Effect of <i>Hymenolepis</i> nana infection on immunological responses of mice to sRBC

, Rhee, J K; , Youk, S Y; , Park, B K

doi:1989.27.1.23

Korean J Parasito > Volume 27(1):1989 > Article

Original Article


Korean J Parasitol. 1989 Mar;27(1):23-33. English. Published online Mar 20, 1994. http://dx.doi.org/10.3347/kjp.1989.27.1.23
Copyright © 1989 by The Korean Society for Parasitology


Effect of Hymenolepis nana infection on immunological responses of mice to sRBC
J K Rhee,S Y Youk and B K Park
Department of Veterinary Parasitology, School of Veterinary Medicine, Chonbuk National University, Chonju 560-756, Korea.


Abstract
In an attempt to investigate the effect of Hymenolepis nana infection on immunological responses to sRBC in ICR strain of mice, cellular and humoral immune responses were chronologically monitored after sensitization with sRBC. Mice weighing about 20 g were allocated into artificial and natural infection groups. The shell-free eggs of H. nana were inoculated into mice on the day 0 (initial) and day 10 in the former group, and praziquantel (25 mg/kg/day) was administered for 3 days to the one half of the mice at the 15th day after the first inoculation and to all of the mice in natural infection group. In artificial infection group, the delayed-type hypersensitivity (DTH) to sRBC was considerably decreased on the day 10 after the first inoculation, and then elevated gradually to normal. Eosinophils in the peripheral blood increased slightly. The hemagglutinin (HA) and hemolysin (HE) titers during the early stage were shown to be more or less higher than those of control. Thereafter, the titers were returned to normal, followed by a transient decrease on the day 15 post-infection. The sRBC rosette and antibody-treated rosette-forming capacities on the day 15 post-infection were temporarily lowered but became higher thereafter. The mucosal mast cells (MMC) in the small intestine were gradually increased to make a peak on the day 10 post-infection and then maintained more or less at lower level. After praziquantel treatment, the DTH and the number of eosinophils were decreased slightly and the MMC number and sRBC rosette-forming capacity were considerably decreased. The titers of HA and HE and antibody-treated rosette-forming capacity, however, were elevated in general. In natural infection group, the DTH, the number of eosinophils, and MMC which were elevated due to H. nana infection were gradually returned to normal after praziquantel treatment. The titers of HA and HE which were decreased by parasite infection were increased to normal after the treatment. However, the capacities of sRBC rosette or antibody-treated rosette formation were maintained at low levels in spite of the treatment. These results revealed that the immune responses to sRBC were significantly activated during H. nana infection, although they were transiently decreased during the days 10-15 post-infection.

Figures


	Fig. 1 Experimental procedure.

Tables


	Table 1 Effect of Hymenolepis nana infection on DTH to sRBC in mice


	Table 2 Effect of H. nana infection on sRBC-rosette formation of splenocytes in mice


	Table 3 Effect of H. nana infection on the distribution of eosinophil in peripheral blood of mice


	Table 4 Effect of H. nana infection on the distribution of mucosal mast cells in intestine of mice


	Table 5 Effect of H. nana infection on HA and HE antibody responses to sRBC in mice


	Table 6 Effect of H. nana infection on antibody-coated rosette formation of splenocytes to sRBC in mice

References


1.	Asano K, et al. Jpn J Parasitol 1982;31 Suppl.:25.

2.	Asano K, et al. Jpn J Parasitol 1983;32 Suppl.:53.

3.	Asano K, et al. Jpn J Parasitol 1988;37(1) Suppl.:9.

4.	Bach JF, Dardenne M. Antigen recognition by T lymphocytes. Thymus and marrow dependence of spontaneous rosette forming cells in the mouse. Cell Immunol 1972;3(1):1–10.

5.	Berntzen AK, Voge M. In Vitro Hatching Of Oncospheres Of Four Hymenolepidid Cestodes. J Parasitol 1965;51:235–242.

6.	Biozzi G, Stiffel C, Mouton D, Bouthillier Y, Decreusefond C. A kinetic study of antibody producing cells in the spleen of mice immunized intravenously with sheep erythrocytes. Immunology 1968;14(1):7–20.

7.	Boros DL, Warren KS. The bentonite granuloma. Characterization of a model system for infectious and foreign body granulomatous inflammation using soluble mycobacterial, histoplasma and schistosoma antigens. Immunology 1973;24(3):511–529.

8.	Cook RW, Williams JF. Pathology of Taenia taeniaeformis infection in the rat: gastrointestinal changes. J Comp Pathol 1981;91(2):205–217.

9.	Friedberg W, Neas BR, Faulkner DN, Congdon CC. Hymenolepis nana: intestinal tissue phase in actively immunized mice. J Parasitol 1979;65(1):61–64.

*10.*	Furukawa T, Niwa A, Miyazato T. Ultrastructural aspects of immune damage to Hymenolepis nana oncospheres in mice. Int J Parasitol 1981;11(4):287–300.

*11.*	Furukawa T, et al. Jpn J Parasitol 1983;32 Suppl.:52.

*12.*	Furukawa T, et al. Jpn J Parasitol 1987;33 Suppl.:13.

