Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-fscjk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T11:06:32.122Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Changes in surface antigens of Hymenolepis nana during differentiation and maturation in mice

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 June 2009

A. Ito  and
K. Onitake
A. Ito
Affiliation:
Department of Parasitology, Gifu University School of Medicine, Gifu 500
K. Onitake
Affiliation:
Department of Biology, Faculty of Science, Yamagata University, Yamagata 990, Japan
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The surface antigens of oncosphere, cysticercoid, adult scolex and adult strobila (other than scolex) of Hymenolepis nana differ critically from one another. When the oncosphere of H. nana undergoes differentiation and development into the mature tapeworm, the infected mouse first produces anti-oncosphere antibody, followed by anti-cysticercoid, anti-adult scolex and finally anti-strobila (other than scolex region) antibodies of IgG, IgM and IgA isotypes as detected by indirect immunofluorescent antibody test. The parasite changed its surface antigens throughout its differentiation and maturation, and all developmental stages were recognized by the infected mouse host. However, there appeared no further changes in surface antigens during aging after maturation. The antibody responses were always delayed compared with the differentiation and maturation of the parasite.

Keywords

Hymenolepis nanasurface antigensdevelopmentmouse
Type
Research Papers
Information
Journal of Helminthology , Volume 61 , Issue 2 , June 1987 , pp. 129 - 136
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1987

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

Baer, J. G. (1971) Animal Parasites. 256 pp. Weidenfeld and Nicolson: London.Google Scholar
Isaak, D. D., Jacobson, R. H. & Reed, N. D. (1977) The course of Hymenolepis nana in thymus-deficient mice. International Archives of Allergy and Applied Immunology, 55, 504–513.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ito, A. (1980) Hymenolepis nana: Survival in the immunized mouse. Experimental Parasitology, 49, 248–257.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ito, A. (1984) Stage specific immunogens of Hymenolepis nana in mice. Journal of Helminthology, 58, 235–238.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ito, A. (1985) Thymus dependency of induced immune responses against Hymenolepis nana (cestode) using congenitally athymic nude mice. Clinical and Experimental Immunology, 60, 87–94.Google ScholarPubMed
Ito, A., Kano, S., Hioki, A., Kasuya, S. & OHTOMO, H. (1986) Reduced fecundity of Hymenolepis nana due to thymus-dependent immunological responses in mice. International Journal for Parasitology, 16, 81–85.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ito, A. & Onitake, K. (1986) Complete resistance to challenge with Hymenolepis nana cysticercoids derived from mouse, rat and beetle in mice. International Journal for Parasitology, 16, in press.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ito, A. & Onitake, K. (1987) Hymenolepis diminuta and H. nana: cross immunity against the lumen phase in BALB/c mice. Experimental Parasitology, in press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ito, A. & Smyth, J. D. (1987) Adult cestodes. Immunology of the lumen-dwelling cestode infections. In: Immune Responses in Parasitic Infection: Immunology, Immunopathology, and Immunoprophylaxis (editor, Soulsby, E. J. L.) Vol. 2, Chapter 5, in press. CRC Press: Boca Raton.Google Scholar
Lumsden, R. D. (1975) Surface ultrastructure and cytochemistry of parasitic helminths. Experimental Parasitology, 37, 267–339.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lumsden, R. D., Voge, M. & Sogandares-Bernal, F. (1982) The metacestode tegument: Fine structure, development, topochemistry, and interactions with the host. In: Cysticercosis: Present State of Knowledge and Perspectives (editors, Flisser, A., Willms, K., Laclette, J. P., Larralde, C., Rindaura, C. & Bertran, F.) pp. 307–361. Academic Press: New York.Google Scholar
Mcmanus, D. P. & Barrett, N. J. (1985) Isolation, fractionation and partial characterization of the tegumental surface from protoscoleces of the hydatid organism, Echinococcus granulosus. Parasitology, 90, 111–129.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rickard, M. D. (1983) Immunity. In: Biology of the Eucestoda (editors, Arme, C. & Pappas, P. W.) pp. 539–579. Academic Press: London.Google Scholar
Smyth, J. D. (1967) Studies on tapeworm physiology. XI. In vitro cultivation of Echinococcus granulosus from the protoscolex to the strobilate stage. Parasitology, 57, 111–133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williams, J. F. (1982) Cestode infections. In: Immunology of Parasitic Infections (editors, Cohen, S. & Warren, K. S.) pp. 676–714. Blackwell: Oxford.Google Scholar