巨噬细胞活化:免疫抵抗之谜。

Immunology series Pub Date : 1994-01-01
R M Crawford, D A Leiby, S J Green, C A Nacy, A H Fortier, M S Meltzer
{"title":"巨噬细胞活化:免疫抵抗之谜。","authors":"R M Crawford,&nbsp;D A Leiby,&nbsp;S J Green,&nbsp;C A Nacy,&nbsp;A H Fortier,&nbsp;M S Meltzer","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Various lines of defense against infection are present in all living creatures. The balance between symbiosis and parasitism is determined by the mechanisms through which the host resists infection and by the extent of injury induced by the parasite: both factors contribute to disease. Lines of host defense can be arbitrarily divided into three components: 1) barrier functions of skin and mucous membranes and their innate physical and secretory antimicrobial components; 2) elements of host defense that do not necessarily require prior exposure to an infectious agent or immunologic memory (mast cells, granulocytes, macrophages, NK cells, gamma/delta T cells); and 3) immune responses directed against specific epitopes on the infectious agent induced by prior exposure and immunologic memory (alpha/beta T cells, B cells). Analysis of such host defense mechanisms repeatedly documents tremendous redundancy and overlap between these lines of defense. Further, there is open communication, so that a change at any one level ripples throughout the system. Acquired nonspecific resistance to infection is an example of such a ripple. Host response to one infection alerts the immune system, so that the general level of resistance to other infectious agents is increased. This response is initiated by an immune response (third line of defense) but effected by nonspecific elements (second line of defense). The survival value of such responses is obvious. There are numerous examples in both mouse and man of the operation of these systems in response to infection. Further, the menus of antimicrobial components available to both mouse and man for resistance to infection are very similar, but not identical. Indeed, it is said that the genetic basis for differences between mice and man revolve around a difference of less than 10% in DNA sequences. But there are differences! Mouse macrophages produce IFN-beta in response to infection, human cells produce IFN-alpha. Mouse macrophages effect antimicrobial activity principally through induction of NO synthase and the generation of toxic nitrogen oxides. This pathway has yet to be described with human macrophages. In both man and mouse, F. tularensis is an obligate intracellular parasite of macrophages that requires an essential component provided by the cell for its replication. That mouse and man are not so different is well illustrated by the effector mechanisms induced by IFN-gamma for antimicrobial activity against F. tularensis.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)</p>","PeriodicalId":77171,"journal":{"name":"Immunology series","volume":"60 ","pages":"29-46"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1994-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Macrophage activation: a riddle of immunological resistance.\",\"authors\":\"R M Crawford,&nbsp;D A Leiby,&nbsp;S J Green,&nbsp;C A Nacy,&nbsp;A H Fortier,&nbsp;M S Meltzer\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Various lines of defense against infection are present in all living creatures. The balance between symbiosis and parasitism is determined by the mechanisms through which the host resists infection and by the extent of injury induced by the parasite: both factors contribute to disease. Lines of host defense can be arbitrarily divided into three components: 1) barrier functions of skin and mucous membranes and their innate physical and secretory antimicrobial components; 2) elements of host defense that do not necessarily require prior exposure to an infectious agent or immunologic memory (mast cells, granulocytes, macrophages, NK cells, gamma/delta T cells); and 3) immune responses directed against specific epitopes on the infectious agent induced by prior exposure and immunologic memory (alpha/beta T cells, B cells). Analysis of such host defense mechanisms repeatedly documents tremendous redundancy and overlap between these lines of defense. Further, there is open communication, so that a change at any one level ripples throughout the system. Acquired nonspecific resistance to infection is an example of such a ripple. Host response to one infection alerts the immune system, so that the general level of resistance to other infectious agents is increased. This response is initiated by an immune response (third line of defense) but effected by nonspecific elements (second line of defense). The survival value of such responses is obvious. There are numerous examples in both mouse and man of the operation of these systems in response to infection. Further, the menus of antimicrobial components available to both mouse and man for resistance to infection are very similar, but not identical. Indeed, it is said that the genetic basis for differences between mice and man revolve around a difference of less than 10% in DNA sequences. But there are differences! Mouse macrophages produce IFN-beta in response to infection, human cells produce IFN-alpha. Mouse macrophages effect antimicrobial activity principally through induction of NO synthase and the generation of toxic nitrogen oxides. This pathway has yet to be described with human macrophages. In both man and mouse, F. tularensis is an obligate intracellular parasite of macrophages that requires an essential component provided by the cell for its replication. That mouse and man are not so different is well illustrated by the effector mechanisms induced by IFN-gamma for antimicrobial activity against F. tularensis.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":77171,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Immunology series\",\"volume\":\"60 \",\"pages\":\"29-46\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1994-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Immunology series\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Immunology series","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

所有生物体内都有各种抵御感染的防线。共生和寄生之间的平衡取决于宿主抵抗感染的机制和寄生虫引起的伤害程度:这两个因素都有助于疾病的发生。宿主的防线可任意分为三个部分:1)皮肤和粘膜的屏障功能及其固有的物理和分泌性抗菌成分;2)不需要事先暴露于感染因子或免疫记忆的宿主防御要素(肥大细胞、粒细胞、巨噬细胞、NK细胞、γ / δ T细胞);3)由先前暴露和免疫记忆(α / β T细胞,B细胞)诱导的针对感染因子上特定表位的免疫应答。对这种主机防御机制的分析反复记录了这些防线之间的巨大冗余和重叠。此外,还有开放的沟通,因此任何一个级别的变化都会波及整个系统。获得性非特异性抗感染就是这种涟漪效应的一个例子。宿主对一种感染的反应会提醒免疫系统,从而提高对其他感染源的总体抵抗力。这种反应是由免疫反应(第三道防线)发起的,但受非特异性因素(第二道防线)的影响。这种反应的生存价值是显而易见的。在老鼠和人身上都有许多例子说明这些系统对感染的反应。此外,小鼠和人类用于抗感染的抗菌成分菜单非常相似,但并不完全相同。事实上,据说老鼠和人之间的基因差异的基础是DNA序列上不到10%的差异。但是还是有区别的!小鼠巨噬细胞对感染产生ifn - β,人类细胞产生ifn - α。小鼠巨噬细胞主要通过诱导NO合成酶和产生有毒的氮氧化物来影响抗菌活性。这一途径尚未被人类巨噬细胞所描述。在人和小鼠中,土拉螺旋体是巨噬细胞的专性细胞内寄生虫,需要细胞提供必要的成分来进行复制。ifn - γ诱导的对土拉菌的抗菌活性的效应机制很好地说明了小鼠和人并没有太大的不同。(摘要删节为400字)
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Macrophage activation: a riddle of immunological resistance.

Various lines of defense against infection are present in all living creatures. The balance between symbiosis and parasitism is determined by the mechanisms through which the host resists infection and by the extent of injury induced by the parasite: both factors contribute to disease. Lines of host defense can be arbitrarily divided into three components: 1) barrier functions of skin and mucous membranes and their innate physical and secretory antimicrobial components; 2) elements of host defense that do not necessarily require prior exposure to an infectious agent or immunologic memory (mast cells, granulocytes, macrophages, NK cells, gamma/delta T cells); and 3) immune responses directed against specific epitopes on the infectious agent induced by prior exposure and immunologic memory (alpha/beta T cells, B cells). Analysis of such host defense mechanisms repeatedly documents tremendous redundancy and overlap between these lines of defense. Further, there is open communication, so that a change at any one level ripples throughout the system. Acquired nonspecific resistance to infection is an example of such a ripple. Host response to one infection alerts the immune system, so that the general level of resistance to other infectious agents is increased. This response is initiated by an immune response (third line of defense) but effected by nonspecific elements (second line of defense). The survival value of such responses is obvious. There are numerous examples in both mouse and man of the operation of these systems in response to infection. Further, the menus of antimicrobial components available to both mouse and man for resistance to infection are very similar, but not identical. Indeed, it is said that the genetic basis for differences between mice and man revolve around a difference of less than 10% in DNA sequences. But there are differences! Mouse macrophages produce IFN-beta in response to infection, human cells produce IFN-alpha. Mouse macrophages effect antimicrobial activity principally through induction of NO synthase and the generation of toxic nitrogen oxides. This pathway has yet to be described with human macrophages. In both man and mouse, F. tularensis is an obligate intracellular parasite of macrophages that requires an essential component provided by the cell for its replication. That mouse and man are not so different is well illustrated by the effector mechanisms induced by IFN-gamma for antimicrobial activity against F. tularensis.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信