Electronmicrographs of Thin Sections of Molluscum Contagiosum.

Abstract

843tion over the blood vessels of the chorioallantoic membrane and area vasculosa as described elsewhere(5-7). A test period of 24 hours was used during which time the yolk sac tumors nearly doubled in size. The effect on growth was evaluated on the basis of the increased size of embryo and tumor which occurred in the control eggs during the period of the experiment. A total of 320 tumorbearing eggs involving 12 separate experiments was used in these tests.Results. Table 1 records the results with 2 Rain-lily extracts and aminopterin. Aqueous and alcohol extracts of the plant were ineffective. Negative results were also obtained with a solution of liquid pressed from the plant bulbs at high pressure.It will be noted in the table that the Rainlily extracts gave about the same order of inhibition of tumor growth as did aminopterin but without the inhibition of the embryo growth which characterized the action of the latter compound.Discussion. The chemical nature of the effective agent in these Rain-lily extracts will be explored. It is known that an alkaloid with fungicidal action is present in plants of this group. To obtain this material, dry powdered bulbs are extracted with 95% ethanol (8). In the present work ethanol extracts of fresh bulbs were ineffective in the tests on cancer growth. There is apparently a seasonal factor involved since extracts of bulbs collected in the Austin area in the late Spring after the plant was advanced in growth were ineffective. S U~~Q Y Y .Extracts of Rain-lily bulbs have been tested for their effect on the growth of tumor and embryo of tumor-bearing eggs. The results obtained with aminopterin in the same tests are included for comparison. Acid aqueous and acetone extTacts of the plant bulb inhibited tumor growth 81% and 9476, respectively, without affecting the embryo. Aminopterin inhibited tumor growth 87% and embryo growth 19%.

Intracellular Forms of Pox Viruses as Shown by the Electron Microscope (Vaccinia, Ectromelia, Molluscum Contagiosum)

“…As was indicated in the micrographs of Banfield et al (4), developmental bodies were found in the cytoplasmic septa which separate the pockets of virus particles. When the plastic imbedding medium was not removed from sections, the developmental bodies resembled those described for the other two viruses.…”

“…MoUuscum Contagiosura.--The structure of the molluscum inclusion has recently been studied by Rake and Blank (24), Banfield et al (4), and by Blank (9) and was reexamined here only for the purpose of comparison with vaccinia and ectromelia. As was indicated in the micrographs of Banfield et al (4), developmental bodies were found in the cytoplasmic septa which separate the pockets of virus particles.…”

“…Using similar material, we have called attention to the perinuclear position of early vaccinia virus development and to a matrix enveloping the earliest forms (13,14). Molluscum contagiosum virus has been identified in thin sections of the human lesion in two laboratories (4,9). In particular, Banfield et al (4) presented evidence to suggest that the virus particles in such lesions were formed by segmentation and condensation from material comprising the septa which separated nests of mature virus.…”

“…Molluscum contagiosum virus has been identified in thin sections of the human lesion in two laboratories (4,9). In particular, Banfield et al (4) presented evidence to suggest that the virus particles in such lesions were formed by segmentation and condensation from material comprising the septa which separated nests of mature virus. An impression might be gained from the above electron microscopic observations that pox inclusion bodies are merely aggregates of virus particles, similar to bacterial colonies, whose definition is hidden at times by an electron-dense matrix.…”

An electron microscope study of molluscum contagiosum

“…It has been observed electron microscopically in thin-sectioned material by Banfield, Bunting, Strauss & Melnick (1951, and Melnick, Bunting, Banfield, Strauss & Gaylord (1952), but their use of formalin fixation and removal of the methacrylate embedding material from their sections are unsatisfactory for the preservation of fine structural detail. Gaylord & Melnick (1953), using more acceptable techniques, also observed the virus, but their published observations were rather cursory and intended only for comparison with their more informative examination of the vaccinia and ectromelia viruses.…”