4.4 Article

Immune responses of different mouse strains after challenge with equivalent lethal doses of Toxoplasma gondii

Journal

PARASITE
Volume 11, Issue 1, Pages 89-97

Publisher

EDP SCIENCES S A
DOI: 10.1051/parasite/200411189

Keywords

Toxoplasma gondii; toxoplasmosis; lethal equivalence; susceptibility; immune response; mouse

Categories

Funding

  1. NIAID NIH HHS [AI19613, AI30000] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Most immunological studies that utilize different strains of inbred mice following T. gondii infection fail to compensate for differences in host susceptibility to the size of the parasite innoculmm. To address this concern, susceptible C57BL/6 and resistant CBA/J mice were orally infected with either an equivalent 50% lethal dose (L-D-50) of brain cysts of the 76K strain of T. gondii (15 cysts in C57BL/6, 400 cysts in CBA/J) or the some dose of parasites in each mouse strain. C57BL/6 mice receiving 400 cysts (LD50 of CBA/J mice died post infection, whereas CBA/J mice that received 15 cysts (LD50 of C57BL/6 mice) survived. Parasite loads in the brains and serum Toxoplosma-specific IgG1 titers of LD50-infected C57BL/6 mice were significantly higher than those in LD50 or 15 cysts-infected CBA/J mice, whereas splenocyte proliferation to Toxoplasma antigen and the percentage of CD8alpha(+)T cells were reduced in LID50-infected C57BL/6 mice. In contrast, serum IgG2a and IgM titers, the percentage of gammadelta T cells and IFN-gamma expression of spleen of LD50-infected CBA/J mice were higher than those of either 15 cysts-infected CBA/J mice or LD50-infected C57BL/6 mice. These observations demonstrate that the immune response between LD50- infected C57BL/6 and CBA/J mice was more prominent when competed to C57BL/6 or CPA/J mice receiving the same parasite inoculum. These observations would suggest that caution must be excersized in the planning and interpretation of data when the size of the parasite inoculum has not been adjusted for mouse strain.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available