Advertisement

The Source of Cells within Different Areas of Lymph Nodes Draining the Site of Primary Stimulation with a Contact Sensitizing Agent

  • Delphine M. V. Parrott
  • Maria A. B. de Sousa
Part of the Advances in Experimental Medicine and Biology book series (AEMB, volume 5)

Abstract

The cortex of the mouse lymph node can be clearly divided into two areas, a peripheral area of primary nodules, which are round, packed aggregations of lymphocytes, and midcortical area containing lymphocytes spread as a loose, wide sheet rather than as nodular aggregations like the periphery. The latter area of the lymph node, the paracortical area of Oort and Turk [1], has been called thymus- dependent for the following reasons: The depletion of lymphocytes seen in the lymph nodes of mice thymectomized at birth is primarily restricted to the paracortical area, leaving the primary nodules and medullary area relatively unaffected [2]. Autoradiographic studies have demonstrated that thymus cells, whether labeled in vitro with 3H-adenosine and injected intravenously [2] or emigrating from a thymus graft labeled in vivo with 3H-thymidine [3] or from a thymus labeled in situ with 3H-thymidine [4], localize almost exclusively in the thymus-dependent areas of lymph nodes, often close to the postcapillary venules.

Keywords

Lymphoid Tissue Spleen Cell Mouse Lymph Node Blast Cell Small Lymphocyte 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    J. Oort and J. L. Turk, Brit. J. Exptl. Pathol., 49:147, 1965.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    D. M. V. Parrott, M. A. B. de Sousa, and J. East, J. Exptl. Med., 123:191, 1966.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    D. M. V. Parrott and M. A. B. de Sousa, Immunology, 13:193, 1967.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    I. L. Weissman, J. Exptl. Med., 126:291, 1967.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    R. J. Scothorne and I. A. McGregor, J. Anat., 89:283, 1955.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    D. M. V. Parrott, J. Clin. Pathol., 20, (Suppl.):456, 1967.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    A. Fjelde and J. L. Turk, Nature, 205:813, 1965.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    J. East and D. M. V. Parrott, J. Natl. Cancer Inst., 33:673, 1964.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    D. M. V. Parrott and M. A. B. de Sousa, Nature, 212:1316, 1966.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    I. Goldschneider and D. D. McGregor, Lab. Invest., 18:397, 1968.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    B. M. Gesner and J. L. Gowans, Brit. J. Exptl. Pathol., 43:431, 1962.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    G. F. Mitchell and J. F. A. P. Miller, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S., 59:296, 1968.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    J. L. Turk and S. H. Stone, in: Cell-bound Antibodies, p. 51, Philadelphia: Wistar Institute Press, 1963.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    J. G. Hall, J. Exptl. Med., 125:737, 1967.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    H. N. Claman, E. A. Chaperon, and R. Faser Triplett, J. Immunol., 97:828, 1966.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    D. M. V. Parrott, Proc. Roy. Soc. Med., (London) 61:863, 1968.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    A. J. S. Davies, E. Leuchars, V. Wallis, R. Marchant, and E. V. Elliott, Transplantation, 5:222, 1967.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Press 1969

Authors and Affiliations

  • Delphine M. V. Parrott
    • 1
  • Maria A. B. de Sousa
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Bacteriology and ImmunologyWestern InfirmaryGlasgowScotland

Personalised recommendations