Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-7cvxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T04:57:53.780Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Immunological realtionships during primary infection with Heligmosomides polygyrus (Nematospiroides dubius): expulsion of adult worms from fast responder syngeneic and hybrid strains of mice

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 April 2009

F. N. Wahid ,
M. Robinson  and
J. M Behnke
F. N. Wahid
Affiliation:
MRC Experimental Parasitology Research Group, Department of Zoology, University of Nottingham, University Park, Nottingham NG7 2RD
M. Robinson
Affiliation:
MRC Experimental Parasitology Research Group, Department of Zoology, University of Nottingham, University Park, Nottingham NG7 2RD
J. M Behnke
Affiliation:
MRC Experimental Parasitology Research Group, Department of Zoology, University of Nottingham, University Park, Nottingham NG7 2RD
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

The time-course of low and high intensity primary infections with Heligmosomoides polygyrus was monitored in SJL and SWR mice, both of which usually expel worms within 7 weeks of larval administration. Worm expulsion in these strains was not dependent on the intensity of infection, with low and high intensity worm burdens being lost within the same period of time. The ability to expel worms rapidly was inherited in a dominant manner in F1 offspring of SJL or SWR mice mated with C57Bl10 mice; the latter being a strain in which no loss of worms was evident within 10 weeks of infection. However, neither (SJL × C57Bl10)F1 nor (SWR × C57Bl10)F1 mice expelled worms as rapidly as the parental SJL and SWR strains. (SWR × B10G)F1 [H-2q] mice eliminated worms faster than (SWR × C57Bl10)F1 [H-2bq], suggesting that the b haplotype had a moderating influence on the expulsion process. In fact (SWR × B10G)F1 mice showed a significant reduction in worm burdens by week 4 but by weeks 6–8 the rate of worm loss had slowed considerably. In contrast, SJL and SWR mice, whilst initiating rejection slightly later, (after week 4) expelled all worms within the following 2 weeks. Thus two distinct patterns of response were observed among the fast responder strains as exemplified by SWR and SJL mice on the one hand and (SWR × B10G)F1 on the other. Our results support the hypothesis that the course of a primary infection with H. polygyrus is influenced by multiple host gene loci, some of which are encoded within the MHC. SJL and SWR mice probably have similar if not identical gene combinations at loci which determine a fast responder phenotype, distinguishing them from the other mouse strains which have been studied.

Keywords

Heligmosomoides polygyrusworm expulsionfast responder miceimmune response
Type
Research Article
Information
Parasitology , Volume 98 , Issue 3 , June 1989 , pp. 459 - 469
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1989

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

Amagai, T. & Cinader, B. (1981). Resistance against tolerance induction in SJL mice. Immunological Communications 10, 349–58.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Behnke, J. M. (1987). Evasion of immunity by nematode parasites causing chronic infections. Advances in Parasitology 26, 1–71.Google Scholar
Behnke, J. M. & Parish, H. A., (1979). Nematospiroides dubius: arrested development of larvae in immune mice. Experimental Parasitology 47, 116–27.Google Scholar
Behnke, J. M. & Robinson, M. (1985). Genetic control of immunity to Nematospiroides dubius; a 9 day anthelmintic abbreviated immunising regime which separates weak and strong responder strains of mice. Parasite Immunology 7, 235–53.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Behnke, J. M., Williams, D. J., Hannah, J. & Pritchard, D. I. (1987). Immunological relationships during primary infection with Heligmosomoides polygyrus (Nematospiroides dubius): the capacity of adult worms to survive following transplantation to recipient mice. Parasitology 95, 569–81.Google Scholar
Cooke, A. & Hutchings, P. (1984). Defective regulation of erythrocyte autoantibodies in SJL mice. Immunology 51, 489–92.Google ScholarPubMed
Cypess, R. H., Lucia, H. L., Zidian, J. L. & Rivera-Ortiz, C. I. (1977). Heligmosomoides polygyrus: temporal, spatial and morphological population characteristics in LAF1/J mice. Experimental Parasitology 42, 34–43.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Day, K. P., Howard, R. J., Prowse, S. J., Chapman, C. B., & Mitchell, G. F. (1979). Studies on chronic versus transient intestinal nematode infections in mice. 1. A comparison of responses to excretory/secretory (ES) products of Nippostrongylus brasiliensis and Nematospiroides dubius worms. Parasite Immunology 1, 217–39.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dehlawi, M. S. & Wakelin, D. (1988). Suppression of mucosal mastocytosis by Nematospiroides dubius results from an adult worm-mediated effect upon host lymphocytes. Parasite Immunology 10, 85–95.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dehlawi, M. S., Wakelin, D. & Behnke, J. M. (1987). Suppression of mucosal mastocytosis by infection with the intestinal nematode Nematospiroides dubius. Parasite Immunology 9, 187–94.Google Scholar
Dobson, C., Sitepu, P. & Brindley, P. J. (1985). Influence of primary infection on the population dynamics of Nematospiroides dubius after challenge infections in mice. International Journal for Parasitology 15, 353–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Festing, M. F. W. & Blackwell, J. M. (1989). Determination of mode of inheritance of host response. In Genetics of Resistance to Bacterial and Parasitic Infection (ed. Wakelin, D. and Blackwell, J. M.), pp. 21–61. London: Taylor & Francis.Google Scholar
Festing, M. F. W. & Roderick, T. H. (1989). Correlation between genetic distances based on single loci and on skeletal morphology in inbred mice. Genetical Research. (In the Press).Google Scholar
Fujiwara, M. & Cinader, B. (1974). Cellular aspects of tolerance. IV. Strain variation of tolerance inducibility. Cellular Immunology 12, 11–29.Google Scholar
Hutchings, P. R., Varey, A. M. & Cooke, A. (1986). Immunological defects in SJL mice. Immunology 59, 445–50.Google ScholarPubMed
Jacobson, R. H., Brooks, B. O. & Cypess, R. H. (1982). Immunity to Nematospiroides dubius: parasite stages responsible for and subject to resistance in high responder (LAF1/J) mice. Journal of Parasitology 68, 1053–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jenkins, S. N. & Behnke, J. M. (1977). Impairment of primary expulsion of Trichuris muris in mice concurrently infected with Nematospiroides dubius. Parasitology 75, 71–8.Google Scholar
Keymer, A. E. & Hiorns, R. W. (1986). Heligmosomoides polygyrus (Nematoda): the dynamics of primary and repeated infection in outbred mice. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, B 229, 47–67.Google ScholarPubMed
Liu, S. K. (1966). Genetic influence on resistance of mice to Nematospiroides dubius. Experimental Parasitology 18, 311–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lublin, F. D., Knobler, R. L., Doherty, P. C. & Korngold, R. (1986). Relapsing experimental allergic encephalomyelitis in radiation bone marrow chimeras between high and low susceptible strains of mice. Clinical and Experimental Immunology 66, 491–6.Google ScholarPubMed
Mitchell, G. F., Anders, R. F., Brown, G. V., Handman, E., Roberts-Thomson, I. C., Chapman, C. B., Forsyth, K. P., Kahl, L. P. & Cruise, K. M. (1982). Analysis of infection characteristics and antiparasite immune responses in resistant compared with susceptible hosts. Immunological Reviews 61, 137–88.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pritchard, D. I., Ali, N. M. H. & Behnke, J. M. (1984). Analysis of the mechanism of immunodepression following heterologous antigenic stimulation during concurrent infection with Nematospiroides dubius. Immunology 51, 633–42.Google Scholar
Prowse, S. J. & Mitchell, G. F. (1980). On the choice of mice for dissection of strain variations in the development of resistance to infection with Nematospiroides dubius. Australian Journal of Experimental Biology and Medical Research 58, 603–5.Google Scholar
Prowse, S. J., Mitchell, G. F., Ey, P. L. & Jenkin, C. R. (1979). The development of resistance in different inbred strains of mice to infection with Nematospiroides dubius. Parasite Immunology 1, 277–88.Google Scholar
Rice, M. C. & O'Brien, S. J. (1980). Genetic variance of laboratory outbred Swiss mice. Nature, London 283, 157–61.Google Scholar
Robinson, M., Wahid, F. N., Behnke, J. M. & Gilbert, F. S. (1989). Immunological relationships during primary infection with Heligmosomoides polygyrus (Nematospiroides dubius): dose-dependent expulsion of adult worms. Parasitology. (In the Press).Google Scholar
Sokal, R. R. & Rohlf, F. J. (1969). Biometry. San Francisco: Freeman.Google Scholar
Stohlman, S. A., Matsushima, G. K., Casteel, N. & Frelinger, J. A. (1985). The defect in delayed-type hypersensitivity of young adult SJL mice is due to a lack of functional antigen presenting cells. European Journal of Immunology 15, 913–16.Google Scholar
Sugane, K. & Oshima, T. (1985). Induction of a marked eosinophilia by cyclophosphamide in Toxocara canis infected SJL mice. Parasite Immunology 7, 255–63.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tanner, C. E. (1978). The susceptibility to Trichinella spiralis of inbred lines of mice differing at the H-2 histocompatibility locus. Journal of Parasitology 64, 956–7.Google Scholar
Taylor, B. A. (1972). Genetic relationships between inbred strains of mice. Journal of Heredity 63, 83–6.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wakelin, D. (1980). Genetic control of immunity to parasites. Infection with Trichinella spiralis in inbred and congenic mice showing rapid and slow responses to infection. Parasite Immunology 2, 85–98.Google Scholar
Wakelin, D. & Donachie, A. M. (1981). Genetic control of immunity to Trichinella spiralis. Donor bone marrow cells determine responses to infection in mouse radiation chimaeras. Immunology 43, 787–92.Google Scholar
Wakelin, D., Donachie, A. M. & Grencis, R. K. (1985). Genetic control of immunity to Trichinella spiralis in mice. Capacity of cells from slow responder mice to transfer immunity in syngeneic and Fl hybrid recipients. Immunology 56, 203–11.Google Scholar
Wassom, D. L., Brooks, B. O., Cypess, R. H. & David, C. S. (1983). A survey of susceptibility to infection with Trichinella spiralis of inbred mouse strains sharing common H-2 alleles but different genetic backgrounds. Journal of Parasitology 69, 1033–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wassom, D. L., Dougherty, D. A., Krco, C. J. & David, C. S. (1984). H-2 controlled, dose dependent suppression of the response that expels adult Trichinella spiralis from the small intestine of mice. Immunology 53, 811–18.Google Scholar
Watanabe, N., Kojima, S., Shen, F. W. & Ovary, Z. (1977). Suppression of IgE antibody production in SJL mice. II. Expression of Ly-1 antigen on helper and nonspecific suppressor T cells. Journal of Immunology 118, 485–8.Google Scholar
Williams, D. J. L. & Behnke, J. M. (1983). Host protective antibodies and serum immunoglobulin isotypes in mice chronically infected or repeatedly immunized with the nematode parasite Nematospiroides dubius. Immunology 48, 34–47.Google Scholar