuine feature of the membrane response,
and it was an important factor in determining the formulation that we
finally adopted in our mathematical representation of the permeability
changes (Hodgkin & Huxley 1952).
Cole made
many investigations on voltage-clamped squid fibres in the following
years, in collaboration with J.W. Moore and later R.E. Taylor, but this
work was not published until 1960 and 1961 (72-78). They used a second
electrode for potential measurement, thus eliminating errors due to
polarization of the current electrode, but, unlike the potential
electrode used by Hodgkin and myself, this was a glass micropipette,
with the advantage that the potential was recorded from just below the
surface membrane but also the disadvantage that the high resistance of
the electrode, together with its capacitance and that of the input stage
of the amplifier, put a limit to the speed of response of the feedback
system. They recorded much larger ionic currents (up to 5 or 10 mA
cm2 peak inward current) than had been obtained by
Hodgkin and myself or by Cole in his experiments with Marmont; an
unwanted result of this improvement (due partly to better condition of
the nerve fibres and partly to the use of applied current to raise the
resting potential) was that the feedback was not always able to control
the membrane potential fully, and 'notches' and oscillations appeared in
the current traces. These were taken by some critics as invalidating the
conclusions drawn from voltage-clamp records, but Cole and his
colleagues showed by their extensive experimental and theoretical
investigations that these irregularities were instrumental artifacts,
arising only when the surface resistance of the long internal electrode
was not low enough to ensure that at each instant the potential
difference across the fibre membrane was uniform over the length from
which the current was being recorded. It is fortunate that the fibres
used by Marmont and Cole in 1947, and by Hodgkin and myself in 1948-49,
did not produce large enough inward currents to cause instabilities of
these kinds.
Cole & Moore (75) also
investigated the delay with which the current carried by potassium ions
rises following a sudden depolarization of the fibre (interior of the
fibre made positive from its resting negative potential). It was already
known that this delay increased when the resting potential was
artificially raised by means of applied current, but Cole & Moore
found that when the resting potential was raised to an extreme level,
the increase in the delay was greater than could be plausibly explained
by the mechanism that Hodgkin and I (1952) had proposed; this effect has
not yet been given a satisfactory explanation. Cole & Moore (75)
confirmed however that our formulation gave a satisfactory fit within
the range of membrane potential that occurs in a living fibre.
Cole's last major contribution was his book
Membranes, ions and impulses (93), published in 1968. This book
gives a very full account of work in the field covered by its title,
putting Cole's own work into relation with that of others. As regards
Cole's own work, it not only collects his contributions in a consecutive
and readily accessible form, but presents much of his thinking and
theory that do not appear in his papers published in the scientific
journals. More about the origins of his interests is to be found in his
autobiographical chapter in the 1979 issue of the Annual Review of
Physiology (Cole 1979) and in an article in the Annual Review of
Neuroscience (Cole 1982). Two collections of essays in his honour
have been published (Agin 1972, Moore 1976).
- Member, US National Academy of Sciences, 1956
- Hon. Doctor of Science: Oberlin College 1959; University of Chicago, 1967
- Hon. Doctor of Medicine, University of Uppsala, 1967
- National Order of the Southern Cross, Government of Brazil, 1966
- National Medal of Science, 1967
- Foreign Member of The Royal Society, 1972
- In 1973, the Membrane Section of the Biophysical Society (U.S.A.) established an annual 'Cole Award' in his honour.
I AM INDEBTED TO COLE'S
daughter Sally for most of the particulars of his early life and of his
family.
- Agin, D.P. (ed.) 1972 Perspectives in membrane
biophysics. New York: Gordon and Breach.
- Bartlett,
J.H. 1945 Transient anode phenomena. Trans. electrochem. Soc.
87, 521-545.
- Bernstein, J. 1902
Untersuchungen zur Thermodynamik der bioelektrischen Ströme.
Pflügers Arch. ges. Physiol. 92, 521-562.
- Blinks, L.R. 1930 The direct current resistance of
Nitella. J. gen. Physiol. 13, 495-508.
- Blinks, L.R. 1936 The effects of current flow on bioelectric
potential III, Nitella. J. gen. Physiol. 20,
229-265.
- Cole, K.S. 1968 Membranes, ions and
impulses. Berkeley: University of California Press.
- Cole, K.S. 1979 Mostly membranes. A. Rev. Physiol.
41, 1-24.
- Cole, K.S. 1982 Squid axon
membrane: impedance decrease to voltage clamp. A. Rev. Neurosci.
5, 305-323.
- Fricke, H. 1923 The electric
capacity of cell suspensions. Phys. Rev. ser. II, 21,
708-9.
- Fricke, H. 1925 The electric capacity of
suspensions with special reference to blood. J. gen. Physiol.
9, 137-152.
- Gorter, E. & Grendel, F. 1925
On bimolecular layers of lipoids on the chromocytes of the blood. J.
exp. Med. 41, 439-443.
- Hodgkin, A.L. &
Huxley, A.F. 1939 Action potentials recorded from inside a nerve fibre.
Nature, Lond. 144, 710.
- Hodgkin, A.L.
& Huxley, A.F. 1945 Resting and action potentials in single nerve
fibres. J. Physiol. 104, 176-195.
- Hodgkin,
A.L. & Huxley, A.F. 1952 A quantitative description of membrane
current and its application to conduction and excitation in nerve. J.
Physiol. 117, 500-544.
- Hodgkin, A.L. &
Katz, B. 1949 The effect of sodium ions on the electrical activity of
the giant axon of the squid. J. Physiol. 108, 37-77.
- Marmont, M. 1949 Studies on the axon membrane. J. cell.
comp. Physiol. 34, 351-382.
- Moore, J.W. (ed.)
1976 Membranes, ions, and impulses. New York: Plenum.
- Philippson, M. 1921 Les lois de la résistance
électrique des tissus vivants. Bull. Acad. r. Belg., Cl. Sci.
7, 387-403.
Reprinted with permission of the Royal Society, London,
England.
|