Bulletin of Experimental Biology and Medicine

, Volume 87, Issue 3, pp 239–242 | Cite as

The parental resistance phenomenon and its genetic regulation

  • L. N. Fontalin
  • T. K. Kondrat'eva
  • T. K. Novikova
  • Z. K. Blandova
Microbiology and Immunology
  • 14 Downloads

Abstract

Lymphocytes of (CBA×M523)F1 or (A×M523)F1 mice, if transplanted into CBA or A recipients irradiated in a dose of 1000 rad, react to test antigens (sheep's red cells,Salmonella typhi Vi-antigen) by the formation of only 1/100–1/1000 of the number of antibody-forming cells formed by syngeneic recipients. An intermediate result was observed after transplantation of the same cells into irradiated M523 recipients. Conversely, lymphocytes of (A×CBA)F1, (CBA×C57BL/6)F1, or (A×A.CA)F1 mice gave an equal immune response in syngeneic recipients and in CBA or A recipients. The ability of M523 lymphocytes or their hybrids to give an immune response to sheep's red cells did not differ from the immuno-reactivity of lymphocytes of other lines either in situ or in a syngeneic adoptive system. Hematopoietic stem cells from (CBA×M523)F1 mice formed only 40–50% of the number of colonies in the CBA spleen as in the spleen of syngeneic recipients. It is concluded that the M523 mutation interferes with the proliferation and differentiation of hematopoietic cells and lymphocytes in nonsyngeneic irradiated recipients.

Key Words

allogeneic inhibition hybrid resistance parental resistance 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Literature Cited

  1. 1.
    Z. K. Blandova et al., Immunogenetics,2, 291 (1975).Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    S. S. Gambarov and I. N. Golovistikov, Byull. Éksp. Biol. Med., No. 9, 109 (1973).Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    A. A. Korukova, Byull. Éksp. Biol. Med., No. 12, 103 (1971).Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    E. I. Pantelev and O. S. Egorova, in: General Problems in Pathology [in Russian], Vol. 3, Moscow (1972), pp. 44–84.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    L. N. Fontalin, T. K. Novikova, I. K. Egorov, et al., Dokl. Akad. Nauk SSSR,225, 958 (1975).Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    H. N. Claman, E. A. Chaperon, and L. L. Hayes, Transplantation,7, 87 (1969).Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    G. Cudcowicz and J. H. Stimpfling, Immunology,7, 291 (1964).Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    N. K. Jerne and A. A. Nordin, Science,140, 405 (1963).Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    J. Klein, J. Formam, V. Hauptfeld, et al., J. Immunol.,115, 716 (1975).Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    A. Lengerova, V. Matousek, and V. Zeleny, Transplant. Rev.,15, 89 (1973).Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    E. Lotzova, Exp. Hematol.,5, 215 (1977).Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    E. A. McCulloch and J. E. Till, J. Cell. Comp. Physiol.,61, 301 (1963).Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    G. D. Snell, Transplant. Proc.,8, 147 (1976).Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    D. E. Uphoff, in: Transplantation Today, Vol. 2, New York (1973), pp. 197–199.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Publishing Corporation 1979

Authors and Affiliations

  • L. N. Fontalin
  • T. K. Kondrat'eva
  • T. K. Novikova
  • Z. K. Blandova

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations