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

  • J. Chemnitz
  • P. Skaaring
Original Works


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 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  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