Hostname: page-component-84b7d79bbc-x5cpj Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-26T15:33:09.887Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Evasion of the insect immune response by Moniliformis dubius(Acanthocephala): further observations on the origin of the envelope

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 April 2009

Ann M. Lackie  and
J.M. Lackie
Ann M. Lackie
Affiliation:
Department of Zoology, University of Glasgow, Glasgow G12 8QQ
J.M. Lackie*
Affiliation:
Department of Zoology, University of Glasgow, Glasgow G12 8QQ
*
*Department of Cell Biology, University of Glasgow.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

The envelope around larvae of Moniliformis dubius appears to protect the parasite against immune recognition and encapsulation by the insect host's haemocytes. The origin of this envelope has been the subject of controversy although most evidence suggests it is parasite-derived. If host-derived, the envelope would be expected to share surface properties with host tissue. Thus, experiments were undertaken, transplanting parasites and host tissue to other insects and using haemocytic encapsulation as an assay for immune recognition, in order to compare the response to host tissue and to the parasite's envelope. Parasites without their envelopes, and pieces of tissue (ventral nerve cord) from the experimental host (the locust Schistocerca gregaria) were recognized as foreign and encapsulated in the cockroach, Periplaneta americana. The majority of parasites with their envelopes were unencapsulated or only partially encapsulated on transfer to their normal host, P. americana, indicating that the envelope does not have surface similarity to locust tissue. Cockroach-derived parasites with or without envelopes were not encapsulated in S. gregaria, suggesting that the larva itself can evade or inhibit the locust's recognition mechanism. However, since larvae which develop in S. gregaria are enclosed in an envelope, the formation of the envelope would seem to be an inherent feature of the parasite's development.

Type
Research Article
Information
Parasitology , Volume 79 , Issue 2 , October 1979 , pp. 297 - 301
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1979

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

Brennan, B. M. & Cheng, T. C. (1975). Resistance of Moniliformis dubius to the defense reactions of the American cockroach, Periplaneta americana. Journal of Invertebrate Pathology 26, 65–73.Google Scholar
Edmonds, S. J. (1966). Hatching of the eggs of Moniliformis dubius. Experimental Parasitology 19, 216–26.Google Scholar
King, D. & Robinson, E. S. (1967). Aspects of the development of Moniliformis dubius. Journal of Parasitology 53, 142–9.Google Scholar
Lackie, A. M. (1976). Evasion of the haemocytic defence reaction of certain insects by larvae of Hymenolepis diminuta(Cestoda). Parasitology 73, 97–107.Google Scholar
Lackie, A. M. (1977). Cellular recognition of ‘not-self’ in insects. In Developmental Immunology (ed. Solomon, J. B. and Horton, J. D.), pp. 75–81. Amsterdam: Elsevier North Holland.Google Scholar
Lackie, J. M. (1972). The effect of temperature on the development of Moniliformis dubius(Acanthocephala) in the intermediate host, Periplaneta americana. Parasitology 65, 371–7.Google Scholar
Lackie, J. M. (1975). The host-specificity of Moniliformis dubius(Acanthocephala), a parasite of cockroaches. International Journal for Parasitology 5, 301–7.Google Scholar
Lackie, J. M. & Rotheram, S. (1972). Observations on the envelope surrounding Moniliformis dubius (Acanthocephala) in the intermediate host, Periplaneta americana. Parasitology 65, 303–8.Google Scholar
Mercer, E. H. & Nicholas, W. L. (1967). Ultrastructure of the capsule of the larval stages of Moniliformis dubius. Parasitology 57, 169–74.Google Scholar
Ravindranath, M. H. & Anantaraman, S. (1977). The cystacanth of Moniliformis moniliformis (Bremser, 1811) and its relationship with the haemocytes of the intermediate host (Periplaneta americana). Zeitschrift für Parasitenkunde 53, 225–38.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Robinson, E. S. & Strickland, B. C. (1969). Cellular responses of Periplaneta americana to acanthocephalan larvae. Experimental Parasitology 26, 384–92.Google Scholar
Rotheram, S. & Crompton, D. W. T. (1972). Observations on the early relationship between Moniliformis dubius (Acanthocephala) and the haemocytes of the intermediate host, Periplaneta americana. Parasitology 64, 15–21.Google Scholar
Salt, G. (1965). Experimental studies in insect parasitism. XIII. The haemocytic reaction of a caterpillar to eggs of its habitual parasite. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, B 162, 303–18.Google Scholar
Scott, M. T. (1971). Recognition of foreign-ness in invertebrates: transplantation studies using the American cockroach, Periplaneta americana. Transplantation 11, 78–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar