Premium
Difference in Antibody Production to Heterologius Erythrocytes in Conventional, Specific‐Pathogen‐Free (SPF), Germfree and Antigen‐Free Mice
Author(s) -
Taniguchi Tom,
Suzuki Tatsuo,
Miake Shunji,
Nomoto Kikuo,
Hashimoto Kazuo,
Goda Akira,
Takeya Kenji
Publication year - 1978
Publication title -
microbiology and immunology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.664
H-Index - 70
eISSN - 1348-0421
pISSN - 0385-5600
DOI - 10.1111/j.1348-0421.1978.tb00433.x
Subject(s) - antibody , biology , antigen , antibody titer , titer , stimulation , hamster , specific pathogen free , pathogen , strain (injury) , microbiology and biotechnology , immunology , endocrinology , virus , anatomy
The expression of antibody‐producing capacities against hamster erythrocytes (HRBC), known to be weakly immunogenic in mice, was compared among conventional, SPF, germfree and antigen‐free mice. ICR strain germfree and antigen‐free mice showed antibody production to HRBC comparable to that in conventional or specific‐pathogen‐free (SPF) mice. In the NC strain, some of the conventional mice produced low titers of antibody after a single injection of HRBC, but none of the germfree mice showed such a transient antibody production. In the ICR‐KIG strain, which was selected from the colony‐bred ICR strain, antibodies with high titers were produced after a single injection of HRBC under both conventional and germfree conditions. The onset of conversion from 2‐mercaptoethanol (2‐ME) sensitive to 2‐ME resistant antibody after a single injection of HRBC was not delayed in the germfree mice when compared with the conventional or SPF mice. Antibody production to sheep erythrocytes (SRBC), known to be highly immunogenic in mice, was not influenced by exogeneous stimulation from microorganisms or diet. No differences in antibody production to SRBC were detected irrespective of the maintenance conditions of the mice. Stimulation with microorganisms or diet may not be required as essential elements for the maturation of antibody‐producing capacities, but such a stimulation appears to modify the antibody response. The modifying effect was more prominent in the antibody response against weakly immunogenic antigens than against highly immunogenic ones.