Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gxg78 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-31T15:16:19.908Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Dose-response relationships of lymphocytic choriomeningitis viruses in mice and L cell tube cultures

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 May 2009

F. Lehmann-Grube
F. Lehmann-Grube
Affiliation:
Hygiene-Institut der Phillipps-Universität Marburg, Marburg/Lahn, Germany
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

The dose—response relationships between two strains of lymphocytic choriomeningitis virus (WE3 and Armstrong) and two hosts (mice and L cell tube cultures) were determined. The statistical analysis showed that, if infection was regarded as the response, and in the case of Armstrong virus in mice also death, the shapes of the empirical dose—response curves did not deviate from expectation which was based on the zero term of the Poisson distribution. Hence, the hypothesis that individual infectious units are capable of initiating infection and that co-operation is not required, was not contradicted. Furthermore, the units of assay were found to be equally susceptible under the experimental conditions applied.

By way of contrast, the relationship between WE3 virus and mice dying after intracerebral inoculations was found to be more complex. In this case the empirical curve did not run the expected sigmoid course at all, but rather was bell-shaped with a maximum of mortality (92%) at approximately 50 ID 50.

The work was supported by a research grant from the Deutsche Forschungs-gemeinschaft.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Hygiene , Volume 67 , Issue 2 , June 1969 , pp. 269 - 278
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1969

References

REFERENCES

Armstrong, C. & Lillie, R. D. (1934). Experimental lymphocytic choriomeningitis of monkeys and mice produced by a virus encountered in studies of the 1933 St Louis encephalitis epidemic. Publ. Hlth Rep., Wash. 49, 1019.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eagle, H. (1959). Amino acid metabolism in mammalian cell cultures. Science, N.Y. 130, 432.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Earle, W. R. (1943). Production of malignancy in vitro. IV. The mouse fibroblast cultures and changes seen in the living cells. J. natl. Cancer Inst. 4, 165.Google Scholar
Fazekas de St Groth, S. (1955). Production of non-infective particles among influenza viruses: Do changes in virulence accompany the von Magnus phenomenon. J. Hyg., Camb. 53, 276.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Haas, V. H. & Stewart, S. E. (1956). Sparing effect of a-methopterin and guanazolo in mice infected with virus of lymphocytic choriomeningitis. Virology 2, 511.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hanks, J. H. & Wallace, R. E. (1949). Relation of oxygen and temperature in the preservation of tissues by refrigeration. Proc. Soc. exp. Biol. Med. 71, 196.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Haldane, J. B. S. (1939). Sampling errors in the determination of bacterial or virus density by the dilution method. J. Hyg., Camb. 39, 289.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Halvorson, H. O. & Ziegler, N. R. (1933). Application of statistics to problems in bacteriology. I. A means of determining bacterial population by the dilution method. J. Bact. 25, 101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hannover Larsen, J. (1968). Studies on immunological tolerance to LCM virus. 9. Induction of immunological tolerance to the virus in the adult mouse. Acta path. microbiol. scand. 73, 106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hotchin, J. (1962). The biology of lymphocytic choriomeningitis infection: Virus-induced immune disease. In Basic Mechanisms in Animal Virus Biology. Cold Spring Harb. Symp. Quant. Biol. 27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hotchin, J. & Benson, L. (1963). The pathogenesis of lymphocytic choriomeningitis in mice: The effects of different inoculation routes and the footpad response. J. Immun. 91, 460.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hotchin, J., Benson, L. M. & Seamer, J. (1962). Factors affecting the induction of persistent tolerant infection of newborn mice with lymphocytic choriomeningitis. Virology 18, 71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hotchin, J. & Weigand, H. (1961). The effects of pretreatment with X-rays on the pathogenesis of lymphocytic choriomeningitis in mice. I. Host survival, virus multiplication and leukocytosis. J. Immun. 87, 675.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jochheim, K.-A., Scheid, W., Liedtke, G., Hansen, I. & Stausberg, G. (1957). Komplementbindende Antikörper gegen das Virus der lymphozytären Choriomeningitis im Serum von Versuchstieren und Beobachtungen zur Immunität. Arch. ges. Virusforsch. 7, 143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lehmann-Grube, F. (1964 a). Lymphocytic choriomeningitis in the mouse. I. Growth in the brain. Arch. ges. Virusforsch. 14, 344.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lehmann-Grube, F. (1964 b). Lymphocytic choriomeningitis in the mouse. II. Establishment of carrier colonies. Arch. ges. Virusforsch. 14, 351.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lehmann-Grube, F. & Hesse, R. (1967). A new method for the titration of lymphocytic choriomeningitis viruses. Arch. ges. Virusforsch. 20, 256.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lockart, R. Z. & Eagle, H. (1959). Requirements for growth of single human cells. Science, N.Y., 129, 252.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Meynell, G. G. (1957). Inherently low precision of infectivity titrations using a quantal response. Biometrics 13, 149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rowe, W. P. (1956). Protective effect of pre-irradiation on lymphocytic choriomeningitis infection in mice. Proc. Soc. exp. Biol. Med. 92, 194.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sanford, K. K., Earle, W. R. & Likely, G. D. (1948–1949). The growth in vitro of single isolated tissue cells. J. natl. Cancer. Inst. 9, 229.Google ScholarPubMed
Scott, T. F. M. & Rivers, T. M. (1936). Meningitis in man caused by a filterable virus. I. Two cases and the method of obtaining a virus from their spinal fluids. J. exp. Med. 63, 397.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Spiegel, A. & Gönnert, R. (1961). Neue Käfige für Mäuse und Ratten. Z. Versuchstierk. 1, 38.Google Scholar
Volkert, M. & Hannover Larsen, J. (1965). Immunological tolerance to viruses. Prog. med. Virol. 7, 160.Google ScholarPubMed