Abstract:Sporozoites of Eimeria tenella were incubated for 10, 20, or 30 min with parasite-specific monoclonal IgG antibody 3D3II from mice and then rinsed in a Tris-buffered glucose saline solution (TBGS). Some sporozoites were then incubated for 10, 20, or 30 min with ferritin- or colloidal gold-conjugated goat anti-mouse IgG antibody and then fixed in 2.5% glutaraldehyde and prepared for transmission (TEM) or scanning (SEM) electron microscopy. Other sporozoites that had been previously exposed to monoclonal antibod… Show more
“…Inhibition may involve specific antibodies in the mucosa of immune birds which act by directly blocking invasion or by enhancing intraluminal destruction of sporozoites. However, E. tenella has been observed capping and shedding immune complexes (Speer et al, 1985b), and sporozoites taken from the caeca of immune birds develop normally when transferred to naive chickens (Rose, 1987). Conversely, E. acervulina immune birds had 11% more intracellular sporozoites (Augustine & Danforth, 1986) than controls, but they do not develop indicating that immunity interferes with further development, not simply invasion.…”
Section: Sporozoite Invasion and Transportmentioning
“…Inhibition may involve specific antibodies in the mucosa of immune birds which act by directly blocking invasion or by enhancing intraluminal destruction of sporozoites. However, E. tenella has been observed capping and shedding immune complexes (Speer et al, 1985b), and sporozoites taken from the caeca of immune birds develop normally when transferred to naive chickens (Rose, 1987). Conversely, E. acervulina immune birds had 11% more intracellular sporozoites (Augustine & Danforth, 1986) than controls, but they do not develop indicating that immunity interferes with further development, not simply invasion.…”
Section: Sporozoite Invasion and Transportmentioning
“…As suggested by Davis and Porter (1979), antibodies or enzymes within digestive tracts of immune animals may not completely abolish host cell penetration, but may alter parasites rendering them incapable of further development. Speer et al (1985) found that jncubation in a monoclonal antibody alone did not by itself induce capping of immune complexes by E . tenella sporozoites.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…Except for the work of Speer et al (1983aSpeer et al ( , 1983Speer et al ( b, 1985 concerning monoclonal antibodies, there have been no previous immunoelectron microscopy (IEM) investigations using imrnunodeterminate site markers on Eimeria species. We report herein the ultrastructural localization of parasite-specific IgA and IgG on Eimeria falciformis oocysts, sporocysts, sporozoites , and merozoites.…”
1986. Ultrastructural localization of IgA and IgG receptors on oocysts, sporocysts, sporozoites and merozoites of Eimeria falciformis. Can. J . Zool. 64: 778-784. The localization of parasite-speci fic IgA and IgG immunoglobulins on Eimeria falciformis oocysts , sporocysts , sporozoites , and merozoites was examined by immunoelectron microscopy. Parasites were fixed in glutaraldehyde, incubated with heatinactivated sera or gut contents from normal or specifically immunized mice, reacted with ferritin-conjugated or colloidal gold-conjugated sheep or goat antimouse IgA or IgG antibody and prepared for transmission electron microscopy. Other purified samples of sporozoites or merozoites were exposed to sera or gut contents, fixed in 0.15% glutaraldehyde, and then incubated with ferritin-conjugated or colloidal gold-conjugated sheep or goat antimouse antibody. Parasite-specific IgA and IgG receptors were detected on the plasmalemma of sporozoites and merozoites. Specific IgG receptors were also present on the inner and outer layers of the oocyst wall, and on the inner surface of the sporocyst wall. Live sporozoites and merozoites shed immune complexes at their posterior ends. No internal alternations were detected ultrastructurally in sporozoites or merozoites treated with parasite-specific IgA or IgG antibodies. WHITMIRE, W. M., et C. A. SPEER. 