Response of Earthworm Leukocytes to Concanavalin a and Transplantation Antigens

  • Ph. Roch
  • P. Valembois
  • L. Du Pasquier
Part of the Advances in Experimental Medicine and Biology book series (AEMB, volume 64)


There are several reasons to believe that rejection of both allogenic and xenogenic tissues by earthworms is due to an active immune response: a second graft from a same donor to a same receptor is more actively rejected (1); graft immunity can be transfered by coelomic cells from a sensitized animal to a non sensitized one (2). Coelomic cells, which are the free cells of the coelomic cavity, mainly consist in leukocyte-like cells. The leukocytes undoubtly play a prominent role in graft rejection in earthworms: it seems that they recognize the immunogenic stimulus and then proliferate and differentiate into cells that attack the grafted tissues (3). In vertebrates, specific recognition is achieved by a special group of leukocytes, the lymphocytes (4), that generally proliferate after antigenic stimulation. The leukocytes can also exibit an increase of DNA synthesis after a wound. But, in vertebrates, stimulated cells involved in inflammation are different from lymphocytes. In order to check whether graft reaction in earthworms was different from inflammatory process, we have compared the leukocyte stimulation induced by wound with that occuring after graft. The quantitative aspects of the stimulation have been investigated as well as the nature of the stimulated cells.


Tritiated Thymidine Coelomic Cavity Active Immune Response Graft Reaction Xenogenic Tissue 
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.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Valembois, P., Comp. Rend. Acad. Sci. Paris, 257: 3489–3490 (1963).Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Duprat, P., Ann. Inst. Pasteur, 113: 867–881 (1967).Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Valembois, P., Contemporary Topics Immunobio1., 4: 121–126 (1974).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Gowans, J.L., Mac Gregor, D.D., Cowen, D.M. and Ford, C.E., Nature London, 196: 651–655 (1962).PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Nowell, P.C., Cancer Res., 20: 462–466 (1960).PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ling, N.R., Lymphocyte stimulation (North Holland Publ. Co., Amsterdan, 1968).Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Peavy, D.L., Adler, W.H. and Smith, R.T., J. Immunol., 105: 1453–1458 (1970).PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Janossy, G. and Greaves, M.F., Clin. exp. Immunol., 9: 483–494 (1971).PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Avel, M., Bull. Biol. France et Belgique, 63: 149–318 (1929).Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Valembois, P., Roch, Ph. and Du Pasquier, L., Comp. Rend. Acad. Sci. Paris, 277: 57–60 (1973).Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Gay, R., Ann. Epiphyties, 14: 61–75 (1963).Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Borer, A., Doctoral Thesis, Department Biology, St Bonaventure University, N. Y., 1–102 (1968).Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Cooper, E.L., in Proc. 3d Intern. Colloquium on Invert. Tissue Culture, Bratislava, 381–404, June 1971 (1973).Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Agrawal, B.B.L. and Goldstein, I.J., Biochem. J., 96: 23–25 (1965).Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Salpeter, M.M. and Bachmann, L., J. Cell Biol., 22: 469–476 (1964).PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Wisse, E. and Tates, A.D., in Proc. 4th Europ. Reg. Conf. Electron Microscopy, Rome, 465-466 (1968).Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Novogrodsky, A. and Katchalski, E., Biochim. Biophys. Acta, 228: 579–583 (1971).PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Goldstein, I.J., Hollerman, C.E. and Smith, E.E., Biochem., 4: 876–883 (1965).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Andersson, J., Sjoberg, O. and Moller, G., Transplant. Rev., 11: 131–177 (1972).PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Good, R.A., J. exp. Med., 119: 105–130 (1964).PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Roch, Ph., Doctorat 3me Cycle Biologie n° 1077, Université de Bordeaux 1, 1-70 (1973).Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Valembois, P., Bull. Soc. zool. France, 96: 59–72 (1971).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1975

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ph. Roch
    • 1
    • 2
  • P. Valembois
    • 1
    • 2
  • L. Du Pasquier
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Laboratoire de Zoologie A de l’Université de Bordeaux 1Centre de Morphologie Expérimentale du CNRSTalenceFrance
  2. 2.Basel Institute for ImmunologyBaselSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations