FREE SHIPPING over $40
OVER 9000 FIVE-STAR REVIEWS
5% OFF ALL SUBSCRIPTIONS
100% HAPPINESS GUARANTEE
Analyze Diet
0
Home / Equine Research Bank / Clin Exp Immunol / Genetic restriction of cytolysis during equid herpesvirus 1 ...
Clinical and experimental immunology1987; 70(2); 276-282;

Genetic restriction of cytolysis during equid herpesvirus 1 subtype 2 infection.

Abstract: Six Welsh Mountain pony foals were experimentally infected with a subtype 2 isolate of Equid Herpesvirus 1 (EHV-1) and subsequently examined for T cell mediated cytotoxicity against both subtypes. Cytotoxicity was not observed at 3 or 7 days after primary exposure but virus-specific, and genetically restricted, cytotoxicity of EHV-1-labelled autologous skin fibroblasts could be demonstrated 7 and 21 days after the animals were given a second exposure to live virus. Killing of subtype 2 antigen-labelled targets was more efficient than subtype 1 coated cells. This finding was paralleled by the observation that virus-neutralizing and complement-fixing antibody levels were subtype specific after the primary infection but after secondary exposure were directed against both subtypes. During primary infection the lymphocyte proliferative response to EHV-1 subtype 2 was not evident at 7 days post infection (dpi) but by 18 dpi was present in all animals. The second exposure produced an earlier (3 dpi) and larger proliferative response which was specific to the infecting isolate. The non-specific proliferative response to Concanavalin A mitogen indicated that virus infection induced a state of activation in circulating lymphocytes.
Get Full Text
Publication Date: 1987-11-01 PubMed ID: 2827921PubMed Central: PMC1542070
The Equine Research Bank provides access to a large database of publicly available scientific literature. Inclusion in the Research Bank does not imply endorsement of study methods or findings by Mad Barn.
LinkedInCopy
  • Journal Article
  • Research Support
  • Non-U.S. Gov't

Summary

This research summary has been generated with artificial intelligence and may contain errors and omissions. Refer to the original study to confirm details provided. Submit correction.

This research article involves a study conducted on pony foals where they were exposed to Equid Herpesvirus 1 (EHV-1) subtype 2, observing the immune response on their cells, comparing responses to different virus subtypes over time.

Experimental Setup and Processes

  • The basis of the research was an experimental infection conducted on six Welsh Mountain pony foals with a subtype 2 isolate of Equid Herpesvirus 1 (EHV-1).
  • The experiment involved initially exposing the ponies to the virus and then subsequently re-exposing them to observe the cytotoxic effect on their skin fibroblasts. ‘Cytotoxic effect’ refers to the ability of certain cells in the immune system to kill cells that are infected with a virus. Specifically, cytotoxic effect was measured at 3 and 7 days after primary exposure and 7 and 21 days following the secondary exposure.
  • The researchers observed the cytotoxicity against both subtype 1 and subtype 2 isolates of EHV-1.

Findings and Observations

  • No cytotoxicity was observed 3 or 7 days after the primary virus exposure. However, a virus-specific, genetically restricted killing of EHV-1-infected skin cells was demonstrated 7 and 21 days following the secondary exposure to the virus. This essentially means that the specific immune response activated by the re-exposure was more effective and could kill the virus-infected cells efficiently.
  • Killing of subtype 2 antigen-labelled targets was observed to be more efficient than subtype 1-coated cells. Antigen-labelled targets refer to the cells carrying the virus-specific antigens on their surfaces.
  • High levels of virus-neutralizing and complement-fixing antibodies, which are essential part of the immune response against viruses, were detected. These antibodies showed specificity for both subtypes after the secondary exposure, indicating an adaptive immune response developed after the initial infection.
  • Lymphocyte proliferation, which is a crucial step in the development of an effective immune response, was not detectable until 18 days after initial infection. Following the second exposure, the proliferative response was earlier at 3 days and was specific to the infecting subtype 2 virus.
  • The research also found an active state of immune response in the ponies’ circulating lymphocytes, indicated by their non-specific proliferation in response to Concanavalin A mitogen, a substance that triggers cell division.

Conclusions

  • The study concludes that the immune response against EHV-1 is subtype-specific and develops over time with repeated exposure leading to a potent and more specific response.
  • The research highlights the importance of secondary immune responses in developing a more potent and specific response against a particular subtype of the virus, a process known as immunological memory.

Cite This Article

APA
Bridges CG, Edington N. (1987). Genetic restriction of cytolysis during equid herpesvirus 1 subtype 2 infection. Clin Exp Immunol, 70(2), 276-282.

Publication

Clinical and experimental immunology
ISSN: 0009-9104
NlmUniqueID: 0057202
Country: England
Language: English
Volume: 70
Issue: 2
Pages: 276-282

Researcher Affiliations

Bridges, C G
  • Department of Microbiology, Royal Veterinary College, London, UK.
Edington, N

    MeSH Terms

    • Animals
    • Antibodies, Viral / analysis
    • Cell Division
    • Cytotoxicity, Immunologic
    • Herpesviridae Infections / genetics
    • Herpesviridae Infections / immunology
    • Herpesviridae Infections / veterinary
    • Herpesvirus 1, Equid / immunology
    • Horse Diseases / immunology
    • Horses
    • Lymphocyte Activation

    References

    This article includes 23 references
    1. Thomson GR, Mumford JA, Campbell J, Griffiths L, Clapham P. Serological detection of equid herpesvirus 1 infections of the respiratory tract.. Equine Vet J 1976 Apr;8(2):58-65.
      pubmed: 177281doi: 10.1111/j.2042-3306.1976.tb03291.xgoogle scholar: lookup
    2. Allen GP, Bryans JT. Molecular epizootiology, pathogenesis, and prophylaxis of equine herpesvirus-1 infections.. Prog Vet Microbiol Immunol 1986;2:78-144.
      pubmed: 2856183
    3. Gerber JD, Marron AE, Bass EP, Beckenhauer WH. Effect of age and pregnancy on the antibody and cell-mediated immune responses of horses to equine herpesvirus 1.. Can J Comp Med 1977 Oct;41(4):471-8.
      pubmed: 200320
    4. Shearer GM, Schmitt-Verhulst AM. Major histocompatibility complex restricted cell-mediated immunity.. Adv Immunol 1977;25:55-91.
      pubmed: 76435doi: 10.1016/s0065-2776(08)60931-1google scholar: lookup
    5. Dutta SK, Myrup A, Bumgardner MK. Lymphocyte responses to virus and mitogen in ponies during experimental infection with equine herpesvirus 1.. Am J Vet Res 1980 Dec;41(12):2066-8.
      pubmed: 6259978
    6. Quinnan GV Jr, Kirmani N, Esber E, Saral R, Manischewitz JF, Rogers JL, Rook AH, Santos GW, Burns WH. HLA-restricted cytotoxic T lymphocyte and nonthymic cytotoxic lymphocyte responses to cytomegalovirus infection of bone marrow transplant recipients.. J Immunol 1981 May;126(5):2036-41.
      pubmed: 6260861
    7. Nash AA, Gell PG, Wildy P. Tolerance and immunity in mice infected with herpes simplex virus: simultaneous induction of protective immunity and tolerance to delayed-type hypersensitivity.. Immunology 1981 May;43(1):153-9.
      pubmed: 7251047
    8. Patel JR, Edington N, Mumford JA. Variation in cellular tropism between isolates of equine herpesvirus-1 in foals.. Arch Virol 1982;74(1):41-51.
      pubmed: 6297429doi: 10.1007/BF01320781google scholar: lookup
    9. Nash AA, Gell PG. Membrane phenotype of murine effector and suppressor T cells involved in delayed hypersensitivity and protective immunity to herpes simplex virus.. Cell Immunol 1983 Feb 1;75(2):348-55.
      pubmed: 6219750doi: 10.1016/0008-8749(83)90332-5google scholar: lookup
    10. Sethi KK, Omata Y, Schneweis KE. Protection of mice from fatal herpes simplex virus type 1 infection by adoptive transfer of cloned virus-specific and H-2-restricted cytotoxic T lymphocytes.. J Gen Virol 1983 Feb;64 (Pt 2):443-7.
      pubmed: 6601180doi: 10.1099/0022-1317-64-2-443google scholar: lookup
    11. Campbell TM, Studdert MJ, Blackney MH. Immunogenicity of equine herpesvirus type 1 (EHV1) and equine rhinovirus type 1 (ERhV1) following inactivation by betapropiolactone (BPL) and ultraviolet (UV) light.. Vet Microbiol 1982 Dec;7(6):535-44.
      pubmed: 6301141doi: 10.1016/0378-1135(82)90047-5google scholar: lookup
    12. Iwasaka T, Sheridan JF, Aurelian L. Immunity to herpes simplex virus type 2: recurrent lesions are associated with the induction of suppressor cells and soluble suppressor factors.. Infect Immun 1983 Dec;42(3):955-64.
      pubmed: 6227561doi: 10.1128/iai.42.3.955-964.1983google scholar: lookup
    13. Yasukawa M, Zarling JM. Human cytotoxic T cell clones directed against herpes simplex virus-infected cells. I. Lysis restricted by HLA class II MB and DR antigens.. J Immunol 1984 Jul;133(1):422-7.
      pubmed: 6609990
    14. Burrows R, Goodridge D, Denyer MS. Trials of an inactivated equid herpesvirus 1 vaccine: challenge with a subtype 1 virus.. Vet Rec 1984 Apr 14;114(15):369-74.
      pubmed: 6328728doi: 10.1136/vr.114.15.369google scholar: lookup
    15. Mumford JA, Bates J. Trials of an inactivated equid herpesvirus 1 vaccine: challenge with a subtype 2 virus.. Vet Rec 1984 Apr 14;114(15):375-81.
      pubmed: 6328729doi: 10.1136/vr.114.15.375google scholar: lookup
    16. Fitzpatrick DR, Studdert MJ. Immunologic relationships between equine herpesvirus type 1 (equine abortion virus) and type 4 (equine rhinopneumonitis virus).. Am J Vet Res 1984 Oct;45(10):1947-52.
      pubmed: 6208822
    17. Wainberg MA, Portnoy JD, Clecner B, Hubschman S, Lagacé-Simard J, Rabinovitch N, Remer Z, Mendelson J. Viral inhibition of lymphocyte proliferative responsiveness in patients suffering from recurrent lesions caused by herpes simplex virus.. J Infect Dis 1985 Sep;152(3):441-8.
      pubmed: 2993440doi: 10.1093/infdis/152.3.441google scholar: lookup
    18. Chan WL, Lukig ML, Liew FY. Helper T cells induced by an immunopurified herpes simplex virus type I (HSV-I) 115 kilodalton glycoprotein (gB) protect mice against HSV-I infection.. J Exp Med 1985 Oct 1;162(4):1304-18.
      pubmed: 2995536doi: 10.1084/jem.162.4.1304google scholar: lookup
    19. Liew FY. New aspects of vaccine development.. Clin Exp Immunol 1985 Nov;62(2):225-41.
      pubmed: 2417761
    20. Williamson SA, Parish N, Chambers JD, Knight RA. Human immune responses to herpes simplex virus, varicella-zoster and cytomegalovirus in vitro.. Immunology 1986 Mar;57(3):437-42.
      pubmed: 3007334
    21. Horohov DW, Wyckoff JH 3rd, Moore RN, Rouse BT. Regulation of herpes simplex virus-specific cell-mediated immunity by a specific suppressor factor.. J Virol 1986 May;58(2):331-8.
      pubmed: 3009850doi: 10.1128/JVI.58.2.331-338.1986google scholar: lookup
    22. Bridges CG, Edington N. Innate immunity during Equid herpesvirus 1 (EHV-1) infection.. Clin Exp Immunol 1986 Jul;65(1):172-81.
      pubmed: 2431815
    23. Wilks CR. In vitro cytotoxicity of serum and peripheral blood leukocytes for equine herpesvirus type 1-infected target cells.. Am J Vet Res 1977 Jan;38(1):117-21.
      pubmed: 189645

    Citations

    This article has been cited 1 times.
    1. Smith D, Hamblin A, Edington N. Equid herpesvirus 1 infection of endothelial cells requires activation of putative adhesion molecules: an in vitro model.. Clin Exp Immunol 2002 Aug;129(2):281-7.
      doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2249.2002.01463.xpubmed: 12165084google scholar: lookup
    Subscribe to our newsletter
    Join 99,344 horse owners like you who receive our email updates on horse health and nutrition.