Advances in Immunology [Vol 1] - W. Taliaferro, et al., (AP, 1961) WW

423 Pages·1961·21.62 MB·English

ADVANCES IN

Immunology

EDITED BY

W.-H. TAUIAFERRO J. H, HUMPHREY
ef ata

VOLUME T
1961

a)
7
TAREE on ts

Gove Rinons on sade
SERIE Fake 2" LERBos) cr,

ibaa of Caer Gatabg Ca Naor 82 170
CONTRIBUTORS.

B. Brvacemnan, Departnient of Patalogy, Now York tt
nf Merieine, Neo York, New Yoo

1. GA Gas, Dyprtnent of Hxporimentel Pathology, Clee of
‘inning, rmanghoin, Lngdeed

B.A. Gonray! Depurtnent of Pathology, (u/s Hospital, London. England

J.-H. Hoax, Heplona Public Heals Laboratory, Goneva! Hopital, New:
‘ante upna Tyne, Haglan

IM, Hai, Carchostncek Acaitomg of Slonces,tntinle of Biology, De
periment of Faperinend Biology snd Geneties, Prague, Czech.
Movalia

1, Haws, Cztchadocak Academy af Seionces. Jntitute of Biology, De.

periient of Expovimensal Biology and Genoies, Page, Crick
Bcatta

smity School

A Tasomor’, Ceechoslosek Academy of Solonec, tnteute of Biology,
Department of Fxpcinental Filey seat Cents, Pagan, Cok
Howakia

Arnanane ©. Oxtmm, Doparinent of Mierobinkngy, The Solin Hopkin
Gnivcoity School of Meriine ond Schoo! of Hygiene ou Public
Health onl the Depurtincet of Meuiiee, The Jota opting Ce
tersity Sehcal of Medivine,Weliee, aryl!

Moun ‘See, Department of Fedlasles, Cuiversty of Floste
Gollege of Metin, Gatewoile, lord

Amos B. Scavmose, Deportoron! of Microbiology, Weatem Reserve
University, School of Sfodtetne, Cleland, Ohin

Wasaan 0. Weve, Dilson oj Exprrinantad Patolony, Serigpe Cline
tana Rearares Poundevion, La (ola, Caiforsia

TT Beat Mi 128
PREFACE

‘he primary purus of Adzancoe im Eomentgty sil be 2 poescat
lily veiw of vatous topes in omaingy’ tel wot uly WEL serve
In Keep Investigate inforael Wut will also Te to wnify the voncupts
suerlying this highly divendter! vor techoicelly specialized subjet
iach wstene wil sontain aout eight reviews om dMeront asgreds of
fnmetolagy, heady denied aa as t faclidy wich subjeets a8 Sunes
cheanisty, antibody synehsi, bislegiod wetions wf aaubodies, immunn
egiel cancaponsiveness, mca fy foxale and acquired Seumnity
net inyoleing siilin, amt spscialized inuunclogial teebigqoes
“The atlfoe wil stress fundamental sonewts but ut Nhe same Uae will
attempt to evaluate thy experimental approaches.

“The roviers fa hiv Ait volume are enmeesued may with some
the more hinhgica, aqpect nf inanmolngy—partly hacanee i aleane
futeest in thee subjects at tha protent nie and partly because rerows
‘on moro cherreal sapocts have appease cvheze or wil be inched
in eibsequent eolemes of Adame do Framasclogy

\We hope that samuncloginte a2 a whole will weleoue Abnibatn ©.
Ode's review on “Functions of the Comple-nent Syste,” ineludiag
vali ie ts pallnogica punerases, and Abeoun B Slavs’ survey
fof “tn Vite Studies uf the Antihody Herpunsc” fh relation to thoorle of
jngdution und tu de biovhumisty of autudy syutais. “Ihe subject
ol Tnytunelogiol Tolerance i very Haroughly cecal it reviews,
toe by flchard ‘1, Sn in seapect to nanliving antigens, and tne by
M. Thick, A Leagerovi, and ‘I. Hoaba in eslatian to ttaneplanttina
immnunnty, Tao Keble oF muly, im which ropid progress im ore ander
standing has Deen nade a reven! year, 2m “Pileyed Hypenensiceiy
fi Siele rotoin Antigens” and (se °Lale tan! Biolages! Acton of
Antigen Aniiualy Cempleyts™ The anv sunveyed bp P. Gd. Celt
ane B, Henacerat, end by Willa O. Welle, eespeothvely, The uther
fn tecicay conven wipes of imamunclogy Whit tues apa Ue a
‘eros of workect ou cancer zeanch and virus dssases, Ore on “Lhe
Antigenic Sruetare of Tunas” by the late TA, Gare wis ee Task
felenle paper ie sete befoue his untimely deal. Ih her sme on
the “Darnton Of Immurity in Vins Diseases Hy J. H. Hale and ie
‘ivoused in relation to the possible persiteucs ox zeintoduction of
the vine,

‘The olor te ploarure in expressing to the contibuters thelr apr
resistin for Ue great effort invelved im writing the reviews and for
her Ioleanse of the onivusfrosrations agente sith the acting oF
1 new eolow srl.

Ontoher, 1862 WH. Tene
JR. Beserme
Transplantation Immunity ond Tolerance

Da HABE A, UNGEROVA, AND T. HRABA

1 teat a
Th Kncmaley of liomoga 5
en Fppecaf Howtos sil Case beshigae 5
J Cllr tame sree 1"
©. Gata Ta tain 8
A Net of lang rag awa a

1. Toe Deanene of nccwlyged anaes nd
tke lope Psat a Diloee Sire e

een ot Frage a
Die slatenhi af amnegeal Tose Seca Tne:

ate Seca. of tn ou a Fl B
Nelenaees %

1 tation

‘ramplintition tmmonity aud imumolugieal (aerance ace, under
cvrala oondting, alternative reactions of tho sao urgisna to he sme
antigen stinntse-snrnehs, tanephaalating nf Sesucy cr eels Som an
Sntigeneally dierent individ Which of Ee ty allenative wal lake
pate i desided by the czeumshnees of the Fret experince by The #P-
Setig iodividual atthe given autigous, espcully important bring An
age of derleymarnt at whieh tht Fiat expetienee occurs. principle,
Af the Brac cumacr takes place arly i entgenens, eli te aligen is
tolatated by the exganica simply #6 a consequence oF its imealngial
inmuturily, this Rr woprvieace may cause the expacity for tolecmee of
this watgen to be eubvined een alter tle develope of inonurslagical
instuiy of the orguaiam an, pethaps, throwghent ile white Ble span
Ry vinfeat, dan ltt seston i induced ty the Gt tno Hw
oF the niger ft epaninn, i wl oe a eale recur atall further com
tects, Entry WF antiguas ite wn onganian whi! & not gel wapable of
prosccing to tcaoume responce fe nommally ther weep nd, end con
Seem, be Beat allcenetive isa ual saree event than tho Secunt

‘hy ox-wreewe of tensplantatin femoinuty is rule and seesplants-
tion toleniaee is wa wacuptfon {0 fhis role, Ta. general, the crzanisn
2 ns adden, A rancid, aso Tae

reacts imcannologially agaist the antigens of transplanted homelugoos
sues, which wre thereby destroyed ond arjectrd. ‘The mackanion
andaving this vogular reaction is tho subject of dhe siudy of tans
lactation aul, The stoution in whic, wuder nora woods,
the urgeaisa cows nut reat kemunulugielly ageioct tisue antigens of
sanvther veganism, but tolerate thom canstincey am exception to the rab.
Such esceptians ave the starting paints for the study of the mechanien
of inmmtogial tolerance,

"The fict Hat the satigen can be tolerated provides an apparent cum
trudiction im crn, sinco antigens are defined by thaie capacity to induce
0 dmerane response (Farmation of aniiblies} Ja the recipient. The
Aefaition of am antigen is, however, aienye relates No eos oF
complix can be denated at satigenic in izolation but only in relation to
sm appropriate xeiplen, because What fs antigente iy one sysiem nsed
not be antigen in another, Fur example the ells oF a organion Inder
the formation of anttbodios if administered in a wile way ty another
(aaugenicaly diferent) organs, but they do not clita similar 20
ation ia thele ow maternal organton. If would seem, therefore, that
the dednition ofthe untigen nest sumeliow bith inekide « nasiement
tha It be heterogeneia. ven this, owever, ie ineufeea:, Under ovrain
onditions the argaaiin llosatee a potential antigen, dt the samo sy
ti tlertes the constituents of its own ody, amt om the other band,
Under diferent conditions, it cen react aginst @ coustiment of fs ova
body a¢it would agalat a orsign antigen in the usual caso af the rd,
yy fonaing aaltbulie. The elatinstap between experimentally Induced
tolerance and immunity is, howe, wut reaiproal. The majorly of
foreign antigont” capable of iducingu state of immunologic tolerama:
fo w given organism aro as role able to induce ap fommane response in
tuner diferent eouditions, bat, in contest, only a Seal! prepartion of
sotigens producing immunity secms to be able to clctfleramve ox wel,

“This ditinction hetreen antigna ta wich tole eam bo teed
tw the one and sad inaain:ty on He other say, pasha, sean fom the
{iferent nates ut which the two poteslal rexpousse of the organi
tome in play under normal eunditions, It x posible tat vuder spacial
fondlaiont the developrnt of tlceanco to forign enters, ua the basis
of the “Bat experienoi i In prinelple Idenileal seth the mechanism by
‘sbich, under normal cineitions, fhe organ becomes Inlet af tho
fomatlanent of te own body An tecoolgeal terms #8 oynld wan That
fhe metanisen af tolerance is designed on'y for a resictod spectrum
if the body’ own anlgens, a8 a natural defense mechsnise against woo
feanity, However, sue the sorigenie ake, of a Sadia 1 the
-TaNHnLSrTAMOS NGUEXTY AN TOLERMEE a

result of 2 mondom event (Ke, of a rendem socombinalion of the 22
pectin gurl dsterinaalo iat fownatinn of ay gole te spackinen
OF untgcas to which he ngunion ow butonie tolerant wuulel have te
Ibe comevchar wider ia order to caakraeo oquilly all roantigens of the
ven species. Tho species, which represents all tho panies of foe
ombinatien of the dallgenic detscrinanls suring the arson oF fest
ation, might, Heche, reprment at the vime te tho mato] Hits
for the incution of tlersncc under scrim conditios, (Uhis boge the
question whether capedimenially induced tolerance of ian coinate
tigen, Hes 3 al the rel of more ot ne pees spe
plication of a mechan desigued wormally oat for Buwmtigens, ox
‘whether it 9 quabtasvely difeceot mechani pardally fsting the
recalls of tolerance} AllRangh soch 4 canompd ray be far eee jue Red,
the fact tht ehe ofoctivees of expurimentlly induced taerance of
collar avayens resembles tolerance nf the body's wen conettacnts only
insane anol all stanoes when Hh ioantlgens ar fly Zor
fiction. Trsofur ae se are noncernnt with mrad toeranee
fand tranepliottion immonity we two atematice reactions of the or
{anise the same stinmlus, the ital emg of clevance cannes this
dy tC phere of sania

Wile she natural postive mle oF fmrmmologicl folerzae fa this
sphere is readily undertanesble tho same cranct bo esi of the rote of
aneplanction munity. To postulate a natuzal defense onechanion
fagalasirgealy teonaletred fteige itn seems a8 incepta uy te
‘le that trample amenity sua urtnetprosacod By the atfact
of traneplantation, No ig am explanation to regned taneplanttlen i
fovalty ab an abermen: foxon of bacterial leegy ditccted agaist the
Tear Uistue doatead of Sivadieg pathogenic wicenneganms, The
defensive vale of Kacleral ergy Se were el te suppose the ba
teria allrgy it che priminy mectunism sacl chee waneplantaion iim
surly Is devived from it weuld be quite arbluay, selleting evideu"y
Fhe iw soqpenoe af ie devel.

Te seen Ine wore probable thal lsunplsattion immunity snd bac
terial allergy represent tou dierent mmaifetutoe uf w more gener
reaction mechanism base orimurly on the abit of the aeganivn 16
recngnine not sal som self: What shoud bn, however, Ihe geatral bio
Togieal ignicance of this ability to rexngnioe and destroy “uot af"?
At Best danve i anay appear that inde woraul volition such am sbiisy
Svould be harm rather thin wyeful to che angunis, cut, the eelainn
Tetween rather and fetus fulfills the fundamental canditina Tor acrt=
renew ofthe borctransplantatin reaction. Same other mein, thor
4 se Tale, 5, punning gh Ts onan

fore, most be presurcd to protoct the feus frum the reaction of the
thother

‘The question of whether the mechantse nocd in the homngraft
action [Haws a postive vole im levelopment ye cussed reeeady by
‘Thomas (1859). Bre wiggrated theo possiblities, Hist a mochaninn snght
lve smwntied controlling the wifornity of the call af the cuganicn and
acting against a possible gonalle divergence, ty other words a mechanism
Balancing the action ol sues somatic rotations we might moniest thom
selves by changes of wntigenie spodicty, An zaportant pt of Us bio
loggeal function could then be the defense aguas! malignaot growth
based on the lamiune 2eaetew agains a specie temor witigen produced
fn the cones of malignant trsneforenion,

