1975
DOI: 10.1016/s0070-2153(08)60040-x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Chapter 4 Phenomena of Cellular Recognition in Sponges

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
23
0

Year Published

1982
1982
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 50 publications
(23 citation statements)
references
References 28 publications
0
23
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Mixtures of cells dissociated from different individuals of the freshwater sponge Ephydatia fluviatilis segregated into clumps containing cells of only one individual several days after a mixed aggregate was formed (33). Such individual specificity could be also observed between cell fractions containing only one cell type (34).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 80%
“…Mixtures of cells dissociated from different individuals of the freshwater sponge Ephydatia fluviatilis segregated into clumps containing cells of only one individual several days after a mixed aggregate was formed (33). Such individual specificity could be also observed between cell fractions containing only one cell type (34).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 80%
“…The cell aggregation activity of marine AFs depends on an extracellular calcium concentration of about 10 mM, similar to that found in sea water. AFs from freshwater sponges have also been described [104] and partially purified [105,106], although they are still poorly characterized. Freshwater sponge AFs are active at Ca 2+ concentrations of 1 mM [107], implying major differences when compared to their marine counterparts.…”
Section: Sponge Pgs In Cell Adhesionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Reactions can be fast, such as in Clathria prolifera , which responds to allografting in two to six hours [2,23], or comparatively slow, as in Callyspongia diffusa , which can take up to a week to react [2,10,20,24,25,26]. Processes that characterise graft rejection may include cellular necrosis of one or both graft partners [2,10,20,24,25], collagen deposition to form a physicochemical barrier between the apposing sponges [2,12,22,23,27,28,29], cellular migration to the point of contact [20,21,22,23,29,30], and phagocytic or cytotoxic reactions [22,24,25,26]. Qualitative and quantitative responses to grafts are replicable and predictable [2,24,31], between both first-party (sponge A:B replicates) and third-party (where A:B fusion predicts identical A:C and B:C reactions) grafts [13,25,28].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%