Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-sh8wx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-18T23:26:48.475Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

In vitro tapeworm extract-induced proliferative responses of gut-associated lymphoid cells from Hymenolepis diminuta infected mice

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 June 2009

Dale D. Isaak
Dale D. Isaak
Affiliation:
Department of Microbiology and Immunology, Kirksville College of Osteopathic Medicine, Kirksville, MO 63501, USA.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The development of lymphoid cells reactive to tapeworm-associated antigens during the course of Hymenolepis diminuta rejection from mice was studied using an in vitro tapeworm extract (TWE)-induced cell proliferation culture system. Mice infected with three cysticercoids on day 0 developed three adult worms by day 7 but worms were rejected by day 21 post-infection. Concomitant with worm rejection was the development of TWE-sensitized lymphoid cells which responded by proliferation when stimulated in vitro with TWE. Sensitized cells were detected in gut-associated mesenteric lymph nodes but were not detected in spleen, axillary lymph nodes, or peyer's patches of infected mice, or in lymphoid organs of non-infected mice. These studies suggest that rejection of H. diminuta from mice is associated with the activities of gut-associated, tapeworm antigen-sensitized immune cells localized in the mesenteric lymph nodes.

Type
Research Papers
Information
Journal of Helminthology , Volume 57 , Issue 1 , March 1983 , pp. 43 - 50
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1983

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Befus, A. D. (1975) Secondary infections of Hymenolepis diminuta in mice: Effects of varying worm burdens in primary and secondary infections. Parasitology, 71, 61–75.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Befus, A. D. (1977) Hymenolepis diminuta and Hymenolepis microstoma: mouse immunoglobulins binding to the tegumental surface. Experimental Parasitology, 42, 242–251.Google Scholar
Befus, A. D. & Featherston, D. W. (1974) Delayed rejection of single Hymenolepis diminuta in primary infections of young mice. Parasitology, 69, 77–85.Google Scholar
Befus, A. D. & Threadgold, L. T. (1975) Possible immunological damage to the tegument of Hymenolepis diminuta in mice and rats. Parasitology. 71, 525–534.Google Scholar
Bienenstock, J. & Befus, A. D. (1980) Mucosal immunology. Immunology, 41, 249–270.Google ScholarPubMed
Bienenstock, J. & Dolezel, J. (1971) Peyer's Patches: lack of specific antibody-containing cells after oral and parental immunization. Journal of Immunology, 106, 938–945.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bland, P. W. (1976) Immunity to Hymenolepis diminuta: unresponsiveness of the athymic nude mouse to infection. Parasitology, 72, 93–97.Google Scholar
Ganguly, R. & Waldman, R. H. (1980) Local immunity and local immune responses. Progress in Allergy, 27, 1–68.Google ScholarPubMed
Guy-Grand, D., Griscelli, C. & Vasalli, P. (1978) The mouse gut T lymphocyte, a novel type of T cell. Nature, origin and traffic in normal and graft-versus-host conditions. Journal of Experimental Medicine, 148, 1661–1677.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Henry, C., Faulk, W. P., Kuhn, L., Yoffey, J. M. & Fudenberg, H. H. (1970) Peyer's patches: immunological studies. Journal of Experimental Medicine, 131, 1200–1210.Google Scholar
Heyneman, D. (1962) Studies on the helminth immunity. II. Influence of Hymenolepis nana (Cestoda: Hymenolepididae) in dual infections with H. diminuta in white mice and rats. Experimental Parasitology, 12, 7–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hopkins, C. A., Subramanian, G. & Stallard, H. (1972a) The development of Hymenolepis diminuta in primary and secondary infections of mice. Parasitology, 64, 401–112.Google Scholar
Hopkins, C. A., Subramanian, G. & Stallard, H. (1972b) The effect of immunosuppressants on the development of Hymenolepis diminuta in mice. Parasitology, 65, 111–120.Google Scholar
Isaak, D. D. (1976) Analysis of the mechanisms of immune expulsion from mice of Hymenolepis diminuta and Hymenolepis nana. Ph.D. Dissertation, Montana State University, Bozeman, Montana.Google Scholar
Isaak, D. D., Jacobson, R. H. & Reed, N. D. (1975) Thymus dependence of tapeworm (Hymenolepis Diminuta) elimination from mice. Infection and Immunity, 12, 1478–1479.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Isaak, D. D., Jacobson, R. H. & Reed, N. D. (1977) The course of Hymenolepis nana infections in thymus-deficient mice. International Archives of Allergy and Applied Immunology, 55, 504–513.Google Scholar
Macinnis, A. J. & Voge, M. (1970) Experiments and techniques in parasitology. P. 130. W. H. Freeman and Co.; San Francisco.Google Scholar
Threadgold, L. T. & Befus, A. D. (1977) Hymenolepis diminuta: ultra-structural localization of immunoglobulin-binding sites on the tegument. Experimental Parasitology, 43, 169–179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walker, W. A. & Isselbacher, K. J. (1977) Intestinal antibodies. New England Journal of Medicine, 297, 767–773.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Weinman, C. J. (1966) Immunity mechanisms in cestode infections. In: Biology of Parasites, Emphasis on Veterinary Parasites (editor, Soulsby, J. ) Pp. 301–320. Academic Press; New York.Google Scholar
Weinman, C. J. (1970) Cestodes and Acanthocephala. In: Immunity to Parasitic Animals (Jackson, G. J., Herman, R., Singer, I., Editors) Volume 2, Pp. 1021–1059. Appleton-Century-Crofts: New York.Google Scholar