The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Immediate Hypersensitivity: A Defense against Arthropods?
Abstract
IMMEDIATE HYPERSENSITIVITY: A DEFENSE AGAINST ARTHROPODS? JAMES H. STEBBINGS, JR.* It is known, but not widely recognized, that many reactions to insect bites are immediate hypersensitivity reactions [1, p. 146; 2]; that these reactions are far more common than hay fever, asthma, and other immediate hypersensitivity reactions of clinical importance is indisputable . I propose the hypothesis that a major function of the immediate hypersensitivity reactions has been the protection of terrestrial vertebrates from the bites of, or invasion by, arthropods. Beyond the obvious notion that the most common agent inducing a biological response may be a clue as to the function of that response, two observations induced me to pursue the line of thought presented in this paper. Since the time of Osier [3] hay fever has been considered a product of modern culture; Burnet has commented on its apparent increase in recent decades [4, p. 142]. A concurrent decrease in frequency of insect bites, and presumably of the immediate hypersensitivity reactions which often follow, has not been quantified but is scarcely deniable. Second, a frequent, readily observable, and presumably beneficial function of the immediate hypersensitivity reaction to insect bites in man is the inducement of avoidance behavior. The natural functions of reagirne antibodies, or immunoglobulin E, have remained obscure despite their clinical importance as mediators of atopic diseases [5; 6, p. 31]. Elevated serum IgE levels h…
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“Even before Profet’s 1991 paper, James Stebbings, Jr. hypothesized that “a major function of the immediate hypersensitivity reactions has been the protection of terrestrial vertebrates from the bites of, or invasion by, arthropods” [40].”
From Mast cells and IgE in defense against lethality of venoms: Possible “benefit” of allergy (2020) · cites this paper as [40]
In the citing paper
“The latter finding supports the idea proposed both by Stebbings [40] and Profet [39] that elements of allergic responses, in this case, mast cells, can confer benefit to hosts experiencing attacks by arthropods [40] or other sources of toxins [39] by altering the host’s behavior in ways that would help to eliminate, or at least permit the host to become aware of, the threat.”
From Mast cells and IgE in defense against lethality of venoms: Possible “benefit” of allergy (2020) · cites this paper as [40]
In the citing paper
“This evidence supports the notion [39–41] that key elements of “allergic reactivity”, including mast cells and IgE, indeed can importantly enhance innate and acquired host resistance to venoms.”
From Mast cells and IgE in defense against lethality of venoms: Possible “benefit” of allergy (2020) · cites this paper as [40]
Citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Mast cells and IgE in defense against venoms: Possible “good side” of allergy?
Galli, S. J., Starkl, P., Marichal, T., & Tsai, M. (2016) · Allergology International · doi:10.1016/j.alit.2015.09.002 · Cited by 73
Mast cells and IgE in defense against lethality of venoms: Possible “benefit” of allergy
Galli, S. J., Metz, M., Starkl, P., Marichal, T., & Tsai, M. (2020) · Allergo Journal International · doi:10.1007/s40629-020-00118-6 · Cited by 57
Metadata
- Authors
- Stebbings, J. H.
- Venue
- Perspectives in Biology and Medicine
- Publisher
- Project MUSE
- Published
- 1974-12
- Volume
- 17
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 233-241
- ISSN
- 1529-8795
- Cited by
- 35
- References
- 0
- Language
- en
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Immediate Hypersensitivity: A Defense against Arthropods? https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1353/pbm.1974.0027
- The paper
- Stebbings, J. H. (1974). Immediate Hypersensitivity: A Defense against Arthropods? Perspectives in Biology and Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1353/pbm.1974.0027