Advertisement

Some Effects of Divalent Cations on In Vitro Phagocytosis

  • G. V. Metzger
  • L. J. Casarett
Part of the Advances in Experimental Medicine and Biology book series (AEMB, volume 1)

Abstract

An in vitro investigation of phagocytosis by rat peritoneal macrophages is reported. Some effects of divalent cations on binding and engulfment of several metal oxides and carbon particles are described.

Calcium and magnesium concentrations were varied by the treatment of protein-free Tyrodes medium with EDTA or ion-exchange resin in preliminary studies, and by the addition to 0.145 M NaCl. Removal of Ca++resuited in a consistent decrease of the phagocytic index (expressed as percentage of cells containing particles). Conversely, addition of Ca++, within limits, enhanced the phagocytic index with a peak effect at 10−4M for metal oxide particles studied. In all cases, Mg++ did not significantly change the phagocytic index from control levels (with 0.145 M NaCl and no divalent ions). Unlike the metal oxides, Ca++ did not significantly change the phagocytic index from control levels for the carbon particles.

Additional experiments on the variation of the phagocytic index as a function of time, incubating medium, particle-concentration, and type, are described. These experiments were carried out to determine whether Ca++ increased the “rate” of phagocytosis, or the total number of cells phagocytizing. The binding of cells to various surfaces was also investigated as a function of divalent ion concentrations.

The possible mechanisms of the actions of Ca++ in the phagocytic process are discussed in the light of the data presented.

Keywords

Anionic Group Divalent Cation Peritoneal Macrophage Carbon Particle Fe203 Particle 
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.
    G.B. Gordon and D. W. King, “Phagocytosis,” Am.J. Pathol., 37: 279–292, 1960.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    P.L. Carpenter, Immunology and Serology, Philadelphia, Saunders, 1965, pp. 296–316.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Z.A. Cohn, “The metabolism and physiology of the mononuclear phagocytes,” in: B.W. Zweifach, L. Grant, and R.T. McCluskey (Eds.), The Inflammatory Process, New York, Academic Press, 1965, pp. 323–353.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    D. Rowley, “Phagocytosis,” Adv.Immunol., 2: 241–264, 1962.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    H.J. Hamburger, Physikalisch-chemische untersuchungen über phagozyten, Wiesbaden, 1912.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    S. Mudd, M. McCutcheon, and B. Lucké, “Phagocytosis,” Physiol. Rev., 14: 210–275, 1934.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    F. Neufield and R. Etinger-Tulcyznska, “Beitrag zur Wirkungsweise der phagozytosserregenden immunkörper,” Zentr. Bakteriol. Parasitenk. Abt. I. Orig., 114: 252–263, 1929.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    W.J. Nungester and A.M. Ames, “Effect of selected chemical substances on phagocytosis,” J. Infect. Diseases, 90: 51–60, 1952.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    J. Gordon and F.C. Thompson, “The artificial opsonization of bacteria,” Brit. J. Exptl. Pathol., 17: 159–163, 1936.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    D.J. Wilkins and A.D. Bangham, “The effect of some metal ions on in vitro phagocytosis, ” J. Reticuloendothelial Soc., 1: 233–242, 1964.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    W.O. Fenn, “The phagocytosis of solid particles. II. Carbon,” J.Gen. Physiol., 3: 465–482, 1920–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    S. Boyden, “Cellular recognition of foreign matter,” Intern. Rev. Exptl. Pathol., 2: 311–356, 1963.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    A.D. Bangham, B.A. Pethica, and G.V.F. Seaman, The charged groups at the interface of some blood cells,” Biochem. J., 69: 12–19, 1958.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    J.N. Mehrishi and G. V. F. Seaman, “Temperature dependence of the electrophoretic mobility of cells and quartz particles,” Biochim. Biophys.Acta, 112: 154–159, 1966.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    A.D. Bangham and B.A. Pethica, “The adhesiveness of cells and the nature of the chemical groups at their surfaces,” Proc. Roy. Soc. Edinburgh, Sect. A, 28: 43–50, 1959.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    G. M.W. Cook, “Sialis acids and the electrokinetic charge of the human erythrocytes,” Nature, 191: 44–45, 1961.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    E. Granzer, G. F. Fuhrman, and G. Ruhenstroth-Bauer, “Untersuchungen über die mit Neuraminidase abspaltbaren Neuraminsäurederivate aus Oberflackenmenbranen normaler Leberzellen und Asciteshepatomzellen von Ratten, ‘Hoppe-Seylers Z. Phisol. Chem., 337: 52–56, 1964.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    H. A. Abramson, “Electrokinetic phenomena. I. Adsorption of serum by quartz and paraffin oil,” J. Gen. Physiol., 13: 169–177, 1929.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    S. Glasstone, Textbook of Physical Chemistry, New York, D. Van Nostrand Co.,Inc., 1946, pp. 1238–1243.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    A. Katchalsky, “Polyelectrolytes and their biological interactions,” Biophys.J., 4: 9–41, 1964.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    F. Allison, Jr., M.G. Lancaster, and J. L. Crosthwaite, “Studies on the pathogenesis of acute inflammation. V. An assessment of factors that influence in vitro the phagocytic and adhesive properties of leucocytes obtained from rabbit peritoneal exudate,” Am. J. Pathol., 43: 775–795, 1963.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    J. E. Garvin, “Factors affecting the adhesiveness of human leucocytes and platelets in vitro,” J. Exp. Med., 114: 51–73, 1961.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1967

Authors and Affiliations

  • G. V. Metzger
    • 1
  • L. J. Casarett
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Radiation Biology and BiophysicsUniversity of Rochester Medical CenterRochesterUSA

Personalised recommendations