*13.*	Griffiths HJ. Some common parasites of small laboratory animals. Lab Anim 1971;5(1):123–135.

*14.*	Grove DI, Mahmoud AA, Warren KS. Eosinophils and resistance to Trichinella spiralis. J Exp Med 1;145(3):755–759.

*15.*	Gupta RK, Elizabeth SM, Kaushik SL, Johri GN. Hymenolepis nana: transfer of acquired immunity in mice through sensitized peritoneal exudate cells. Experientia 15;36(1):128–129.

*16.*	Gutierrez C, et al. Clin Exp Immunol 1976;23:258–263.

*17.*	Habermann RT, Fletcher PW Jr. The identification and control of helminths in laboratory animals. J Natl Cancer Inst 1958;20(5):979–1009.

*18.*	Heyneman D. Studies on helminth immunity. III. Experimental verification of autoinfection from cysticercoids of Hymenolepis nana in the white mouse. J Infect Dis 1961;109:10–18.

*19.*	Heyneman D. Studies on helminth immunity. I. Comparison between lumenal and tissue phases of infection in the white mouse by Hymenolepis nana (Cestoda: Hymenolepididae). Am J Trop Med Hyg 1962;11:46–63.

*20.*	Heyneman D. Studies on helminth immunity. IV. Rapid onset of resistance by the white mouse against a challenging infection with eggs of Hymenolepis nana (Cestoda: Hymenolepididae). J Immunol 1962;88:217–220.

*21.*	Higa A, et al. Jpn J Parasitol 1988;37(2):96.

*22.*	Hoole D, Mitchell JB. Gorgoderina vitelliloba: interaction with frog leucocytes in vivo and in vitro. Exp Parasitol 1984;57(3):225–233.

*23.*	Inoue T, et al. Jpn J Parasitol 1979;28(5):309–316.

*24.*	Isaak DD, Jacobson RH, Reed ND. The course of Hymenolepis nana infections in thymus-deficient mice. Int Arch Allergy Appl Immunol 1977;55(1-6):504–513.

*25.*	Ito A, et al. Jpn J Parasitol 1976;25(4):247–253.

*26.*	Ito A. Hymenolepis nana: survival in the immunized mouse. Exp Parasitol 1980;49(2):248–257.

*27.*	Ito A. Hymenolepis nana: immunogenicity of a lumen phase of the direct cycle and failure of autoinfection in BALB/c mice. Exp Parasitol 1982;54(1):113–120.

*28.*	Jang DH, et al. Seoul Nat Univ J Vet Sci 1976;1(1):85–113.

*29.*	Kano S, et al. Jpn J Parasitol 1983;32(3):183–193.

*30.*	Kierszenbaum F, Ackerman SJ, Gleich GJ. Destruction of bloodstream forms of Trypanosoma cruzi by eosinophil granule major basic protein. Am J Trop Med Hyg 1981;30(4):775–779.

*31.*	Letonja T, Hammerberg B. Third component of complement, immunoglobulin deposition, and leucocyte attachment related to surface sulfate on larval Taenia taeniaeformis. J Parasitol 1983;69(4):637–644.

*32.*	Nakamura F, et al. Jpn J Parasitol 1984;33 Suppl.:89.

*33.*	Nakamura F, et al. Jpn J Parasitol 1987;36 Suppl:46.

*34.*	Okamoto K. Jpn J Parasitol 1968;17:53–59.

*35.*	Okamoto K. Jpn J Parasitol 1985;34 Suppl.:15.

*37.*	Shimoda K, et al. Jpn J Parasitol 1982;31 Suppl.:37.

*38.*	Shinkai S, et al. Jpn J Parasitol 1984;33(2) Suppl:62–63.

*39.*	Shinkai S, et al. Jpn J Parasitol 1985;34(2) Suppl:117.

*41.*	Stavitsky AB. Micromethods for the study of proteins and antibodies. I. Procedure and general applications of hemagglutination and hemagglutination-inhibition reactions with tannic acid and protein-treated red blood cells. J Immunol 1954;72(5):360–367.

*42.*	Strobel S, Miller HR, Ferguson A. Human intestinal mucosal mast cells: evaluation of fixation and staining techniques. J Clin Pathol 1981;34(8):851–858.

*43.*	Tronchin G, Dutoit E, Vernes A, Biguet J. Oral immunization of mice with metabolic antigens of Trichinella spiralis larvae: effects on the kinetics of intestinal cell response including mast cells and polymorphonuclear eosinophils. J Parasitol 1979;65(5):685–691.

*44.*	Uchida S, et al. Jpn J Parasitol 1982;31(2):105–111.

*47.*	Williams JF. Recent advances in the immunology of cestode infections. J Parasitol 1979;65(3):337–349.

*48.*	Wilson JD. The functions of immune T and B rosette-forming cells. Immunology 1973;25:185–196.

*49.*	Yoshikai Y, Miake S, Matsumoto T, Nomoto K, Takeya K. Effect of stimulation and blockade of mononuclear phagocyte system on the delayed footpad reaction to SRBC in mice. Immunology 1979;38(3):577–583.