Antigen Absorption by the Gut

223 Pages·1978·4.17 MB·English

by  W. A. Hemmings (auth.), W. A. Hemmings (eds.)

Antigen Absorption by the Gut
Antigen Absorption by the Gut
Edited by
W. A. Hemmings
Agricultural Research Council, Immunology Group,
Zoology Department,
University College of North Wales,
Bangor
MTP
Published by
MTP PRESS LIMITED
Falcon House
Lancaster, England
Copyright CS·I 978 MTP Press Limited
Softcover reprint of the hardcover 1st edition 1978
All rights reserved. No part of this publication
may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval
system, or transmitted in any form or by any
means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying,
recording or otherwise, without prior
permission from the publishers.
ISBN-13: 978-94-011-6611-9 e-ISBN-13: 978-94-011-6609-6
DOl: 10.1 007/978-94-011-6609-6
Typeset by Typecrafters Ltd., Preston and printed
by United Printing Services Ltd., Blackpool.
Contents
List of COlltrihutors Vlll
1. Introduction
W. A. Hemmings
2. The receptor hypothesis of protein ingestion
I. G. Morris 3
3. Macromolecular uptake and transport by the small intestine
of the suckling rat
B. Morris and R. Morris 23
4. A preliminary study of the binding of rat and bovine IgG to
isolated brush borders from neonatal rat jejunum
R. Gingles 31
5. The transmission of high molecular weight break-down
products of protein across the gut of suckling and adult rats
W. A. Hemmings 37
6. Ferritin uptake by the gut of the adult rat: an immunological
and electron microscopic study
E. W. Williams 49
7. Oral immunization of rats with human serum albumin:
interference with intestinal absorption and tolerogenic effect
C. Andre, J. P. Vaerman and J. F. Heremans 65
v
ANTIGEN ABSORPTION BY THE GUT
8. Biological functions of antigen-IgA antibody complexes: in
vivo and in vitro interference with intestinal absorption and
tolerogenic effect
C. Andre and J. P. Vaerman 73
9. Antibody response in pigs and calves to antigens from the
intestinal lumen and the efficacy of oral immunoprophylaxis
against post-weaning enteric infection
P. Porter and W. D. Allen 81
10. Absorption and endogenous production of immunoglobulins
in calves
A. J. Husband, M. R. Brandon and A. K. Lascelles 93
11. Antigen uptake in the small intestine of guinea pigs infected
with Trichinella spiralis
D. I. Pritchard, D. Catty and J. J. Hankes 109
12. Antibody production in the intestine-associated immune
tissues following antigen stimulation in the bowel lumen
R. V. Heatley and S. M. Stark 121
13. Natural antibodies and the intestinal flora in rodents
A. Lee and M. C. Foo 135
14. Delayed-hypersensitivity reactions in the small intestine
Anne Ferguson 145
15. Schizophrenia, cereal grains and the gut barrier Coeliac
disease as a model
F. C. Dohan 155
16. The chemistry of gliadin
A. L. Patey 161
17. Urticaria and dietary hypersensitivity
M. Denham, T. Platts-Mills, P. J. Brereton,
L. Doddymead, R. Soan, B. K. Pelton, G. Loewi,
M. Shiner and D. K. Peters 167
vi
CONTENTS
18. A review of endotoxin and its absorption from the gut
E. N. Wardle 183
19. Antibody facilitated digestion and the consequences of its
failure
F. H. Y. Green and D. L. J. Freed 189
20. Endopeptidase activity of the small intestine
J. Woodley and E. E. Sterchi 199
21. The traffic of lymphocytes through the gut of mammals
J. G. Hall 207
22. Summing up
J. L. Gowans 219
Index 223
vii
list of Contributors
W.D.ALLEN ANNE FERGUSON
Department of Immunology, Unilever Gastro-intestinal Unit, Western General
Research Laboratory, Colworth House, Hospital, Edinburgh EH4 2XU
Sharnbrook, Bedfordshire
M.C.FOO
C.ANDRE School of Microbiology, University of New
Research Unit of Digestive South Wales, Australia
Physiopathology, U. 45 (INSERM),
E. Herriot Hospital, Pavillion H, Lyon, D. L. J. FREED
France Department of Bacteriology and Virology,
University of Manchester Medical School,
M. R. BRANDON Oxford Road, Manchester M13 9PT
Department of Experimental Pathology,
John Curtin School of Medical Research, R.GINGLES
The Australian National University, Forensic Science Laboratories,
Canberra, 2601, Australia Newtownbreda Road,
Belfast
P. J. BRERETON
Department of Dietetics, Northwick Park J. L. GOWANS
Hospital, Watford Road, Harrow MRC Unit of Cellular Immunology, Sir
HAl 3UJ, Middlesex William Dunne School of Pathology,
Oxford
D.CATIY
Department of Experimental Pathology, F. H. Y. GREEN
University of Birmingham Department of Pathology, University of
Manchester Medical School, Oxford Road,
A.M.DENHAM Manchester M13 9PT
Division of Immunology, MRC Clinical
Research Centre, Watford Road, Harrow J.G.HALL
HAI3UJ, Middlesex Chester Beatty Research Institute, Institute
of Cancer Research, Clifton Avenue,
L. DODDYMEAD Belmont, Sutton, Surrey SM2 5PX
Department of Dietetics, Northwick Park
Hospital, Watford Road, Harrow J.J.HANKES
HAI3UJ, Middlesex Department of Experimental Pathology,
University of Birmingham
F.C.DOHAN
Eastern Pennsylvania Psychiatric Institute, R. V. HEATLEY
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19129, USA University Department of Surgery, Welsh
National School of Medicine, Heath Park,
Cardiff CF4 4XN
viii
LIST OF CONTRIBUTORS
W. A. HEMMINGS Hospital, Du Cane Road, London
Agricultural Research Council, Department WI20HS
of Zoology, University College of North
Wales, Bangor LL57 2UW T. PLATTS-MILLS
Division of Immunology, MRC Clinical
J. F. HEREMANS Research Centre, Watford Road, Harrow
Department of Experimental Medicine, HAl 3Ul, Middlesex
Institute of Cellular Pathology, Universite
Catholique de Louvain, 75 Avenue P.PORTER
Hippocrate, B-1200 Brussels, Belgium Department of Immunology, Unilever
Research Laboratory, Colworth House,
A. J. HUSBAND Shornbrook, Bedfordshire
Veterinary Research Station, Glenfield,
NSW 2167, Australia D. I. PRITCHARD
Department of Experimental Pathology,
A.K.LASCELLES University of Birmingham
Division of Animal Health, C.S.I.R.O.,
Parkville, 3052, Australia M.SHlNER
Department of Gastroenterology, Central
A.LEE Middlesex Hospital, Acton Lane, London
School of Microbiology, University of New N.W.lO
South Wales, Australia
R.SOAN
G.LOEWI Department of Dietetics, Northwick Park
Division of Immunology, MRC Clinical Hospital, Watford Road, Harrow
Research Centre, Watford Road, Harrow HAl 3Ul, Middlesex
HAl 3Ul, Middlesex
J.M.STARK
B. MORRIS University Department of Medical
Department of Zoology, The University of Microbiology, Welsh National School of
Nottingham, Nottingham NG7 2RD Medicine, Heath Paek, Cardiff CF4 4XN
R. MORRIS J. P. VAERMAN
Department of Zoology, Unit of Experimental Medicine,
University of Nottingham, International Institute of Cellular and
Nottingham NG7 2RD Molecular Pathology, Universite
Catholique de Louvain, 74 Avenue
I. G. MORRIS Hippocrate, B-1200 Brussels, Belgium
Department of Zoology,
University College of North Wales, E.N. WARDLE
Bangor LL57 2UW Department of Medicine,
Royal Victoria Infirmary,
A. L. PATEY Newcastle-upon-Tyne NEI 4LP
Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and
Food, Food Science Division, Colney Lane, E. W. WILLIAMS
Norwich NR4 7UA Agricultural Research Council, Department
of Zoology, University College of North
B.K.PELTON Wales, Bangor LL57 2UW
Division of Immunology, MRC Clinical
Research Centre, Watford Road, Harrow J. WOODLEY
HAl eUl, Middlesex Biochemistry Research Unit,
University of Keele,
D.K.PETERS Staffs. ST5 5BG
Department of Medicine, Hammersmith
ix
1
Introduction
w. A. HEMMINGS
The concept that proteins can enter cells whole is a difficult one. Yet the
model situations whereby this process may be studied have been known
and investigated for many years. Those situations arise through the
specialization required to transfer immunoglobulins synthesized by the
mother to the circulation of the fetus or newborn animal, that is in the
transmission of passive immunity to the young. This always entails the
protein crossing a continuous cellular barrier, in the placenta or fetal
membranes, or in the intestinal epithelium.
The concept is hard to accept in terms of cell biology because it is
difficult to envisage a mechanism whereby proteins can pass in quantity a
cell membrane which is regulating the entry of solutes. Brambell has put
forward an hypothesis of such a mechanism, restating it in 'The
transmission of passive immunity from mother to young' in 1970. In
1974, after his death, a symposium was held in Bangor largely on this
subject, published as 'Maternofetal Transmission of Immunoglobulins' .
Since then two further meetings have been held on gut transfer under the
title of the present volume, which is composed of papers drawn from
these two meetings.
The present position seems to be that considerable modification of
Brambell's hypothesis is proposed. There are two main alternatives in
sight. The first suggests that incoming protein is taken up in
micropinocytotic coated vesicles (MPCV), very ably described by
Rodewald, which are assumed, by virtue of their coat of bristles, not to
fuse with lysosomes but to pass through the cytoplasm and discharge
ANTIGEN ABSORPTION BY THE GUT
their contents at the lateral boundary of the cell. But a most important
feature of this transport is that it is selective: it differentiates one protein
from another in common solution. It is hard to see how the MPCV
concept by itself, could explain selection.
The second concept might be termed the glycocalyx assisted diffusion
concept, which is based on the twin observations that homologous and
heterologous IgO attaches equally to the cell surface, and that apparently
any protein administered to the membrane can be found scattered
through the cytosol in molecular distribution. It is suggested by
Hemmings and Williams that attachment to the glycocalyx is followed by
passage of the unit membrane into the cytosol, and that selection occurs
at the stage of leaving the cell by assisted diffusion through the lateral
membrane.
Further light on this concept is thrown by the observation that the
adult gut permits the free passage of large amounts of large cleavage
products of soluble dietary protein. This is novel, but extends the older
observations that immunologically significant amounts of native protein
are absorbed intact from the diet. The cleavage products are found in
the cytosol of tissues throughout the body, suggesting that it is normal
for these large entities to pass freely into cells of many tissues. This could
again be a process of diffusion assisted by glycocalyx material.
These two hypotheses are both closely based on observation, and they
are not mutually exclusive therefore. The abused term 'receptor' enters
into both, though whether the definitive receptors are in the glycocalyx
or upon the apical cell membrane remains to be determined. At any rate,
the present position is exciting and changing rapidly.
2