Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-gb8f7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-27T01:37:55.301Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A comparison of two procedures for labelling the surface of the hydatid disease organism, Echinococcus granulosus, with 125I

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 June 2009

D. P. Mcmanus ,
Diane J. Mclaren ,
N. W. T. Clark  and
R. M. E. Parkhouse
D. P. Mcmanus
Affiliation:
Department of Pure and Applied Biology, Imperial college, Prince Consort Road, London SW7 2BB;
Diane J. Mclaren
Affiliation:
Divisions of Immunology and Parasitology, National Institue for medical Research, Mill Hill, London NW7 1AA, England
N. W. T. Clark
Affiliation:
Divisions of Immunology and Parasitology, National Institue for medical Research, Mill Hill, London NW7 1AA, England
R. M. E. Parkhouse
Affiliation:
Divisions of Immunology and Parasitology, National Institue for medical Research, Mill Hill, London NW7 1AA, England
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Living, intact protoscoleces of the British horse and sheep strains of Echinococcus granulosus were subjected to surface radioiodination procedures using 125I and Iodogen and 125I-Bolton Hunter reagent. Subsequent combined electron microscopy and autoradiography revealed specific surface membrane labelling with the Iodogen procedure, but significant tegumental labelling with the Bolton-Hunter reagent. The two parasite strains yielded different profiles of electrophoretically separated labelled proteins; the Iodogen method, not surprisingly, resulted in a less complex pattern of labelled polypeptides than the Bolton and Hunter reagent.

Keywords

Echinococcus granulosushydatidradiolabelling techniquessurface proteins
Type
Research Papers
Information
Journal of Helminthology , Volume 61 , Issue 1 , March 1987 , pp. 47 - 52
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

Bolton, A.E. & Hunter, W.M. (1973) The labelling of proteins to high specific radioactivities by conjugation to a 125I-containing acylating agent. Biochemical Journal, 133, 529–538.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fraker, P.J. & Speck, J.C. Jr. (1978) Protein and cell membrane iodinations with a sparingly soluble chloroamide 1, 3, 4, 6-tetrachloro-3α, 6α-diphenylglycoluril. Biochemical Biophysical Research Communications, 80, 849–857.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hayunga, E.G., Murrell, K.D., Taylor, D.W. & Vannier, W.F. (1979) Isolation and characterization of surface antigens from Schistosoma mansoni. l: Evaluation of techniques for radioisotope labeling of surface proteins from adult worms. Journal of Parasitology, 65, 488–496.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lumsden, R.D. (1975) Surface ultrastructure and cytochemistry of parasitic helminths. Experimental Parasitology, 37, 267–339.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Marshall, E. & Howells, R.E. (1985) An evaluation of different methods for labelling the surface of the filarial nematode Brugia pahangi with 125I. Molecular and Biochemical Parasitology, 15, 295–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mclaren, D.J. (1974) The anterior glands of adult Necator americanus (Nematoda: Strongyloidea). I. Ultrastructural studies. International Journal for Parasitology, 4, 25–37.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mcmanus, D.P. & Barrett, N.J. (1985) Isolation, fractionation and partial characterisation of the tegumental surface from protoscoleces of the hydatid organism. Echinococcus granulosus. Parasitology, 90, 111–129.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mcmanus, D.P. & Macpherson, C.N.L. (1984) Strain characterisation in the hydatid organism, Echinococcus granulosus: current status and new perspectives. Annals of Tropical Medicine and Parasitology, 78, 193–198.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mcmanus, D.P. & Smyth, J.D. (1986) Hydatid disease: changing concepts in epidemiology and speciation. Parasitology Today, 2, 163–168.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Parkhouse, R.M.E., Philipp, M. & Ogilvie, B.M. (1981) Characterization of surface antigens of Trichinella spiralis infective larvae. Parasite Immunology, 3, 339–352.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Philipp, M., Parkhouse, R.M.E., & Ogilvie, B.M. (1980) Changing proteins on the surface of a parasitic nematode. Nature, 287, 538–540.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Philipp, M. & Rumjanek, F.D. (1984) Antigenis and dynamic properties of helminth surface structures. Molecular and Biochemical Parasitology, 10, 245–268.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smyth, J.D. & Davies, Z. (1974) In vitro culture of the strobilar stage of Echinococcus granulosus (sheep strain): a review of basic probpems and results. International Journal for Parasitology, 4, 631–644.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Soulsby, E.J.L. (1963) The nature and origin of the functional antigens in helminth infections. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 113, 492–509.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Thompson, R.C.A. Biology and systematics of Echinococcus. In: The Biology of Echinococcus and Hydatid Disease (editor, Thompson, R. C. A.) pp. 5–43. George Allen and Unwin, London.Google Scholar
Williams, M.A. (1977) Autoradiography and immunocytochemistry. Elsevier, North Holland, Amsterdam.Google Scholar