Bulletin of Experimental Biology and Medicine

, Volume 84, Issue 4, pp 1444–1448 | Cite as

Electron-microscopic study of interaction between cytolytic T lymphocytes and target cells

  • S. N. Bykovskaya
  • A. F. Bykovskii
  • A. V. Sergeev
  • L. M. Luchanskaya
  • A. A. Ivanov
  • M. O. Raushenbakh
Microbiology and Immunology


Thymocytes stimulatedin vitro in mixed culture were adsorbed by centrifugation on to the surface of target cells for an electron-microscopic study of the cytology of immune T lymphocytes and of the early stages of cytolysis. A well-developed Golgi apparatus and clusters of tubular structures 50–60 nm in diameter, communicating with the cisternae of the granular endoplasmic reticulum, with “emptied” vesicles, and with the plasma membrane of the lymphocyte, were found in the cytoplasm of the lymphocytes. Over a wide area the plasma membrane formed numerous contacts with the membrane of the target cells, so that closed slit-like spaces were formed. With these data and also modern views regarding interconversion of membranes and intracellular transport in mind, a hypothetical scheme for the mechanism of cytolysis of the target cell by the immune T lymphocyte is suggested.

Key Words

T lymphocytes cytolysis ultrastructure 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Literature Cited

  1. 1.
    S. N. Bykovskaya, A. V. Sergeev, L. M. Luchanskaya, et al., Byull. Éksp. Biol. Med., No. 9, 330 (1977).Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    S. N. Sura, I. Yu. Chernyakhovskaya, Z. G. Kadagidze, et al., Exp. Cell Res.,48, 656 (1966).Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    A. Frey-Wyssling, Comparative Organellography of the Cytoplasm [Russian translation], Moscow (1976).Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    L. S. Andersson, Scand. J. Immunol.,2, 75 (1973).Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    G. Berke and D. B. Amos, Transplant. Rev.,17, 71 (1973).Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    G. Berke, K. A. Sullivan, and B. Amos, J. Exp. Med.,135, 1334 (1972).Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    J. C. Cerottini and K. T. Brunner, Adv. Immunol.,18, 67 (1974).Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    A. J. Dalton, Anat. Rec.,12, 281 (1955).Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    C. S. Henney, J. Reticuloend. Soc.,17, 231 (1975).Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    H. S. Koren, W. Ax, and E. Freund-Moelbert, Eur. J. Immunol.,3, 1 (1973).Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    E. Martz, J. Immunol.,115, 261 (1975).Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    A. Matter, B. Lisowska-Bernstein, J. E. Ryser, et al., J. Exp. Med.,136, 1008 (1972).Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    J. Verluga and A. C. Alisson, Nature (London),258, 708 (1975).Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    E. W. Waterfield, A. Anaclerio, and G. Moller, Transplant. Rev.,29, 278 (1976).Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    B. D. Wilson, J. Exp. Med.,122, 143 (1965).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Publishing Corporation 1978

Authors and Affiliations

  • S. N. Bykovskaya
  • A. F. Bykovskii
  • A. V. Sergeev
  • L. M. Luchanskaya
  • A. A. Ivanov
  • M. O. Raushenbakh

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations