Advertisement

The Lymphocyte Uropod: A Specialized Surface Site for Immunologic Recognition

  • Alan S. Rosenthal
  • David L. Rosenstreich
Part of the Biomembranes book series (B, volume 5)

Abstract

Functional specialization of the cell surface of motile protozoa such as the Paramecium and amoeba are generally recognized (Ambrose and Forrester, 1968; Wolpert and Gin-gell, 1968). Less well appreciated is the existence of differentiated surface membranes on mammalian leukocytes. In this laboratory we have been interested in a modification of the lymphocyte surface called the uropod, an area consisting of microvillus projections of cell membrane adjacent to the golgi-associated cell pole. The cytoplasm contained in the uropod is rich in microtubules, mitochondria, endoplasmic reticulum, and numerous endocytic vesicles, and is quite distinct from the pseudopod region which contains few such subcellular organelles. Moreover, the uropod is not engaged in cell motility as is the pseudopod. The lymphocyte surface membrane functions in immunologic recognition, cell cooperation, and cell-mediated cytotoxicity in an as yet undefined manner. Circumstantial evidence suggests that the uropod may represent the site of such interactions.

Keywords

Surface Immunoglobulin Chang Liver Cell Experimental Allergic Neuritis Immunologic Recognition Phonuclear Leukocyte 
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. Ambrose, E. J., and Forrester, J. A., 1968, Electrical phenomena associated with cell movements, Symposia of the Society of Experimental Biology: Aspects of cell motility 22:237.Google Scholar
  2. Åström, K. E., Webster, H. D. F., and Arnason, B. G., 1968, The initial lesion in experimental allergic neuritis: A phase and electron microscopy study, J. Exp. Med., 128:469.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Ax, W., Malchow, H., Zeiss, I., and Fischer, H., 1968, The behaviour of lymphocytes in the process of target cell destruction in vitro, Exp. Cell Res. 53:108.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bain, B., Vas, M. R., and Lowenstein, L., 1964, The development of large immature mononuclear cells in mixed leukocyte culture, Blood 23: 108.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Basten, A., Miller, J. F. A. P., Sprent, J., and Pye, J., 1972, A receptor for antibody on B lymphocytes. I. Method of detection and functional significance, J. Exp. Med. 135:610.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bianco, C., Patrick, R., and Nussensweig, V., 1970, A population of lymphocytes bearing a membrane receptor for antigen-antibody-complement complexes. I. Separation and characterization, J. Exp. Med. 132:702.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Biberfeld, P., 1971a, Cytotoxic interaction of phytohaemagglutinin stimulated blood lymphocytes with monolayer cells. A study by light and electron microscopy, Cell Immunol., 2:54.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Biberfeld, P., 1971b, Uropod formation in phytohaemagglutinin (PHA) stimulated lymphocytes, Exp. Cell Res. 66:433.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bunting, C. H., and Houston, J., 1921, Fate of lymphocytes, Exp. Med. 33: 593.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Burnet, F. M., 1959, The Clonal Selection Theory of Acquired Immunity, Vanderbilt University Press, Nashville, Tennessee.Google Scholar
  11. DeBruyn, P. P. H., 1944, Locomotion of blood cells in tissue cultures, Anat. Record 89:43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Good, R. A., 1972, Structure-function relations in the lymphoid system, Clin. Immunobiol. 1:1.Google Scholar
  13. Jennings, H. S., 1904, The Movements and Reactions of Amoeba, Carnegie Institute Publishers 16:129, Washington, D. C.Google Scholar
  14. Katz, D. H., and Benacerraf, B., 1972, The regulatory influence of activated T cells on B cell responses to antigen, Advan. Immunol. 15:1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Landsteiner, K., and Chase, M. W., 1942, Experimental transfer of cutaneous hypersensitivity to simple compounds, Proc. Soc. Exp. Biol. Med. 49:688.Google Scholar
  16. Lewis, W. H., 1931, Locomotion of lymphocytes, Bull. Johns Hopkins Hosp., 49:29.Google Scholar
  17. Loor, R., Forni, L., and Pernis, B., 1972, The dynamic state of the lymphocyte membrane. Factors affecting the redistribution and turnover of surface immunoglobulins. Eur. J. Immunol. 2:203.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Matter, B., Lisowska-Bernstein, B., Ryser, J. E., Lamelin, J. P., and Vassalli, P., 1972, Mouse thymus-independent and thymus-derived lymphoid cells. II. ltrastructural studies, J. Exp. Med. 136:1008.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. McFarland, W., and Schechter, G. P., 1970, The lymphocyte in immunological reactions in vitro: Ultrastructural studies, Blood 35:683.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. McFarland, W., Heilman, D. H., and Moorhead, J. F., 1967, Functional anatomy of the lymphocyte in immunological reactions in vitro, J. Exp. Med. 124:851.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Murphy, J. B., and Ellis, A. W. M., 1914, Experiments on the role of lymphoid tissue in the resistance to experimental tuberculosis in mice, J. Exp. Med. 20:397.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Murphy, J. B., and Taylor, H. D., 1919, The lymphocyte in natural and induced resistance to transplanted cancer, J. Exp. Med. 28:1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Paul, W. E., 1973, Antigen recognition and cell receptor sites, in: Defense and Recognition. (R. R. Porter, ed.), Medical and Technologic Publishers Co. Ltd., Aylesbury, England.Google Scholar
  24. Ramsay, W. S., 1972, Locomotion of human polymorphonuclear leukocyte, Exp. Cell Res. 72:489.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Rosenthal, A. S., Davie, J. M., Rosenstreich, D. L., and Blake, J. T., 1972, Depletion of antibody-forming cells and their precursors from complex lymphoid cell populations, J. Immunol. 108:219.Google Scholar
  26. Rosenstreich, D. L., Blake, J. T., and Rosenthal, A. S., 1971, The peritoneal exudate lymphocyte. I. Differences in antigen responsiveness between peritoneal exudate and lymph node lymphocytes in the guinea pig, J. Exp. Med. 134:1170.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Rosenstreich, D. L., Shevach, E., Green, I., and Rosenthal, A. S., 1972, The uropod-bearing lymphocyte of the guinea pig: Evidence for thymic origin, J. Exp. Med. 135:1037.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Salvin, S. B., Sell, S., and Nishiu, J., 1971, Activity in vitro of lymphocytes and macrophages in delayed hypersensitivity, J. Immunol. 107:655.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Sell, S., and Gell, P. G. H., 1965, Studies on rabbit lymphocytes in vitro. I. Stimulation of blast transformation with an antiallotype serum, J. Exp. Med. 122:423.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Starzl, T. E., and Putnam, C. W., 1972, Transplantation immunology, Clin. Immunobiol. 1:75.Google Scholar
  31. Taylor, A. C., and Robbins, E., 1963, Observations on microextensions from the surface of isolated vertebrate cells, Develop. Biol. 7:660.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Taylor, R. B., Duffus, P. H., Raff, M. C., and dePetris, S., 1971, Redistribution and pinocytosis of lymphocyte surface immunoglobulin molecules induced by anti-immunoglobulin antibody, Nature (New Biology) 233: 225.Google Scholar
  33. Weiss, P., 1961, From cell to molecule, in: The Molecular Control of Cellular Activity(J. M. Allen, ed.), pp. 1–72, McGraw-Hill, New York.Google Scholar
  34. Wiseman, B. K., 1931, The induction of lymphocytosis and lymphatic hyperplasia by means of parentally administered protein, J. Exp. Med. 53: 499.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Wolpert, L., and Gingell, D., 1968, Cell surface membrane and amoeboid movement, Symposia of the Society of Experimental Biology: Aspects of Cell Motility 22:169.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Press, New York 1974

Authors and Affiliations

  • Alan S. Rosenthal
    • 1
    • 2
  • David L. Rosenstreich
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Laboratory of Clinical Investigation, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious DiseasesNational Institutes of HealthBethesdaUSA
  2. 2.Laboratory of Microbiology and Immunology, National Institute of Dental ResearchNational Institutes of HealthBethesdaUSA

Personalised recommendations