Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-8r8nv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-08T15:21:28.358Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Refractoriness of host haemocytes to parasite immunosuppressive factors as a putative resistance mechanism in the Biomphalaria glabrata–Echinostoma caproni system

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 July 2001

E. HUMBERT
Affiliation:
Centre de Biologie et d'Ecologie, UMR 5555 du CNRS, 52 Ave de Villeneuve, Université de Perpignan, 66860 Perpignan cedex, France
C. COUSTAU
Affiliation:
Centre de Biologie et d'Ecologie, UMR 5555 du CNRS, 52 Ave de Villeneuve, Université de Perpignan, 66860 Perpignan cedex, France
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In contrast to the growing knowledge accumulated on plant resistance to pathogens, mechanisms of parasite resistance largely remain to be elucidated in animal species. In the present study we investigated mechanisms underlying resistance/susceptibility in the snail–trematode system Biomphalaria glabrata–Echinostoma caproni. In particular, we compared the effect of the parasite excretory–secretory (E–S) products on the defence functions of haemocytes from 2 susceptible and 2 resistant snail strains. In vitro experiments showed that E. caproni E–S products inhibit adhesion and phagocytosis of haemocytes from susceptible snails. A partial biochemical characterization also suggested that the interfering factor(s) is (are) heat-labile glycosylated polypeptides of molecular mass between 10 and 30 kDa. Interestingly, haemocytes from resistant snails remained unaffected by the parasite E–S products, suggesting that a constitutive difference results in their refractoriness to the parasite's immunosuppressive factor(s).

Information

Type
Research Article
Copyright
© 2001 Cambridge University Press
Figure 0

Fig. 1. Percentage of spread haemocytes from the 2 susceptible HAC and EAF strains, and the 2 resistant KB and CB strains of Biomphalaria glabrata, after a 3 h exposure to CBSS, or Echinostoma caproni E–S products from 0–24 h (E–S 24 h) or 24–48 h (E–S 48 h) cultures. Asterisks indicate a significant difference from control (P<0.001) using the Mann–Whitney U-test.

Figure 1

Fig. 2. Morphology of haemocytes from the 2 susceptible HAC (A, B) and EAF (C, D) snail strains when exposed to CBSS (A and C) or Echinostoma caproni E–S products (B and D). Haemocytes from the 2 resistant KB and CB strains remained well spread after exposure to E. caproni E–S products (E and F).

Figure 2

Fig. 3. Dose-dependent action of E–S products (A) or CBSS (B) on the spreading of haemocytes from the 2 susceptible HAC and EAF and the 2 resistant KB and CB strains of Biomphalaria glabrata. Significant decreases in spreading are indicated by asterisks (P<0.001; Mann–Whitney U-test).

Figure 3

Fig. 4. Percentage of beads phagocytosed by haemocytes from the 2 susceptible HAC and EAF strains, and the 2 resistant KB and CB strains of Biomphalaria glabrata, after a 3 h exposure to CBSS, or Echinostoma caproni E–S products from 0–24 h (E–S 24 h) or 24–48 h (E–S 48 h) cultures. Asterisks indicate a significant difference from control (P<0.001) using the Mann–Whitney U-test.

Figure 4

Fig. 5. Percentage spread of haemocytes from the 2 susceptible (HAC and EAF) strains, and 2 resistant (KB and CB) snail strains after a 3 h incubation in CBSS, heat-treated, concanavalin A-adsorbed or untreated E–S products. Asterisks indicate a significant difference from control (P<0.001) using the Mann–Whitney U-test.

Figure 5

Fig. 6. Effect of various treatments on the E–S ability to affect the spreading of haemocytes from the 2 susceptible strains (HAC and EAF). T, trypsin treatment; T+I, trypsin + trypsin inhibitor treatment; I, inhibitor treatment. Significant differences (P<0.001) with the corresponding CBSS treatment using the Mann–Whitney U-test are indicated with an asterisk.

Figure 6

Fig. 7. Effect of various fractions of E–S products on the spreading of haemocytes from the 2 susceptible (HAC and EAF) strains. Asterisks indicate a significant difference compared to control CBSS using the Mann–Whitney U-test (P<0.001).