1986. Ultrastructural localization of IgA and IgG receptors on oocysts, sporocysts, sporozoites and merozoites of Eimeria falciformis. Can. J . Zool. 64: 778-784. Une technique d'immuno-Clectro-microscopie a permis de dCterminer le site des immunoglobulines sp6cifiques au parasite, IgA et IgG, chez des oocystes, des sporocystes, des sporozoi'tes et des mCrozoi'tes d'Eimeria falciformis.Les parasites ont Ct C fixCs dans du glutaraldChyde, gardCs en incubation dans des sCrums inactivCs a la chaleur ou dans des contenus stomacaux de souris normales ou immunisCes ~Ncifiquement, mis en prksence d'anticorps IgA ou IgG anti-souris de mouton ou de chkvre combinks a de la ferritine ou a de l'or colloi'dal, et enfin prCparCs pour l'examen au microscope Clectronique ordinaire. D'autres Cchantillons purifiCs de sporozoi'tes ou de mCrozoi'tes ont Ct C exposCs a des sCrums ou a des contenus stomacaux, fix& dans du glutaraldChyde 0,15% et ensuite gardCs en incubation avec des anticorps anti-souris de mouton ou de chkvre combinks a de la femtine ou 2 de l'or colloi'dal. La prCsence de rCcepteurs d'IgA et d'IgG spkcifiques au parasite a Ct C dCcelCe sur le plasmalemme des sporozoi'tes et des mCrozoi'tes. Des rCcepteurs d'IgG sp6cifique sont Cgalement prksents sur les couches interne et externe de la paroi de l'oocyste et sur la surface interne de la paroi du sporocyste. Les sporozoi'tes et les mCrozoi'tes vivants libkrent des complexes immunitaires a leur extrCmitC postkrieure. Aucune modification ultrastructurale interne n'a Ct C dCcelCe dans les sporozoi'tes et les mCrozoi'tes trait& aux anticorps IgA ou IgG spCcifiques au parasite.[Traduit par la Revue]
“…It is unclear as to the precise fate of ligands cleared from the surface of sporocysts. Mammalian lymphocytes and fibroblasts predominantly endocytose 'capped' complexes (Raff & de Petris 1973, Bretscher 1984, while most parasitic protozoans shed surface immune complexes (Dzbenski et a1 1976, Schmunis et al 1980, Speer et al 1985. Samuelson, Caulfield & David (1981) documented lateral mobility and shedding of con A-receptor complexes with surface membranes of the schistosomula of S. mansoni and found no evidence for internalization of these complexes.…”
Section: Gar) At 4" C (Con A/anti-con A/r-gar [4"c]) or In The Presementioning
confidence: 99%
“…Ligand-induced modulation of surface membrane determinants is a common event in many motile eucaryoticcell systems. A variety of mammalian cells (Nicholson 1974,1976, Schreiner & Unanue 1976, invertebrate blood phagocytes (Yoshino 1986, Dageforde, Schmucker & Renwrantz 1986, and parasitic protozoa (Speer et al 1985) undergo the sequential processes of 'patching' and 'capping' following binding of specific multivalent ligands to surface receptors. The fluidity of the lipid bilayer plasma membrane permits the aggregation of ligand-linked receptors into island 'patches' that coalesce, usually forming a single 'cap'.…”
The clearance of host molecules from the surface of a parasite constitutes a potential immune evasive strategy. The possibility that certain ligands, when bound to the tegument of Schistosoma mansoni primary sporocysts, could induce such a modulating effect was investigated. Live, in vitro cultured primary sporocysts were first treated with either snail host Biomphalaria glabrata plasma, an anti-sporocyst monoclonal antibody (MoAb III-1), or concanavalin A (con A). The capacity of these primary ligands to produce a modulating effect alone, or when subsequently crosslinked by secondary or tertiary ligands, was measured using quantitative fluorescence microscopy. Snail plasma alone, or plasma crosslinked at the sporocyst surface with a mouse anti-plasma MoAb had little or no modulating effect. However, a tertiary level of ligand crosslinking with an anti-mouse IgG antibody produced an average 1.8-fold decrease in surface fluorescence within 1 h post-labelling. The anti-sporocyst MoAb III-1 also required secondary antibody reactivity to induce an average 1.5-fold decrease in MoAb III-1 recognized epitopes. Sporocysts labelled with con A crosslinked by secondary and tertiary ligands showed inconsistent modulation, with a 1.5-fold decrease in fluorescence in one out of three replicates. Overall, however, analysis of combined data revealed no significant effect of tertiary ligand level crosslinkage on modulation of con A-tegumental receptor complexes. In contrast, con A binding alone to tegumental determinants induced a small, but significant, reduction in surface con A complexes. Modulation of ligand-receptor complexes on the sporocyst tegumental membrane appears to be an energy-requiring event, since clearance of surface complexes was inhibited in the presence of sodium azide and/or sodium iodoacetate, or when larvae were incubated at 4 degrees C. It is concluded that alterations in sporocyst tegumental surface components may be triggered by specific (but as yet undefined) signals. Sporocysts are capable of exhibiting different responses depending on the nature of the binding signal and reactive tegumental receptor, and the degree of ligand crosslinkage.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.