Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-ndw9j Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-15T15:37:55.675Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The in vivo and in vitro ananlysis of immunity to Trichinella spiralis in mice and rats

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 April 2009

D. D. Despommier ,
W. C. Campbell  and
L. S. Blair
D. D. Despommier
Affiliation:
Division of Tropical Medicine, School of Public Health, Columbia University, 630 West 168th Street, New York 10032
W. C. Campbell
Affiliation:
Merck Institute for Therapeutic Research, Rahway, New Jersey 07065
L. S. Blair
Affiliation:
Merck Institute for Therapeutic Research, Rahway, New Jersey 07065
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Wistar-Furth strain male rats and CFW strain male mice were immunized against Trichinella spiralis using an antegenic fraction derived from a cell-free homogenate of mature muscle larvae.

In rats, animlas immunized with 250 μg of antigen harboured singnificantly fewer (135000) muscle larvae 30 days after oral challenge than controls (231000). Furhter 7-day-old adult worms derived from immunized rats shed 48% fewer (P < 0·001) newborn larvae over a 24 h period in vitro than adult worms from non-immunized animals.

Mice were injected with either 10 or 100 μg of antigen. In comparison with non-immunized controls, mice immunized with 100μg of antigen harboured significantly fewer adult worms at days 7 and 9 after oral challenge infection, while female worms recovered from immune mice on days 6–10 after challenge shed fewer newborn larvae in vitro. Finally, mice immunized with 100μg of antigen harboured significantly fewer (10391) muscle larvae at 30 days after challenge than did controls (47750).

Immunization of mice with 10μ of antigen did not induce a statistically significant reduction in adult worms at either days 7 or 9 after challenge (P < 0·5). However, adult female worms from mice receiving 10μg of antigen still shed fewer larvae than did adults from control mice (P < 0·05). Mice immunized with 10μg of antigen harboured significantly fewer (13700) recoverable muscle larvae than did controls at 30 days after challenge (39000).

Type
Research Article
Information
Parasitology , Volume 74 , Issue 1 , February 1977 , pp. 109 - 119
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1977

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

Campbell, C. H. (1955). The antigenic role of the excretions and secretions of Trichinella spiralis in the production of immunity in mice. Journal of Parasitology 41, 483–91.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Campbell, W. C., Hartman, R. K. & Cuckler, A. C. (1963). Induction of immunity to trichinosis in mice by means of chemically abbreviated infections. Experimental Parasitology 14, 29–36.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chipman, P. B. (1957). The antigenic role of the excretions and secretions of adult Trichinella spiralis in the production of immunity in mice. Journal of parasitology 43, 593–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Denham, D. A. (1966). Immunity to Trichinella spiralis. I. The immunity produced by mice to the first four days of the intestinal phase of the infection. Parasitology 56, 323–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Denham, D. A. & Martinez, A. R. (1970). Studies with methyridine and Trichinella spiralis. 2. The use of the drug to study the rate of larval production in mice. Journal of Helminthology 44, 357–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dennis, D. T., Despommier, D. D. & Davis, N. (1970). Infectivity of the newborn larva of Trichinella spiralis in the rat. journal of Parasitology 56, 974–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Despommier, D. D. (1971). Immunogenicity of the newborn larva of Trichinella spiralis. Journal of Parasitology 57, 531–4.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Despommier, D. D. (1974 a). A circular thermal migration device for the rapid collection of large numbers of intestinal helmlinths. Journal of Parasitology 59, 933–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Despommier, D. D. (1974 b). The stichocyte of Trichinella spiralis during morphogenesis in the small intestine of the rat. In Trichinellosis: Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference of Trichinellosis (ed. Kim, C. W.), pp. 239–54. New York: Intext Educational Publishers.Google Scholar
Despommier, D. & Muller, M. (1970 a). Functional antigens of Trichinella spiralis. Journal of Parasitology 56 (Section II, Part I), 76.Google Scholar
Despommier, D. D. & Muller, M. (1907 b). The stichosome of Trichinella spiralis: Its structure and fuction. Journal of Parasitology 56 (Secton II, Part I), 76–7.Google Scholar
Despommier, D., Muller, M., Jenks, B. & Fruitstone, M. (1974). Immuno-diagnosis of human trichinosis using counterelectrophoresis and agar gel diffusion techniques. American Journal of Tropical Medicane and Hygiene 23, 41–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Despommier, D. D. & Wostmann, B. S. (1968). Diffusion chambers for inducing immunity to Trichinella spiralis in mice. Experimental Parasitology 23, 228–33.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ducas, R. (1921). L’immunité dans la trichinose. Thése, pp. 47. Paris: Jouve et Cie.Google Scholar
Gould, S. E. (1970). Anatomic pathology. In Trichinosis in Man and Animals (ed. Gould, S. E.), pp. 147–89. Springfield, Illinois: Charles C. Thomas.Google Scholar
Hollander, M. & Wolfe, D. A. (1973). Nonparametic Statistics, pp. 114–37. New York: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
James, E. R. & Denham, D. A. (1974). The stage specificity of the immune response to Trichinella spiralis. In Trichinellosis: proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Trichinellosis (ed. Kim, C. W.), pp. 245–51. New York: Intext Educational Publishers.Google Scholar
Jones, V. E. & Ogilvie, B. M. (1972). Protective immunity to Nippostrongylus brasiliensis in the rat. III. Modulation of worm acetylcholinesterase by antibodies. Immunology 22, 119–29.Google Scholar
LarshJ. E., Jr. J. E., Jr. (1963). Experimental trichiniasis. In Advances in Parasitology, vol 1 (ed. Dawas, B.), pp. 213–86. London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Love, R. J., Ogilvie, B. M. & McLaren, D. J. (1976). The immune mechanism which exples the intestinal stage of Trichinella spiralis from rats. Immunology 30, 7–15.Google ScholarPubMed
McCoy, O. R. (1931). Immunity of rats to reinfection with Trichinella spiralis. American Journal of Hygine 14, 484–94.Google Scholar
McCue, J. F. & Thorson, R. E. (1965). Host effects on the migration of Nippostrongylus brasiliensis in a thermal gradient. Journal of Parasitology 51, 414–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ogilvie, B. M. & Hockley, D. L. (1968). effects of immunity on Nippostrongylus brasiliensis adult worms. Reversible and irreversible changes in infectivity, reproduction and morphology. Journal of Parasitology 54, 1073–84.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Otto, G. F. (1970). Insect-borne nematodes. In Immunity to Parasitic Animals, Vol. 2 (ed. Jackson, G. J., Herman, R., Singer, I.), pp. 963–80. New York: Appleton-century-Crofts.Google Scholar
Rappaport, I. & Wells, H. S. (1951). Studies in trichinosis. I. Immunity to reinfection follwing a single light infection. Journal of infectious Diseases 88, 248–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sarles, M. P. (1938). The in vitro action of immune rat serum on the nematode, Nippostrongylus muris. Journal of Infectious Diseases 62, 337–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar