Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-4rdpn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-08T02:30:12.575Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Studies on histocompatibility mutations in mouse tumour cells using isogenic strains of mice

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 April 2009

S. S. Dhaliwal
S. S. Dhaliwal
Affiliation:
Institute of Animal Genetics, West Mains Road, Edinburgh 9
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.

The feasibility of using heterozygous tumours induced in hybrids between Snell's isogenic resistant (IR) strains of mice for mutation studies was examined. The system has been described by Mitchison (1956) and Klein, Klein & Révész (1957).

Fourteen hybrid sarcomas (A × A.SW F1; H-2 genotype a/s) were tested in mice of the parental strains. Seven were specific for the original F1 hybrid genotype and failed to give any variants. Four tumours gave variants that were compatible with one of the parental strains. The variants grew progressively in all mice of the parental strain, even in pre-immunized mice, and failed to grow in mice of foreign genotypes. Of these, one tumour, as. 14 gave true variants towards both the parental strains. One tumour, as.7, gave variants regularly in 35·5% of the A.SW mice but only in 7·7% of pre-immunized A.SW mice. It failed to give variants towards the other parental strain.

The effect of triethylenemelamine (TEM) and X-ray treatment on the rate of variant production in hybrid tumours was studied. The effect of the treatment on the viability of tumour cells was first examined by titrating tumour cell suspensions on groups of mice or on the CAMs of groups of developing chick embryos. The TD50 values (50% end-points) were calculated. Comparable results were obtained by titrating on mice and on the CAM, although titration on mice gave more consistent results. Approximately 102 viable, untreated cells were needed to produce a tumour in mice or on the CAM.

Tumour as.7 was tested in the parental strains after treatment with TEM or X-rays. Using comparable cell doses in the untreated controls and treated series, the percentage of variants produced in one of the parental strains (A.SW) was significantly increased after treatment with TEM or X-rays. With the exception of one experiment, no variants were produced in the other parental strain. In one experiment, four variants were produced towards the A strain after treatment with TEM, three of which were tested: only one was found to be specific for the A strain. Three of the A.SW variants, originating after treatment with TEM, were tested: two were specific while one showed incomplete specificity for the A.SW strain. Treatment of specific tumours with TEM or X-rays did not give variants towards either of the parental strains.

Two of the hybrid tumours and their derived variants were examined cytologically. Variants originating spontaneously and after treatment with TEM were examined. While most of the original tumours had chromosome numbers with an exactly diploid modal number, the spontaneous and TEM-treated variants had modal numbers which were hyperdiploid. The TEM-treated variants also had a larger proportion of cells which were triploid or hypotetraploid. This would explain the incomplete specificity of the variants isolated after treatment with TEM.

While it appears possible to use heterozygous tumours for isolating genetical variants specifically compatible with one of the parental strains, the actual nature of the mechanism of variant production remains dubious.

Type
Research Article
Information
Genetics Research , Volume 2 , Issue 3 , November 1961 , pp. 309 - 332
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1961

References

REFERENCES

Allen, S. L. (1955). H-2f, a tenth allele at the histocompatibility-2 locus as determined by tumour transplantation. Cancer Res. 15, 315–319.Google Scholar
Bayreuther, K. & Klein, E. (1958). Cytogenetic, serologic and transplantation studies on a heterozygous tumour and its derived sublines. J. nat. Cancer Inst. 21, 885–923.Google Scholar
British Empire Cancer Campaign (1951). Annual Report, p. 58.Google Scholar
Hauschka, T. S. (1953 a). Cell population studies on mouse ascites tumours. Trans. N.Y. Acad. Sci. 16, 64–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hauschka, T. S. (1953 b). Methods of conditioning the graft in tumour transplantation. J. nat. Cancer Inst. 14, 723–739.Google Scholar
Hauschka, T. S. & Levan, A. (1953). Inverse relationship between chromosome ploidy and host specificity of sixteen transplantable tumours. Exp. Cell Res. 4, 457–467.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hauschka, T. S. & Levan, A. (1958). Cytologic and functional characterisation of single cell clones isolated from the Krebs-2 and Ehrlich ascites tumours. J. nat. Cancer Inst. 21, 77–135.Google Scholar
Hoecker, G. (1956). Genetic mechanisms in tissue transplantation in the mouse. Cold Spr. Harb. Symp. quant. Biol. 21, 355–362.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ishibashi, K. (1950). Studies on the number of cells necessary for the transplantation of Yoshida Sarcoma. Gann, 41, 1–24.Google ScholarPubMed
Kaltenbach, J. P., Kaltenbach, M. H. & Lyons, W. B. (1958). Nigrosin as a dye for differentiating live and dead cells. Exp. Cell Res. 15, 112–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Klein, E., Klein, G. & Révész, L. (1957). Permanent modification (mutation?) of a histo-compatibility gene in a heterozygous tumor. J. nat. Cancer Inst. 19, 95–114.Google Scholar
Klein, G. & Klein, E. (1956 a). Detection of an allelic difference at a single gene locus in a small fraction of a large tumor cell population. Nature, Lond., 178, 1389–1391.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Klein, G. & Klein, E. (1956 b). Mechanism of induced change in transplantation specificity of a mouse tumor passed through hybrid hosts. Transplant. Bull. 3, 136–142.Google Scholar
Klein, G. & Klein, E. (1958). Histocompatibility changes in tumours. J. cell. comp. Physiol. 52, Suppl. 1, 125–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Klein, G. & Klein, E. (1959). Studies of histocompatibility mutations in isogenic strains of mice. In Symposium on Biological Problems of Grafting, Liege, 04 1959.Google Scholar
Lederberg, J. (1956). Prospects for a genetics of somatic and tumor cells. Ann. N.Y. Acad. Sci. 63, 662–665.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mitchison, N. A. (1956). Antigens of heterozygous tumours as material for the study of cell heredity. Proc. roy. Phsy. Soc. 25, 45–48.Google Scholar
Murphy, J. B. (1912). Transplantability of malignant tumors to the embryo of a foreign species. J. Amer. med. Ass. 59, 874–875.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Puck, T. T. (1957). The genetics of somatic mammalian cells. Advanc. biol. med. Phys. 5, 75–101.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Puck, T. T. (1958 a). Action of radiation on mammalian cells. III: Relationship between reproductive death and induction of chromosome anomalies by X-irradiation of euploid and human cells in vitro. Proc. nat. Acad. Sci., Wash., 44, 772–780.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Puck, T. T. (1958 b). Genetics of somatic mammalian cells. J. cell. comp. Physiol. 52, Suppl. 1, 287–311.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Puck, T. T. & Cieciura, S. J. (1958). Studies on the virus carrier state in mammalian cells. In Symposium on Latency and Masking in Viral and Ricketssial Infections, Burgess Publishing Co., Minneapolis, pp. 74–79.Google Scholar
Puck, T. T., Cieciura, S. J. & Fisher, H. W. (1957). Clonal growth in vitro of human cells with fibroblastic morphology. Comparison of growth and genetic characteristics of single epitheliod and fibroblast-like cells from a variety of human organs. J. exp. Med. 106, 145–147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Puck, T. T. & Fisher, H. W. (1956). Genetics of somatic mammalian cells. I: Demonstration of the existence of mutants with different growth requirements in a human cancer cell strain (He La). J. exp. Med. 104, 427–434.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Puck, T. T. & Marcus, P. I. (1955). A rapid method for viable cell titration and clone production with He La cells in tissue culture. The use of X-irradiated cells to supply conditioning factors. Proc. nat. Acad. Sci., Wash., 41, 432–437.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Puck, T. T., Marcus, P. I. & Cieciura, S. J. (1956). Clonal growth of mammalian cells in vitro. Growth characteristics of clones from single He La cells with and without a ‘feeder’ layer. J. exp. Med. 103, 273–284.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reed, L. J. & Meunch, H. (1938). A simple method of estimating fifty per cent end points. Amer. J. Hygiene, 27, 493–497.Google Scholar
Sachs, L. & Gallily, R. (1956). The chromosomes and transplantability of tumours. II: Chromosome duplication and the loss of strain specificity. J. nat. Cancer Inst. 16, 803–840.Google ScholarPubMed
Snell, G. D. (1948). Methods for the study of histocompatibility genes. J. Genet. 49, 87–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Snell, G. D. (1953). Analysis of the histocompatibility-2 locus in the mouse. J. nat. Cancer Inst. 14, 457–458.Google ScholarPubMed
Snell, G. D. (1955). Isogenic resistant (IR) lines of mice. Transplant. Bull. 2, 6–8.Google Scholar
Vinegar, R. (1956). Metachromatic differential fluorochroming of living and dead ascites cells with Acridine Orange. Cancer Res. 16, 900–906.Google ScholarPubMed
Yerganian, G. (1956). Action of triethylene melamine on tumour chromosomes of the Chinese hamster, Cricetulus griseus. Proc. int. Symp. Genet. Cytologia Suppl. 206–209.Google Scholar