Skip to main content
Log in

Collaboration between in vivo responses to LD and SD antigens of major histocompatibility complex

  • Letter
  • Published:

From Nature

View current issue Submit your manuscript

Abstract

STUDIES using mixed leukocyte culture (MLC) and cell mediated lympholysis (CML) tests, have suggested a possible differential role for LD and SD antigens associated with the major histocompatibility complex (MHC, H–2 in mouse) in allograft reactions1–3. LD differences are primarily responsible for stimulating the proliferative response in MLC; the SD antigens are the major targets in CML1. The presence of LD differences on the stimulating cell in MLC enhances the cytotoxic response against the SD antigens. The cellular basis for this potentiation of CML is that two separate subpopulations of T lymphocytes are differentially reactive to LD and SD antigens1,3–5. A proliferating helper cell responds primarily to LD differences whereas cytotoxic T lymphocytes are more strongly activated by the SD antigens. Lafferty et al.7 and Talmage et al.10 have shown that allogeneic thyroids transplanted under the kidney kapsule are rejected less rapidly if they are first cultured in vitro. Injection of peritoneal exudate cells from the thyroid donor into the recipient speeds up rejection. They suggest that the peritoneal exudate cells sensitise the recipient and that the sensitised cells can invade and reject the thyroid. A further refinement in the interpretation of their data might suggest that either in addition to the mechanism they propose or as an alternative to it the peritoneal exudate cells provide an LD stimulus to the recipient's proliferating helper T cells, and that these cells either by themselves or through a secreted helper factor potentiate the development of cytotoxic T lymphocytes directed at the SD antigens on the graft. Our experiments reported here are consistent with this model.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Bach, F. H., Bach, M. L., and Sondel, P. M., Nature, 259, 273–281 (1976).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Bach, F. H., et al., Immune Recognition (edit. by Rosenthal, A. S.), 175–199 (Academic, New York, 1975).

    Google Scholar 

  3. Bach, F. H., et al., Science, 180, 403–406 (1973).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Wagner, H., Röllinghoff, M., and Nosall, G. J. V., Transplant Rev., 17, 3–36 (1973).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Cantor, H., and Boyse, E. A., J. exp. Med., 141, 1390–1399 (1975).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Lafferty, K. J., Cooley, M. A., Woolnough, J., and Walker, K. Z., Science, 188, 259–261 (1975).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Schendel, D. J., and Bach, F. H., J. exp. Med., 140, 1534–1546 (1974).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Davies, D. A. L., and Alkins, B. J., Nature., 247, 294–296 (1974).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Staines, N. A., and Davies, D. A. L., Histocompatibility Testing 1975 (edit. by Kissmever-Nielsen, F.) (Munksgaard, Copenhagen, in the press).

  10. Talmage, D. W., Dart, G., and Lafferty, K. J., Science, 191, 385–387 (1976).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

SOLLINGER, H., BACH, F. Collaboration between in vivo responses to LD and SD antigens of major histocompatibility complex. Nature 259, 487–488 (1976). https://doi.org/10.1038/259487a0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/259487a0

  • Springer Nature Limited

This article is cited by

Navigation