4.4 Article

Modulation of leukocytic populations of gilthead sea bream (Sparus aurata) by the intestinal parasite Enteromyxum leei (Myxozoa: Myxosporea)

期刊

PARASITOLOGY
卷 141, 期 3, 页码 425-440

出版社

CAMBRIDGE UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1017/S0031182013001789

关键词

gut associated lymphoid tissue; mucosal infection; mast cells; Acidophilic granulocytes; eosinophilic granular cells; lymphohaematopoietic organs; inflammation; plasma cells; melanomacrophages

资金

  1. MICINN [AGL2009-13282-C02-01]
  2. 'Generalitat Valenciana' [PROMETEO 2010/006, ISIC 2012/003]
  3. MEC

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The cellular mucosal and systemic effectors of gilthead sea bream (GSB) (Sparus aurata) involved in the acute immune response to the intestinal parasite Enteromyxum leei were studied in fish experimentally infected by the anal route. In the intestinal inflammatory infiltrates and in lymphohaematopoietic organs (head kidney and spleen) of parasitized fish, the number of plasma cells, B cells (IgM immunoreactive) and mast cells (histamine immunoreactive) were significantly higher, whereas the number of acidophilic granulocytes (G7 immunoreactive) decreased, compared with non-parasitized and unexposed fish. These differences were stronger at the posterior intestine, the main target of the parasite, and no differences were found in the thymus. In non-parasitized GSB, the percentage of splenic surface occupied by melanomacrophage centres was significantly higher. These results suggest that the cellular response of GSB to E. leei includes proliferation of leukocytes in lymphohaematopoietic organs and recruitment into intestines via blood circulation involving elements of innate and adaptive immunity. Acidophilic granulocytes and mast cells presented opposite patterns of response to the parasite infection, with an overall depletion of the former and an increased amount of the latter. Some differences between both cell types were also detected in regard to their granule density and cell morphology.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据