investigation into the oxidative combustion of food-
stuffs, a careful analysis of his writing and notebooks
gives no support for this idea. Rather his formulation of
the TCA cycle was the result of the empirical methods
learned in Warburg’s lab. From Albert Szent-Gyorgyi, he
had pigeon breast muscle minces which preserved intact,
the then unknown mitochondria containing the enzymes
of the TCA cycle, and could oxidatively decompose
glucose to CO
2
. From Warburg he had a manometer
with which he could measure rates of CO
2
production.
Again, he added possible intermediates and observed
whether the rates of reactions increased. As he put it in
his autobiography:
One way of tackling the problem of the intermediate
steps of the combustion process is to test which
substances, apart from carbohydrate and fat, burn most
readily. The logic is that if a substance is an intermediate
then it must readily undergo combustion: if it proves to
be non-combustible, it cannot be an intermediate.
In two sentences was his simple plan: the same as he
had used in elucidating the urea cycle. There was no
grand plan. In choosing the intermediates to be added,
he was guided by others working on the same general
problem. Earlier Szent-Gyorgyi had shown that addition
of small amounts of succinate, fumarate, malate, or
oxaloacetate could catalytically increase the rate of
oxidation by pigeon breast muscle minces. Szent-
Gyorgyi interpreted his findings as indicating that
these compounds were not intermediates in a pathway,
but rather that they served as hydrogen carriers
transporting the H
þ
and electrons from foodstuffs to
cytochromes. By 1937, experiments by Martius and
Knoop, Krebs’ teacher at Freiburg, had shown in liver
that citrate was converted to aconitate, then isocitrate
and
a
-ketoglutarate, which in turn was known to be
converted to succinate. It was also known from
Thunberg’s work that malonate could inhibit the
conversion of succinate to fumarate. This presented a
way for Krebs to separate the reactions of Carl Martius
and Franz Knoop from those of Albert Szent-Gyorgyi.
Krebs then hit on the crucial question:
So I asked myself whether perhaps oxaloacetate,
together with a substance derived from foodstuffs,
might combine to form citrate again, after the manner
of a cycle.
Krebs began his “Results” section on the discovery of
the tricarboxcylic acid cycle with the experiments or
data showing the catalytic effects of citrate on respir-
ation in pigeon breast minces. His experimental results
confirmed his hypothesis. In his mind this cycle could
explain the complete combustion of foodstuffs to CO
2
and water.
Into the Wilderness and Back Again
After his triumph in discovering the urea cycle in 1932
and having been invited by Max Plank to discuss his
findings, in the same year, on 19 June 1933, he was
forced into exile from his own homeland, to which he
and his father were devoted and whose army he had
served, for reasons of racial identity which he had
rejected. He found refuge in Hopkins Biochemistry
Laboratory at Cambridge, dependent upon the kindness
of strangers.
Triumph would again be followed by rejection, after
Krebs formulation of the TCA cycle. This time, however,
the rejection would not be by the Nazi’s who took over
his homeland, but rejection would come from his
scientific colleagues. A revolutionary theory always has
its critics. Krebs’ tricarboxcylic acid cycle, published in
1937 after being rejected by Nature, was no exception.
By 1940, Earl Evans, who had been trained in Krebs’ lab
at Sheffield, and Harland Wood, one of America’s most
distinguished biochemists then working at Iowa State,
produced evidence that when C-labeled CO
2
con-
densed with pyruvate to form oxaloacetate it yielded
a
-ketoglutarate with the entire radioactivity confined to
the carboxyl group adjacent to the carbonyl group.
Wood suggested that this radioactive evidence was
compatible with the condensation of pyruvate with
oxaloacetate forming aconitate, then isocitrate and
finally a-ketoglutarate at a rapid rate. If the formation
of citrate from aconitate were only a slow side reaction,
then this would account for the radioactive findings. For
7 years this reasoning was accepted and Krebs changed
the name of his cycle from the more euphonious “citric
acid cycle” (see Figure 2) to the more cumbersome TCA
cycle, which it bears today to accommodate the
generally accepted view in the biochemical community.
Krebs confined his work to practical nutritional
problems for wartime Britain, which was literally
starving from the depredations of Nazi submarine
attacks. Then in 1948, Alexander Ogston published a
short paper in Nature pointing out that the “three-
point” attachment of the symmetrical citrate molecule
to the citrate synthase enzyme would confer optical
properties to the product of that chemically symmetrical
molecule. The “citric acid cycle” was back in business as
Krebs pointed out in his Harvey Lecture delivered on 17
March 1949. The final confirmation of the validity of
Krebs’ original postulate of the “citric acid cycle” came
from Fritz Lipmann’s study of the acetylation of
sulfanilamides where he identified the so-called “active
acetate” as acetyl coenzyme A. Soon thereafter, Stern,
Ochoa, and Lynen showed that the intermediate through
which pyruvate enters the TCA cycle was acetyl CoA
which then combines with oxaloacetate to form citrate,
confirming Krebs’ original formulation of the cycle.
258
TRICARBOXYLIC ACID CYCLE