Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-g8jcs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-30T20:06:14.254Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Inherited histocompatibility changes in progeny of irradiated and unirradiated inbred mice*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 April 2009

D. W. Bailey  and
H. I. Kohn
D. W. Bailey
Affiliation:
Cancer Research Institute and Radiological Laboratory, University of California Medical Center, San Fracancisco, California
H. I. Kohn
Affiliation:
Cancer Research Institute and Radiological Laboratory, University of California Medical Center, San Fracancisco, California
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

(1) F1-hybrid mice derived from a cross of the highly inbred strains: C57BL/6 and BALB/c, were tested for inherited changes of histocompatibility by an orthotopic inter-exchange of tail-skin grafts. The fathers of tested mice received either 522 rads of gonadal X-irradiation, or received no irradiation 2 months prior to mating.

(2) Thirty-two mice with altered histocompatibilities were found in a total of 2572 complete tests. All of those mutant mice (twenty-one) that produced an adequate number of offspring were shown to pass the incompatibility on to their progeny.

(3) Mutants were classified as to whether they effected a gain, a loss or both a gain and a loss in antigen specificity as determined by whether they rejected skin of donor mice or their skin was rejected by host mice. Twenty-six were clearly of the gain type, five were most likely gain type and only one showed both a loss and a gain effect. There was no clearcut evidence that loss types had occurred. The preponderance of gain types was tentatively explained as an artifact of the system used for the assay.

(4) Several of the detected mutants were probably from parents carrying mutations that originated in past generations, for some mutant mice occurred in clusters.

(5) There was no apparent effect of paternal irradiation (522 rads) on mutation frequency. The induced mutation rate was estimated to be less than 2·6 × 10−5/ gamete/rad.

(6) Independent data on isografts from F1 hybrids of proven non-carrier pedigreed parents provided an estimate of spontaneous mutation rate of 6·75 × 10−3/ gamete.

(7) The estimate of doubling dose (greater than 260 rads) was consistent with the estimates for recessive lethals and visibles in mice.

Type
Research Article
Information
Genetics Research , Volume 6 , Issue 3 , November 1965 , pp. 330 - 340
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1965

References

REFERENCES

Amos, D. B., Gorer, P. A. & Mikulska, Z. B. (1955). An analysis of an antigenic system in the mouse (the H-2 system). Proc. R. Soc. B. 144, 369–380.Google ScholarPubMed
Bailey, D. W. (1963). Histoincompatibility associated with the X chromosome in mice. Transpl. 1, 70–74.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bailey, D. W. & Mobraaten, L. (1964). Estimates of the number of histocompatibility loci at which the BALB/c and C57BL/6 strains of mice differ. Genetics, 50, 233 (Abstr.).Google Scholar
Bailey, D. W. & Usama, B. (1960). A rapid method of grafting skin on tails of mice. Transplantn Bull. 7, 424–425.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bateman, A. J. (1958). The partition of dominant lethals in the mouse between unimplanted eggs and deciduomata. Heredity, Lond. 12, 467–475.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Billingham, R. E., Brent, L., Medawar, P. B. & Sparrow, E. M. (1954). Quantitative studies on tissue transplantation immunity. I. Proc. R. Soc. B, 143, 43–58.Google ScholarPubMed
Bittner, J. J. (1930). The experimental determination of an invisible mutation. Pap. Mich. Acad. Sci. 11, 349–351.Google Scholar
Borges, P. R. F. & Kvedar, B. J. (1952). A mutation producing resistance to several trans-plantable neoplasms in the C57 black strain of mice. Cancer Res. 12, 19–24.Google ScholarPubMed
Borges, P. R. F., Kvedar, B. J. & Foerster, G. E. (1954). The development of an isogenic subline of mice (C57BL/6-H-2d) resistant to transplantable neoplasms indigenous to strain C57B1. J. natn. Cancer Inst. 14, 341–346.Google Scholar
Carter, T. C. (1957). Recessive lethal mutations induced in the mouse by chronic X-irradiation. Proc. R. Soc. B, 147, 402–411.Google Scholar
Godfrey, J. & Searle, A. G. (1963). A search for histocompatibility differences between irradiated sublines of inbred mice. Genet. Res. 4, 21–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gorer, P. A. & Mikulska, Z. B. (1955). Some further data on the H-2 system of antigens. Proc. R. Soc. B, 151, 57–69.Google Scholar
Grahn, D. & Hamilton, K. F. (1957). Genetic variation in the acute lethal response of four inbred mouse strains to whole body x-irradiation. Genetics, 42, 189–198.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hellström, K. E. (1961). Studies on the mechanisms of iso-antigenic variant formation in heterozygous mouse tumors. II. J. natn. Cancer Inst. 27, 1095–1105.Google Scholar
Kindred, B. (1963). Skin grafting between sublines of inbred strains of mice. Aust. J. biol. Sci. 16, 863–868.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Klein, E. (1961). Studies on the mechanism of iso-antigenic variant formation in heterozygous mouse tumors. I. J. natn. Cancer Inst. 27, 1069–1093.Google Scholar
Klein, E. & Klein, G. (1959). The uxsse of histoeompatibility genes as markers for the study of cell heredity. In Symposium on Biological Problems of Grafting, Liege, 03 1959.Google Scholar
Kohn, H. I. & Kallman, R. F. (1956 a). The influence of strain on acute x-ray lethality in the mouse. I. Radiat. Res. 5, 309–317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kohn, H. I. & Kallman, R. F. (1956 b). Relative biological efficiency of 100-kvp and 250-kvcp X-rays. IV. Radiat. Res. 5, 700–709.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Linder, O. E. A. (1963). Skin compatibility of different CBA sublines separated from each other in the course of varying number of generations. Transpl. 1, 58–60.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lyon, M. F., Phillips, R. J. S. & Searle, A. G. (1964). The overall rates of dominant and recessive lethal and visible mutation induced by spermatogonial x-irradiation of mice. Genet. Res. 5, 448–467.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lyon, M. F. (1959). Some evidence concerning the ‘mutational load’ in inbred strains of mice. Heredity, Lond. 13, 341–352.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Muramatsu, S., Sugahara, T. & Okazawa, Y. (1963). Genetic effects of chronic low-dose irradiation on mice. Int. J. Radiat. Biol. 6, 49–59.Google Scholar
Roderick, T. (1963). The response of twenty-seven inbred strains of mice to daily doses of whole body X-irradiation. Radiat. Res. 30, 631–639.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Russell, W. L. (1951). X-ray-induced mutations in mice. Cold Spring Harb. Symp. quant. Biol. 16, 327–336.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Russell, W. L. (1963). The effect of radiation dose rate and fractionation on mutation in mice. In Repair from Genetic Radiation. Oxford: Pergamon.Google Scholar
Russell, W. L. & Russell, L. B. (1959). The genetic and phenotypic characteristics of radiation-induced mutations in mice. Radiat. Res. Suppl. 1, 296–305.Google Scholar
Russell, L. B. & Russell, W. L. (1956). The sensitivity of different stages in oogenesis to the radiation induction of dominant lethals and other changes in the mouse. In Progress in Radiobiology, pp. 187–192. Edinburgh: Oliver & Boyd, Ltd.Google Scholar
Searle, A. G. (1964). Effects of low-level irradiation on fitness and skeletal variation in an inbred mouse strain. Genetics, 50, 1159–1178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Snell, G. D. & Borges, P. R. F. (1953). Determination of the histocompatibility locus involved in the resistance of mice strains C57BL/10-X, C57BL/6-X and C57BL/6Ks to C57BL tumors. J. natn. Cancer Inst. 14, 481–484.Google ScholarPubMed