Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gxg78 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T07:31:42.925Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Response of inbred mice to infection with a new isolate of Trypanosoma musculi

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 April 2009

S. N. Chiejina ,
J. Street ,
D. Wakelin  and
J. M. Behnke
S. N. Chiejina
Affiliation:
Department of Veterinary Parasitology and Entomology, University of Nigeria, Nsukka, Nigeria
J. Street
Affiliation:
Department of Life Science, University of Nottingham, Nottingham NG7 2RD
D. Wakelin
Affiliation:
Department of Life Science, University of Nottingham, Nottingham NG7 2RD
J. M. Behnke
Affiliation:
Department of Life Science, University of Nottingham, Nottingham NG7 2RD
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

A new isolate of Trypanosoma musculi has been derived from organisms recovered from Mus spretus captured in Lisbon, Portugal. The time-course and profiles of infection with this isolate in inbred mice have been compared with those obtained with the existing Partinico II isolate. Infections with the Portuguese isolate are less intense, and controlled more quickly than those with the Partinico isolate. As with the latter, there are marked mouse strain-dependent influences on infection with the Portuguese isolate, but these strain-dependent characteristics differ considerably with each isolate. For example, NIH mice were the most susceptible to the Partinico II isolate, but virtually refractory to the Portuguese isolate. Mice exposed to infection with one isolate show complete immunity to both homologous and heterologous challenge infections. These striking interactions between host and parasite genotype are discussed in terms of immunological influences on infection.

Keywords

Trypanosoma musculiPartinico II isolatePortuguese isolateinbred miceparasitaemiagenetic influences
Type
Research Article
Information
Parasitology , Volume 107 , Issue 3 , September 1993 , pp. 233 - 236
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1993

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

Albright, J. W. & Albright, J. F. (1981). Differences in resistance to Trypanosoma musculi infection among strains of in-bred mice. Infection and Immunity 33, 364–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Albright, J. W. & Albright, J. F. (1989). Immunological and nonimmunological control of severity of Trypanosoma musculi infections in C3H and C57BL/6 inbred mice. Infection and Immunity 57, 1647–55.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Albright, J. W. & Albright, J. F. (1991). Rodent trypanosomes: their conflict with the immune system of the host. Parasitology Today 7, 137–40.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Albright, J. W., Holmes, K. L. & Albright, J. F. (1990 a). Fluctuations in subsets of splenocytes and isotypes of immunoglobulin in young adult and aged mice resulting from Trypanosoma musculi infections. Journal of Immunology 144, 3970–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Albright, J. W., Pierantoni, M. & Albright, J. F. (1990 b). Immune and nonimmune regulation of the population of Trypanosoma musculi in infected mice. Infection and Immunity 58, 1757–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anderson, L. W. & Banks, K. L. (1982). Early course of infection in susceptible and resistant strains of mice, using [3H] uridine-labelled Trypanosoma brucei subsp. brucei. Infection and Immunity 36, 525–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bell, R. G., Adams, L. S. & Ogden, R. W. (1984 a). Trypanosoma musculi with Trichinella spiralis or Heligmosomoides polygyrus: concomitant infections in the mouse. Experimental Parasitology 58, 8–18.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bell, R. G., Adams, L. S. & Ogden, R. W. (1984 b). Trypanosoma musculi and Trichinella spiralis: concomitant infections and selection for resistance genotypes in mice. Experimental Parasitology 58, 19–26.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Herbert, W. J. & Lumsden, W. H. R. (1976). Trypanosoma brucei: a rapid ‘matching’ method for estimating the host's parasitaemia. Experimental Parasitology 40, 427–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
House, R. V. & Dean, J. H. (1988). Trypanosoma musculi: characterisation of the T-lymphocyte dependency of immunity by selective immunomodulation of the mouse, Mus musculus. Experimental Parasitology 67, 104–15.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kendall, A. I. (1906). A new species of trypanosomes occurring in the mouse Mus musculus. Journal of Infectious Diseases 3, 228 (Cited by Viens et at. 1974).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morrison, W. I. & Murray, M. (1985). The role of humoral immune responses in determining susceptibility of A/J and C57BL/6 mice to infection with Trypanosoma congolense. Parasite Immunology 7, 63–79.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pinder, M., Chassin, P. & Fumoux, F. (1986). Mechanisms of self-cure from Trypanosoma congolense infection in mice. Journal of Immunology 136, 1427–34.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sage, R. D. (1981). Wild mice. In: The Mouse in Biomedical Research, Vol. 1, pp. 39–90. London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Viens, P., Targett, G. A. T., Leuchars, E. & Davies, A. J. S. (1974). The immunological response of CBA mice to Trypanosoma musculi. I. Initial control of the infection and the effect of T-cell deprivation. Clinical and Experimental Immunology 16, 279–94.Google ScholarPubMed
Wechsler, D. S. & Kongshavn, P. A. L. (1986). Heat-labile IgG2a antibodies effect cure of Trypanosoma musculi infection in C57BL/6 mice. Journal of Immunology 137, 2968–72.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed