Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-mkpzs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T01:08:40.041Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The inheritance of responses to schistosomiasis mansoni in two pairs of inbred strains of mice

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 April 2009

Janet T. Jones  and
J. R. Kusel
Janet T. Jones
Affiliation:
Department of Biochemistry, University of Glasgow, Glasgow G12 8QQ
J. R. Kusel
Affiliation:
Department of Biochemistry, University of Glasgow, Glasgow G12 8QQ
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Genetic differences in mice influence both the pathological and immunological responses to schistosomiasis mansoni. We have investigated the nature of the genetic factors influencing these responses by crossing two different pairs of strains of mice which vary in their response to infection, and measuring responses in the F1 hybrid and backcross offspring. The two pairs of parental strains differed with respect to faecal egg excretion, accumulation of eggs in the tissues, splenomegaly and pattern of antibody response. The numbers of adult worms which establish do not differ between strains. The inheritance of the responses measured was different in the two pairs of strains. The F1 hybrid from the C57BL/6/Ol/a /c cross resembled the low-responding parental strain (CBA/Ca) with respect to faecal egg excretion, accumulation of eggs in the tissues and splenomegaly, and was intermediate in its pattern of antibody response. The F1 hybrid mice from the NIH /Ca cross resembled the high-responding strain (CBA/Ca) with respect to faecal egg excretion, accumulation of eggs in the tissues and splenomegaly, and had an earlier and greater antibody response than either parental strain. No evidence of single gene influence on any of these responses was seen in the backcross offspring. The differing patterns of inheritance and the absence of a bimodal distribution of responses in the backcross offspring indicate that each of these responses is influenced by multiple genes. The pattern of antibody response did not correlate between strains with any of the pathological res The positive correlation of egg accumulation in the tissues and faecal egg excretion suggests that there are genetic influences on the fecundity of the worms.

Type
Research Article
Information
Parasitology , Volume 90 , Issue 2 , April 1985 , pp. 289 - 300
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1985

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

Bickle, Q., Long, E., James, E., Festing, M. & Doenhoff, M. (1980). Factors affecting the acquisition of resistance agains. Schistosoma mansoni in the mouse. VI. The influence of sex, age and strain of murine host. Experimental Parasitology 50, 222–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bina, J. C., TAvaraz-Neto, J., Prata, A. & Azevedo, E. S. (1978). Greater resistance to development of severe schistosomiasis in Brazilian Negroes. Human Biology 50, 4 1–9.Google ScholarPubMed
Blum, K. & Cioli, D. (1978). Behaviour of Biozzi high and low responder mice upon infection wit. Schistosoma mansoni. European Journal of Immunology 8, 52–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Claas, F. H. J. & Deelder, A. M. (1979). H-2 linked immune response to murine experimenta. Schistosoma mansoni infections. Journal of Immunogenetics 6, 167–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Colley, D. G. & Freeman, G. L. jr. (1983). Differences in adult Schistosoma mansoni worm burden requirements for the establishment of resistance to reinfection in inbred mice. II. C57BL/KsJ, SWR/J, SJL/J, BALB/cAnN, DBA/2N, A/J, B10.A(3R), and B10.A(5R) mice. American Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene 32, 543–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dean, D. A., Bukowski, M. A. & Cheever, A. W. (1981). Relationship between acquired resistance, portal hypertension, and lung granulomas in ten strains of mice infected with Schistosoma mansoni. American Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene 30, 806–14.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dunne, D. W., Hassounah, O., Musallam, R., Lucas, S., Pepys, M. B., Baltz, M. & Doenhoff, M. (1983). Mechanisms o. Schistosoma mansoni egg excretion: parasitological observations in immunosuppressed mice reconstituted with immune serum. Parasite Immunology 5, 47–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fanning, M. M., Peters, P. A., Davis, R. S., Kazura, J. W. & Mahmoud, A. A. F. (1981). Immunopathology of murine infection wit. Schistosoma mansoni: relationship of genetic background to hepatoplenic disease and modulation. Journal of infectious Diseases 144, 148–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
James, C., Webbe, G., Shaw, J. R. & Erasmus, D. A. (1976). Egg output suppression – a manifestation of schistosome immunity. Transactions of the Royal Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene 70, 18.Google Scholar
James, S. L., Labine, M. & Sher, A. (1981). Mechanisms of protective immunity agains. Schislosonia mansoni infection in mice vaccinated with irradiated cercariae 1. Analysis of antibody and T-lymphocyte responses in mouse strains developing differing levels of immunity. Cellular Immunology 65, 75–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
James, S. L., Skamene, E. & Meltzer, M. S. (1983). Macrophages as effector cells of protective immunity in murine schistosomiasis V. Variation in macrophage schistosomulacidal and tumoricidal activities among mouse strains and correlation with resistance to reinfection. Journal of Immunology 131, 948–53.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jones, J. T., El Adhami, B. & Kusel, J. R. (1980). Genetic variation in murine responses to schistosomiasis. Parasitology 81, i–ii.Google Scholar
Jones, J. T., McCaffery, D. M. & Kusel, J. R. (1983). The influence of the H-2 complex on responses to infection b. Schistosoma mansoni in mice. Parasitology 86, 19–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lewis, F. A. & Wilson, E. M. (1981). Strain differences in lymphocyte responses an. in vitro suppressor cell induction between Schistosoma mansoni-infected C57BL/6 and CBA mice. Infection and Immunity 32, 260–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McLaren, M. L., Draper, C. C., Roberts, J. M., Minter-Goedbloed, E., Liothart, C. S., Teesdale, C. H., Amin, M. A., Omer, A. H. S., Bartlett, A. & Voller, A. (1978). Studies on the enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) test fo. Schistosoma mansoni infections. Annals of Tropical Medicine and Parasitology 72, 243–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mitchell, G. F., Garcia, E. G., Anders, R. F., Valdez, C. A., Tapales, F. P. & Gruise, K. M. (1981). Schistosoma japonicum: Infection characteristics in mice of various strains and a difference in the response to eggs. international Journal for Parasitology 11, 267–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Murrell, K. D., Clark, S., Dean, D. A. & Vannier, W. E. (1979). Influence of mouse strain on induction of resistance with irradiate. schistosoma mansoni cercariae. Journal of Parasitology 65, 829–31.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Olds, G. R., El Kholy, A. & Ellner, J. J. (1983). Two distinctive patterns of monocyte immunoregulatory and effector functions in heavy human infections wit. Schistosoma mansoni. Journal of Immunology 131, 954–8.Google Scholar
Salam, E. A., Ishaac, S. & Mahmoud, A. A. F. (1979). Histocompatibility-linked susceptibility for hepatosplenomegaly in huma. schistosomiasis mansoni. Journal of Immunology 123, 1829–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smithers, S. R. & Terry, R. J. (1965). The infection of laboratory hosts with cercariae o. Schistosoma mansoni and the recovery of adult worms. Parasitology 55, 695–700.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilson, R. A., Coulson, P. S. & Mchugh, S. M. (1983). A significant part of the ‘concomitant immunity’ of mice t. Schistosoma mansoni is the consequence of a leaky hepatic portal system, not immune killing. Parasite Immunology 5, 595–601.CrossRefGoogle Scholar