Advertisement

Tumor cell interactions in vitro microtubules, 100 å filaments, and contractile microfilaments of tumor cells involved in “emperipolesis”

  • J. Chemnitz
  • P. Skaaring
Original Works

Summary

An increase in the number of examples of emperiopolesis, i. e., cells within cells, was observed subsequently to addition of Bt2cAMP to spinner flask cultures of JB-1-E tumor cells. A conspicuous arrangement of microtubules and 100 Å filaments in the tumor cells involved in emperiopelesis was observed. Absence of emperipolesis in cultures treated with cytochalasin B indicates a possible role of the contractile microfilaments in the events leading to emperiopolesis. The significance of and the term emperipolesis are discussed.

Key words

Cell interaction Tumor cells Emperipolesis Microtubules 100 Å filaments Spinner flask cultures 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Arborgh, B., Bell, P., Brunk, U., Collins, V.P.: The osmotic effect of glutaraldehyde during fixation. A transmission electron microscopy, scanning electron microscopy and cytochemical study. J. Ultrastruct. Res. 56, 339–350 (1976)Google Scholar
  2. Bichel, P., Barfod, N.M., Jakobsen, A.: Employment of synchronized cells and flow microfluorometry in investigations on the JB-1 ascites tumor chalones. Virchows Arch. B Cell Path. 19, 127–133 (1975)Google Scholar
  3. Chemnitz, J., Bichel, P.: Tumor cell — tumor cell emperipolesis studied by transmission electron microscopy. Exp. Cell Res. 82, 319–324 (1973)Google Scholar
  4. Chemnitz, J., Salmberg, K.: Interrelationship between annulate lamellae and the cytoplasmic microtubule complex in tumor cells in vivo and in vitro. Z. Krebsforsch. 90, 175–185 (1977)Google Scholar
  5. Chemnitz, J., Skaaring, P., Bichel, P.: Increasing occurrence of tumor cell — tumor cell emperipolesis in the regenerating JB-1 ascites tumor. Z. Krebsforsch. 84, 89–96 (1975)Google Scholar
  6. Haemmerli, G., Felix, H., Sträuli, P.: Motility of L 5222 rat leukemia cells in the flattened state. Evidence against emeripolesis. Virchows Arch. B Cell Path. 24, 165–178 (1977)Google Scholar
  7. Humble, J. G., Jayne, W.H.W., Pulvertaft, R.S.V.: Biological interaction between lymphocytes and other cells. Brit. J. Haemal. 2, 283–294 (1956)Google Scholar
  8. Hynes, R.O., Destree, A.T.: l0 nm filaments in normal and transformed cells. Cell 13, 151–163 (1978)Google Scholar
  9. Knyrim, K., Paweletz, N.: Cell interactions in a “bilayer” of tumor cells. A scanning electron microscope study. Virchows Arch. B Cell Path. 25, 309–325 (1977)Google Scholar
  10. Luftig, R.B., McMillan, P.N., Weatherbee, J.A., Weihing, R.R.: Increased visualization of microtubules by an improved fixation procedure. J. Histochem. Cytochem. 25, 175–187 (1977)Google Scholar
  11. Margolick, J.B., Sherwin, R.P.: Lymphocytocidal lymphocyte trapping by human lymph node cells: A tissue culture-ultrastructural study. In vitro 12, 407–417 (1976)Google Scholar
  12. Schrek, R.: Sensitivity of leukaemic lymphocytes to microtubular reagents. Br. J. exp. Path. 56, 280–285 (1975)Google Scholar
  13. Takahashi, M.: Color atlas of cancer cytology. J.B. Lippincott Company, Philadelphia and Toronto 1971Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1978

Authors and Affiliations

  • J. Chemnitz
    • 1
  • P. Skaaring
    • 1
  1. 1.Winslow Institute of Human AnatomyUniversity of OdenseOdense MDenmark

Personalised recommendations