4.1 Article

Histoplanimetrical Study on the Spatial Relationship of Distribution of Indigenous Bacteria with Mucosal Lymphatic Follicles in Alimentary Tract of Rat

期刊

JOURNAL OF VETERINARY MEDICAL SCIENCE
卷 71, 期 5, 页码 621-630

出版社

JAPAN SOC VET SCI
DOI: 10.1292/jvms.71.621

关键词

alimentary tract; histology; lymphoid organ; microbiological monitoring; rat

资金

  1. Japan Society for the Promotion of Science [19580339]
  2. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [19580339] Funding Source: KAKEN

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The spatial relationship between the distribution of indigenous bacteria (IB) and the Situation of mucosal lymphatic follicles (LF) is histoplanimetrically studied in the rat alimentary tract. From the oral cavity to the nonglandular part of the stomach, IB adhered to the corneal layer of the most luminal mucosa. In the glandular part of the stomach, IB adhered only to the most luminal mucosa but not in the gastric pits. In the small intestine, IB consistently adhered around the apices of both intestinal villi and the doilies, and their amounts decreased toward their basal portions. No IB entered the intestinal crypts. In the large intestine, IB consistently adhered to the most luminal mucosa. Numerous IB were Suspended in the intestinal crypts of both the cecum and the proximal colon, whereas there were no IB in the crypts of the distal colon and the rectum. When IB spread over the basal portions of the intestinal villi, IB with the same morphology were detected on the neighboring LF, whereas no bacteria were detected on the neighboring LF, when IB were located in the apical to middle portions of the intestinal villi. This close relationship between the distribution of IB and mucosal LF was also observed in the large intestine. These results Suggest that the most luminal mucosae are a fundamental settlement site of IB throughout the alimentary tract and that the hyperproliferation of IB's colonies might be detected by neighboring LF in the rat intestine.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.1
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据