Skip to main content
Immunology logoLink to Immunology
. 1979 May;37(1):241–245.

The production of contact sensitivity by the injection into the footpads of recipients of the lymph node cells from mice 1 day after painting the skin with contact sensitizing agent: requirement for matching at the major histocompatibility complex between donor and recipient mice.

G L Asherson, B Mayhew, M A Perera
PMCID: PMC1457317  PMID: 468300

Abstract

Donor mice were painted on the skin of the abdomen with the contact sensitizing agent, oxazolone. One day later 2-5 x 10(6) cells from the regional lymph nodes were injected into the footpads of recipient mice. Contact sensitivity was detected 6 days later by challenging the ears of the recipients and measuring the increase of thickness at 24 h. Good contact sensitivity was obtained when CBA cells were injected into CBA mice and BALB/c cells injected into BALB/c mice; the injection of BALB/c (H-2d) cells into CBA (H-2k) mice and vice versa failed to give rise to contact sensitivity. Hybrid F1 cells gave intermediate responses. The contact sensitivity caused by the injection of small numbers of lymph node cells into the footpad is interpreted as a mode of active immunization and the present results show that this only occurs when there is genetic matching at the major histocompatibility complex between the donor and the recipient mouse.

Full text

PDF
241

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Asherson G. L., Mayhew B. Induction of cell-mediated immunity in the mouse: circumstantial evidence for highly immunogenic antigen in the regional lymph nodes following skin painting with contact sensitizing agents. Isr J Med Sci. 1976 Apr-May;12(4-5):454–467. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Cohen I. R., Livnat S. The cell-mediated immune response: interactions of initiator and recruited T lymphocytes. Transplant Rev. 1976;29:24–58. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-065x.1976.tb00196.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Erb P., Feldmann M. The role of macrophages in the generation of T-helper cells. II. The genetic control of the macrophage-T-cell interaction for helper cell induction with soluble antigens. J Exp Med. 1975 Aug 1;142(2):460–472. doi: 10.1084/jem.142.2.460. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Miller J. F., Vadas M. A., Whitelaw A., Gamble J. Role of major histocompatibility complex gene products in delayed-type hypersensitivity. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1976 Jul;73(7):2486–2490. doi: 10.1073/pnas.73.7.2486. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Zinkernagel R. M., Althage A., Adler B., Blanden R. V., Davidson W. F., Kees U., Dunlop M. B., Shreffler D. C. H-2 restriction of cell-mediated immunity to an intracellular bacterium: effector T cells are specific for Listeria antigen in association with H-21 region-coded self-markers. J Exp Med. 1977 May 1;145(5):1353–1367. doi: 10.1084/jem.145.5.1353. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Zinkernagel R. M., Callahan G. N., Althage A., Cooper S., Klein P. A., Klein J. On the thymus in the differentiation of "H-2 self-recognition" by T cells: evidence for dual recognition? J Exp Med. 1978 Mar 1;147(3):882–896. doi: 10.1084/jem.147.3.882. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Immunology are provided here courtesy of British Society for Immunology

RESOURCES