Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-8zxtt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-11T13:07:20.248Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Genetic control of immune responses to parasites: immunity to Trichuris muris in inbred and random-bred strains of mice

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 April 2009

P. Wakelin
P. Wakelin
Affiliation:
Wellcome Laboratories for Experimental Parasitology, University of Glasgow, Bearsden, Glasgow G61 1QH
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

A comparison has been made of the responses of random-bred CFLP and inbred NIH mice to infection with Trichuris muris. Random-bred mice showed greater variation in worm burdens and less uniformity in worm expulsion. Irradiation prior to infection reduced variation, but did not increase the mean level of infection above that shown by the most susceptible unirradiated mice. In NIH mice, however, irradiation raised the level of infection in all mice. The factors responsible for variation between CFLP mice and for the level of infection in NIH mice came into play after the fifth day of infection and were inactivated by cortisone acetate. It is suggested that these factors are immunologically mediated and under direct genetic control. Uniformity of infection and expulsion in NIH mice is therefore seen as a consequence of genetic uniformity; variability in CFLP mice as a consequence of genetic variation.

The time of worm expulsion was found to differ markedly between inbred strains of mice. Hybrid progeny showed the expulsion time characteristic of the parental strain with the most rapid expulsion; greater resistance was therefore inherited as a dominant characteristic. The genetic control of immunity to T. muris is discussed in the context of the antibody- and cell-mediated components of the expulsion process.

Type
Research Article
Information
Parasitology , Volume 71 , Issue 1 , August 1975 , pp. 51 - 60
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1975

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

Ackert, J. E. (1942). Natural resistance to helminthic infections. Journal of Parasitology 28, 1–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ackert, J. E., Eisenbrandt, L. L., Wilmoth, J. H., Glading, B. & Pratt, I. (1935). Com parative resistance of five breeds of chickens to the nematode Ascaridia lineata (Schneider). Journal of Agricultural Research 50, 607–24.Google Scholar
Ali-Khan, Z. (1974). Host-parasite relationship in echinococcosis. I. Parasite biomass and antibody response in three strains of inbred mice against graded doses of Echinococcus multilocularis cysts. Journal of Parasitology 60, 231–5.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brozzi, G., Stiffel, C., Mouton, D., Bouthillier, Y. & Decreusefond, C. (1971). Genetic regulation of the function of antibody producing cells. In Progress in Immunology (ed. Amos, B.), pp. 529–45. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Curtis, M. R., Dunning, W. F. & Bullock, F. D. (1933). Genetic factors in relation to the etiology of malignant tumors. American Journal of Cancer 17, 894–923.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gowen, J. W. (1948). Inheritance of immunity in animals. Annual Review of Microbiology 2, 215–54.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gowen, J. W. (1961). Experimental analysis of genetic determinants in resistance to infectious disease. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 91, 689–709.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gregory, P. W., Miller, R. F. & Stewart, M. A. (1940). An analysis of environmental and genetic factors influencing stomach worm infestation in sheep. Journal of Genetics 39, 391–400.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liu, S.-K. (1966). Genetic influence on resistance of mice to Nematospiroides dubius. Experimental Parasitology 18, 311–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lubinsky, G. (1964). Growth of the vegetatively propagated strain of larval Echinococcus multilocularis in some strains of Jackson mice and in their hybrids. Canadian Journal of Zoology 42, 1099–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McDevitt, H. O. & Benacerraf, B. (1969). Genetic control of specific immune responses. Advances in Immunology 11, 31–74.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pike, E. H. (1969). Egg output of Trichuris muris (Schrank, 1788). Journal of Parasitolg 55, 1046–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Selby, G. R. & Wakelin, D. (1973). Transfer of immunity against Trichuris muris in the mouse by serum and cells. International Journal for Parasitology 3, 717–22.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Spurlock, G. M. (1943). Observations on host-parasite relationships between laboratory mice and Nematospiroides dubius, Baylis. Journal of Parasitology 29, 303–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stewart, M. A., Miller, R. F. & Douglas, J. R. (1937). Resistance of sheep of different breeds to infestation by Ostertagia circumcincta. Journal of Agricultural Research 55, 923–3O.Google Scholar
Stirewalt, M. A., Shepperson, J. R. & Lincicome, D. R. (1965). Comparison of penetration and maturation of Schistosoma mansoni in four strains of mice. Parasitology 55, 227–135.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wakelin, D. (1967). Acquired immunity to Trichuris muris in the albino laboratory mouse. Parasitology 57, 515–24.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wakelin, D. (1969). Studies on the immunity of albino mice to Trichuris muris in the albino laboratory mouse. The stimulation of immunity by chemically abbreviated infections. Parasitology 59, 549–55.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wakelin, D. (1970). The stimulation of immunity and the induction of unresponsiveness to Trichuris muris in various strains of laboratory mice. Zeitschrift für Parasitenkunde 35, 162–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wakelin, D. (1973). The stimulation of immunity to Trichuris muris in mice exposed to low-level infections. Parasitology 66, 181–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wakelin, D. (1975). Immune expulsion of Trichuris muris from mice during a primary infection. Analysis of the components involved. Parasitology (in the Press).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wassom, D. L., DeWitt, C. W. & Grundmann, A. W. (1974). Immunity to Hymenolepis citelli by Peromyscus maniculatus: genetic control and ecological implications. Journal of Parasitology 60, 47–52.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Whitlock, J. H. (1955). A study of the inheritance of resistance to triehostrongylidosis in sheep. Cornell Veterinarian 45, 422–39.Google ScholarPubMed
Whitlock, J. H. (1958). The inheritance of resistance to trichostrongylidosis in sheep. I. Demonstration of the validity of the phenomena. Cornell Veterinarian 48, 127–33.Google ScholarPubMed
Whitlock, J. H. & Madsen, H. (1958). The inheritance of resistance to trichostrongylidosis in sheep. II. Observations on the genetic mechanism in trichostrongylidosis. Cornell Veterinarian 48, 134–45.Google ScholarPubMed
Worley, D. E., Meisenhelder, S. E., Sheffield, H. G. & Thompson, P. E. (1962). Experimental studies on Trichuris muris in mice with an appraisal of its use for evaluating anthelmintics. Journal of Parasitology 48, 433–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed