Abstract
Historical insight: Between 1912 and 1921, James Murphy established conclusively the role of the lymphocyte in tissue and tumor graft rejection and in protection against infection. Contemporary mainstream immunology paid little attention to these findings, until the lymphocyte was “rediscovered” with the advent of modern cellular immunology after the mid-1950s.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution
Access options
Subscribe to this journal
Receive 12 print issues and online access
$209.00 per year
only $17.42 per issue
Buy this article
- Purchase on Springer Link
- Instant access to full article PDF
Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout
References
Rich, A. R. The Pathogenesis of Tuberculosis 2nd edn (Charles C. Thomas, Springfield, IL, 1951).
Fleck, L. Genesis and Development of a Scientific Fact. (University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1986). The original German version was published in 1935.
See, for example, Canguilhem's criticism of the theory of scientific “precursors” in Etudes d'Histoire et de Philosophie des Sciences 11–23 (Vrin, Paris, 1974). See also Sandler, I. Hist. Sci. 17, 170–190 (1979).
Medawar, P. B. J. Anat. 78, 176–199 (1944) and J. Anat. 79, 157–176 (1945). Only in 1957 would Medawar refer to Murphy's work and conclude then (erroneously, I believe) that “All we have now to regret is that these authors believed a 'cellular' theory to be incompatible with an immunological theory”. Harvey Lectures 52, 144–176 (1957), see pp. 148–149.
Yoffee, J. M. et al. in Biological Activity of the Leukocyte (eds. Wolstenholme, G. E. W. & M. O'Connor, M.) 45–59 (Churchill, London, 1961). It is all the more ironic that J. L. Gowans, B. M. Gesner and D. D. McGregor would provide an answer to the function of the lymphocyte just a few pages away in the same volume, see pages 32–44.
In choosing Gowans to represent modern progress in “lymphocytology”, we should not forget such important contributions as those of Chase and Mitchison for passive cell transfer; of Simonsen, Billingham and Brent and of Teresaki for their work on the graft-versus-host reaction; of Gell and Waksman for defining the cytology of hypersensitivity reactions; of Miller, Waksman and Good for defining the role of the thymus and of Good for defining the role of the avian bursa of Fabricius; of Claman, Miller and Mitchell and of Mitchison for defining the functions of T and B cells; and of the many others who have contributed importantly to this fascinating story.
Löwy, I. Bull. Hist. Med. 63, 356–391 (1989).
Rous's career is well covered in the biographical memoirs by Henderson, J. S. Am. Philosoph. Soc. Yearbook 168–179 (1971) and Dulbecco, R. Biograph. Mem. Natl Acad. Sci. 48, 275–306 (1976).
Rous, P. J. Am. Med. Soc. 56, 198–199 (1911). Rous's teacher, William Welch, had cautioned the young man that: “Whatever you do, don't commit yourself to the cancer problem”, cited on p. 109 of Corner, A. History of the Rockefeller Institute 1901–1953 (New York, Rockefeller Inst. Press, 1964). Rous wasted no time in proving Welch wrong, as his much-delayed Nobel Prize in 1966 for the sarcoma virus discovery would attest.
For further information on Murphy and on those aspects of his science not discussed here see Little, C. C. in Biographical Memoirs of Members of the National Academy of Sciences 34, 183–203 (1964), Davis, A. B. The Dictionary of Scientific Biography 9, 586–587 (1974) and Corner, A. History of the Rockefeller Institute 1901–1953 (New York, Rockefeller Inst. Press, 1964). Murphy's annual reports make fascinating reading; they are contained in Scientific Reports to the Corporation and Board of Scientific Directors of the Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research, collection RV-RG N0. 439 at the Rockefeller Archives Center, Sleepy Hollow, New York (henceforth RAC-RIMR collection). I thank its Director, D. Stapleton and his staff for their generous assistance.
Murphy, J. B. Monographs of the Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research No. 21 (1926).
Brent, L. A History of Transplantation p. 66 (San Diego, Academic Press, 1997).
Schöne, G. Die Heteroplastische und Homöoplastische Transplantation (Springer, Berlin, 1912).
Tyzzer, J. Cancer Res. 1, 125–152 (1916).
Woglom, W. H. Cancer Rev. 4, 129–214 (1929).
See Silverstein, A. M. A History of Immunology pp. 275–295 (Academic Press, New York, 1989) but also see L. Brent's caveat about this conclusion in A History of Transplantation p. 60 (San Diego, Academic Press, 1997).
See Löwy, I. Bull. Hist. Med. 63, 356–391 (1989). See also Löwy's discussion of the significance that a term's semantic changes over time have for the attribution of “discovery” in Hist. Stud. Phys. Biol. Sci. 21, 1–121 (1990). But the use of different terms does not always mean that different meanings were understood; all contemporaries understood that Paul Ehrlich's Ambozeptor and Jules Bordet's substance sensibilisatrice referred to the same hemolytic antibody. See Silverstein, A. M. Cell. Immunol. 97, 173–188 (1986).
Murphy, J. B. J. Exp. Med. 19, 181–186 (1914).
Murphy, J. B. J. Exp. Med. 19, 513–522 (1914). See also RAC-RIMR 439, Box 1, vol. 3, pp. 374–375.
Murphy, J. B. J. Exp. Med. 24, 513–522 (1916). See also Murphy, J. B. Monographs of the Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research No. 21 (1926) and RAC-RIMR 439, Box 1, vol.4, p. 180.
Simonsen, M. Acta Path. Microbiol. Scand. 40, 480–500 (1957).
Billingham, R. E. & Brent, L. Transplant. Bull. 4, 67–71 (1957).
Simonsen, M. Immunol. Rev. 88, 1–23 (1985).
Murphy, J. B. & Morton, J. J. J. Exp. Med. 22, 204–211 (1915), see p. 210.
Murphy, J. B. & Taylor, H. D. J. Exp. Med. 28, 1–10 (1918). See also Nakahara, W. & Murphy, J. B. J. Exp. Med. 33, 429–432 and 433–439 (1921).
Murphy, J. B. & Sturm, E. J. Exp. Med. 29, 1–16, 25–30 and 31–34 (1919).
Taylor, H. D., Witherbee, W. D. & Murphy, J. B., J. Exp. Med. 29, 53–74 (1919). See also RAC-RIMR 439, Box 1, vol. 4, p. 10.
Shirai, Y. Jap. Med. World 1, 14 (1921).
Murphy, J. B. & Sturm, E., J. Exp. Med. 38, 183–197 (1923).
Murphy, J.B. & Ellis, A.W.M., J. Exp. Med. 20, 397–403 (1914).
Murphy, J. B. Monographs of the Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research No. 21 (1926).
Hektoen, L. J. Infect. Dis. 27, 23–30 (1920).
Murphy, J. B. & Sturm, E. J. Exp. Med. 41, 245–255 (1925).
Murphy, J. B. Monographs of the Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research No. 21 (1926). The relationship between lymphoid cells and antibody formation would not become apparent for another 30-odd years. E. E. Tyzzer, Cancer Res. 1, 125–152 (1916), had shown earlier that passive transfer of serum from immune animals to normals furnished no protection against tumor grafts.
As late as 1963, a conference could still be held at the National Academy of Sciences entitled “Cell-bound antibodies”. Amos, B. & Koprowski, H. (eds.) Cell-bound Antibodies (Wistar Institute Press, Philadelphia, 1963).
Silverstein, A. M. Cell. Immunol. 132, 515–532 (1991).
Dienes, L. & Mallory, T. B. Am. J. Pathol. 8, 689–709 (1932).
Rich, A. R. The Pathogenesis of Tuberculosis 2nd edn (Charles C. Thomas, Springfield, IL, 1951).
Landsteiner, K. & Chase, M. W. Proc. Soc. Exp. Biol. Med. 49, 688–690 (1942). See also Chase, M. W. Proc. Soc. Exp. Biol. Med. 59, 134–135 (1945).
Kabat, E. A., Wolfe, A. & Bezer, A. E., J. Exp. Med. 85, 117–130 (1947) and J. Exp. Med. 89, 395–398 (1949).
Is it a coincidence that all four were botanists?
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Silverstein, A. The lymphocyte in immunology: from James B. Murphy to James L. Gowans. Nat Immunol 2, 569–571 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1038/89706
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/89706
This article is cited by
-
Lymphocytes, Jim Gowans and in vivo veritas
Nature Immunology (2010)
-
How important was Murphy?
Nature Immunology (2001)