Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Species Differences in the Effectiveness of Intestinal Barriers against Penetration of Inert Particulates and Bacteria

  • Chapter
Gram-Negative Bacterial Infections and Mode of Endotoxin Actions

Abstract

Host and microflora interactions occur on all surfaces of the body exposed to the environment. The microbial ecology of the gastrointestinal tract may be regarded as the most important site of interaction if numbers of microorganisms and diversity and magnitude of antigenic stimulation involved are considered. Because of suppression of, or competition with, potential invaders, possibly also by virtue of its ability to block access of invaders to the tissues, the autochthonous flora contributes to the defense of the host. It may also be related to the mosaic-like distribution of bacterial species along the gastrointestinal tract. It has been recognized in recent years that intimate symbiotic associations between microorganisms and the inner surface of the gastrointestinal tract in small rodents are instrumental in maintaining a state of health. An unexpected finding was that large numbers of hitherto unknown, highly oxygen-sensitive bacteria form dense layers covering the mucosal epithelium (1, 2, 3). Little is known with respect to the relative importance of secretory IgA, lysozyme, complement components and other humoral factors for defense against microorganisms in the neighbourhood of, or within, intestinal epithelial layers. A so-called chemical barrier resembling the intracellular digestive apparatus, as observed in mammalian tissue culture cells (4), has been proposed to exist near the brush border of epithelial cells where activities of enzymes such as acid phosphatase and nonspecific esterase have been demonstrated. However, this defense mechanism does not provide sufficient protection against such pathogenic microbes as Salmonella, Shigella, Cryptosporidia and other organisms which penetrate and/ or reside and multiply within the brush border or the entire epithelial layer (review: 5); moreover, it is sensitive to the action of certain enterotoxins such as those from E. coli and Vibrio cholerae (6, 7, 8).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Savage, D. C., Dubos, R., Schaedler, R. W. J. exp. Med. 127: 67 (1968).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Lee, A., Gordon, J., Dubos, R.: Nature 220: 1137 (1968).

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Savage, D. C., McAllister, J. S.: Microbial interactions at body surfaces andresistance to infectious diseases. In: Dunlop, R. H., Moon, H. W.: Resistance to Infectious Disease, p.113 (Saskatoon Modern Press 1970 ).

    Google Scholar 

  4. Gordon, G. B., Miller, L. R., Bensch, K. G.: J. Cell Biol. 25: 41 (1965).

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Takeuchi, A.: Current Topics in Pathology 54: 1 (1971).

    Google Scholar 

  6. Love, A. H. G.: Gut 10: 105 (1969).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Moon, H. W., Whipp, S. C., Baetz, A. L.: Lab. Invest. 25: 133 (1971).

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Yardley, J. H., Brown, G. D.: Lab. Invest. 28: 482 (1973).

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Gordon, L. E., Ruml, D., Hahne, H. J., Miller, C. Ph.: J. exp. Med. 102: 413 (1955).

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Thomas, H. C., McSween, R. N. M., White, R. G.: Lancet I: 1288 (1973).

    Google Scholar 

  11. Hammond, C, W., Tompkins, M., Miller, C. Ph.: J. exp. Med. 99: 405 (1954).

    Google Scholar 

  12. Hammond, C. W., Colling, M., Cooper, D. B., Miller, C. Ph.: J. exp. Med. 99: 411 (1954).

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Cottier, H.: Histopathologie der Wirkung ionisierender Strahlen auf höhere Organismen (Tier und Mensch). In: Diethelm, L., Olsson, O., Strnad, F., Vie-ten, H., Zuppinger, A.: Handbuch der Medizinischen Radiologie, p. 3, Bd. II/2 ( Springer, Berlin-Heidelberg-New York 1966 ).

    Google Scholar 

  14. Herbst, E. F. G.: Das Lymphgefäßsystem und seine Verrichtungen ( Vandenhoeck und Ruprecht, Göttingen 1844 ).

    Google Scholar 

  15. Mason, J. H., Dalling, T., Gordon, W. S.: J. Path. Bact. 33: 783 (1930).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Aschaffenburg, R., Bartlett, S., Kon, S. K., Roy, J. H. B., Walker, D., Briggs, C., Lovell, R.: Brit. J. Nutr. 5: 171 (1951).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Bangham, D. R., Ingram, P. L., Roy, J. H. B., Shillam, K. W. G., Terry, R. J.: Proc. Roy. Soc. B 149: 184 (1958).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Fey, H., Margadant, A.: Zbl. Vet. Med. 9: 767 (1962).

    Google Scholar 

  19. Balfour, W. E., Comline, R. S.: J. Physiol. 160: 234 (1962).

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Fey, H.: Die Bedeutung des Gammaglobulins für das neugeborene Kalb. Internat. Tierärztl. Arbeitsgemeinschaft Tierernährung, Symposium Salzburg, p. 17 (1967).

    Google Scholar 

  21. Kraehenbuhl, J. P., Campiche, M. A.: J. Cell Biol. 42: 345 (1969).

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Brambell, F. W.R.: The transmission of passive immunity from mother to young. In: Neuberger, A., Tatum, E. L.: Frontiers of Biology, vol. 18 ( North-Holland Publishing Co., Amsterdam-London 1970 ).