"The second speculation of Thomas is that anppantatlon inmauaity
oll areal by 2 xen wor all rxpornble forthe “ply
“gent degeneration” oF the pra af he Sul atige uf seeguney, Lei
foneept. therefore, points up » real situetun ip which under naval
physlologial condltinas the heeaktown aod xefcctian of the heathy
tase cour wscempanled by patholagleal changes stag reals
the pictora of u homawguft destruction ty tamuplentacon mn. ot
ideas of Thomas axe approachable experimentally

‘The term “Iransplantatin imeanlly” wae eoiced & express the dis:
sovery that tansplistition imeampulibilly & a pbenowenan wish i
Jmananologleal im nacite, Alchough this convope x relate ol (Sci
91S}, # for Tong lacked saulsfactary experimental evidence aving t2
failure to detect anthony fonnatina in tho organise reacting” agaiont
foreign tse, Lalrect evidence of Sale Smpurtaner won provide, sul
aldes findings vightly inkerprcted, by Meduwar, ia the novelerted break
‘down of dhe tnd graft from the same denor. Such destruction of heraa-
tral i curatouly ought fin terms of the spec cellar veacten
Univer, the ceactions of he ung aguas Iuano- ur hetero
tisues ean be mrp varied than Hi, wal thy stay of Ue elation to
lnmimologfal tolerance covars. im fut, a wide old of inmunelogy,
tunel, not ouly haagplestaion af normal and mmor tismes bt aloo
trunuhasun, the velaianship heween mother and lets, and aulatn-
munity, Tho elucidation nf the mcelamisn of tramxplatating immu
and iromacloyseal turaece and “her eelaGnsip is, therefore, net
Unly one af she fendaental problems af any imrounological they, but
Sv w oniter oF considerable genera! hislogieal importsnee.
1h tmmunology of Hosagrott Redcions

Surgesl transfor of vinques tween ten fndlvidaals of the sine
species alrnatiovatibly wade the destruction uf w heme by on
‘anmime process, Ike bilogical buss of this gencralition ie best ue
daated by a few vata but walldelined exeptons, One of Useve i the
suoaese ot keaugplatation Teton anomnsigotie twin CE, Hy, Basen,
9Er; Paget, 1832: Lome et a 1955) whic ie evidently deo their
genetic identity, Genatic divenity ie ou tha coutery 2 practeally ab-
solute conditign for iene eampaulity, hie nfl i tuen the Coe
that geaetia Agparty {fur this ripen uf Teast) so complet o,f
other swords, that cach individual of tke given spocios Ii « umioe
taakoup of gencticlly controlled Eactns by wich sdvidual specitetly
i dalesmlacd

‘A sevone exemption ofthe rule of tisme iovompwabiity kar helped to
lneidate the mature ofthe peaste dxpaity hecweereaipiont aud dooor
of Dansplanied Ustue vic is necestay foe he davelopwarat uf ean
plato iavuty, The By byes between te highly ile teu
soe univer reedpioate gf truneplinted tissues aot only fre individuals
fof Dots parental stsios hut also from thotr progeny in the rst and
Fuetaes generations, This was éerno eae Tle aint Jolson (1982)
cand deuolus eeurly tht yeuetie disparity of the graft i mut sefBetene
itself for manifestation of tucampathley to accnr ix the vosipict. Tho
FF; hyhwids ate enlversal rerpients hecause they represeal a romplele
cumin of tse entity fans chamanteriti of ba petal
Stoning, so eae any dipanty of taeuce derived from paves ar fom ‘belt
fowa proguny is a negative one, due to the absense ol some of cheir
iets lernimanty trarlntatin neacton ko sate ca be str
Javed only by & postive diference boteroen tho dagor wad ecient,
by the genoically devemninod presence of zorze chetieal constituent of
the dor ities which wr abswal ro te ecient

Seeh continents, or iaantgens, rauy Pry bs defined wt any
genetically centelled postive difeecaces botwoon individ af the
iow species whlch ate eapable of Inducing somo pe af iste xeae
finn, Thefr physilogical role i large eakrown ar Cis chrmniel
saature ie alos Far From being explained satiety. root of thet ext
face iz based eo far only on their ability to induce ome soations or
lorcomhina wth specie ables,

Specify ange ote gi Selividual favalve Z hoomgiating
sem to be enotspiclly filly represealed i Ue eel oF iPencat
Iistegenctic origin, wldwvugh the possility is not exuded “bet theie
Dhenotypical representation aay vany to somo extent. Incowpleto repre-