    Google Scholar 

  23. Kraehenbuhl, J. P., Gloor, E., Blanc, B.: Z. Zellforsch. 70: 209 (1966).

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Kraehenbuhl, J. P., Gloor, E., Blanc, B.: Z. Zellforsch. 76: 170 (1967).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Clark, S. L.: J. biophys. biochem. Cytol. 5: 41 (1959).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Moon, H.W.: Vet. Path. 9: 3 (1972).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Halliday, R.: Proc. Roy. Soc. B 143: 408 (1955).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Clarke, R. M„ Hardy, R. N.: J. Physiol. 209: 669 (1970).

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Clarke, R. M., Hardy, R.N.: J. Anat. 108: 63 (1971).

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Clarke, R. M., Hardy, R. N.: J. Physiol. 204: 127 (1969).

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Moon, H. W., Kohler, E. M., Whipp, S. C.: Lab. Invest. 28: 23 (1973).

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Koldovsky, O., Sunshine, P., Kretchmer, N.: Nature 212: 1389 (1966).

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Cornell, R., Walker, W.A., Isselbacher, K. J.: Lab. Invest. 25: 42 (1971).

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Warshaw, A. L., Walker, W. A., Cornell, R., Isselbacher, K. J.: Lab. Invest. 25: 675 (1971).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Walker, W. A., Cornell, R., Davenport, L. M., Isselbacher, K. J.: J. Cell Biol. 54: 195 (1972).

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Walker, W. A., Isselbacher, K. J., Bloch, K. J.: Science 177: 608 (1972).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Walker, W. A., Isselbacher, K. J., Bloch, K. J.: J. Immunol. 111: 221 (1973).

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Isomäki, A. M.: Acta path. microbiol. scand., Sect. A, Supplement 240 (1973).

    Google Scholar 

  39. Volkheimer, G., Hermann, H., Hermans, E., John, A., Al Abesie, F., Wachtel, S.: Zbl. Bakt. (Orig.) 192: 121 (1964).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. Volkheimer, G., Schulz, F. H., John, H., Meier zu Eisen, J., Niederkorn, K.:Gynaecologica 168: 86 (1969).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. Volkheimer, G., Schulz, F. H., Hofmann, I., Pieser, J., Rack, O., Reichelt, G., Rothenbaecher, W., Schmelich, G., Schurig, B., Teicher, G., Weiss, B.: Pharmacology 1: 8 (1968).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  42. Volkheimer, G., Wendlandt, H., Wagemann, W., Reitzig, P., Schneider, D., Böhm, C., Böhm, M., Eras, B., Gröning, H., Hauptmann, G., Hiller, R., Lorenz, H., Mandelkow, A., Strauch, S.: Path. Microbiol. 31: 51 (1968).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  43. Joel, D. D., Hess, M. W., Cottier, H.: J. exp. Med. 135: 907 (1972).

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  44. Chanana, A. D., Schädeli, J., Hess, M. W., Cottier, H.: J. Immunol. 110: 283 (1973).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  45. Joel, D. D., Sordat, B., Hess, M. W., Cottier, H.: Experientia 26: 694 (1970).

    Google Scholar 

  46. Hanaoka, M., Williams, M., Waksman, B. H.: Lab. Invest. 24: 31 (1971).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  47. Friedenstein, A., Goncharenko, I.: Nature 206: 1113 (1965).

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  48. Hess, M. W., Cottier, H., Sordat, B., Joel, D. D., Chanana, A. D.: The intestinal barrier to bacterial invasion. In: Braun, W., Ungar, J.: Non-Specific Factors Influencing Host Resistance. A Reexamination, p. 447 ( Karger, Basel 1973 ).

    Google Scholar 

  49. Shimizu, Y., Andrew, W.: J. Morphol. 123: 231 (1967).

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  50. Waksman, B. H., Ozer, H., Blythman, H. E.: Lab. Invest. 28: 614 (1973).

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  51. Reimann, H. A.: JAMA 192: 100 (1965).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Cooper, M. D., Lawton, A. R., Kincade, P. W.: Clin. exp. Immunol. 11: 143 (1972).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  53. Alten van, P. J., Meuwissen, H. J.: Science 176: 45 (1972).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Pollard, M., Sharon, N.: Infect. Immun. 2: 96 (1970).

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  55. Bienenstock, J., Dolezel, J.: J. Immunol. 106: 938 (1971).

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  56. Cooper, G. N., Turner, K.: J. Reticuloendoth. Soc. 6: 419 (1969).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  57. Craig, S. W., Cebra, J. J.: J. exp. Med. 134: 188 (1971).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors
  1. H. Cottier
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Th. Schaffner
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. A. D. Chanana
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. D. D. Joel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. B. Sordat
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. B. J. Bryant
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. M. W. Hess
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Abteilung für Immunologie und Serologie am Institut für Hygiene und Medizinische Mikrobiologie der Fakultät für Klinische Medizin Mannheim, Universität Heidelberg, Mannheim, Federal Republic of Germany

    Bernhard Urbaschek  & Renate Urbaschek  & 

  2. Departments of Microbiology and Pediatrics, State University of New York at Buffalo, Buffalo, N.Y., USA

    Erwin Neter M. D.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1975 Springer-Verlag/Wien

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Cottier, H. et al. (1975). Species Differences in the Effectiveness of Intestinal Barriers against Penetration of Inert Particulates and Bacteria. In: Urbaschek, B., Urbaschek, R., Neter, E. (eds) Gram-Negative Bacterial Infections and Mode of Endotoxin Actions. Springer, Vienna. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-7091-8396-0_12

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-7091-8396-0_12

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Vienna

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-7091-8398-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-7091-8396-0

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation