4.6 Article

Differential Expression of CD45RO and CD45RA in Bovine T Cells

Journal

CELLS
Volume 11, Issue 11, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/cells11111844

Keywords

cattle; memory; CD4+T cells; CD8+T cells; gamma delta T cells; CD45RO; CD45RA; IFN gamma; IL4; PBMCs

Categories

Funding

  1. USDA NIFA Grant [2016-67015-24948, 2019-67015-29831]
  2. Jorgensen Foundation
  3. MAES program in University of Maryland
  4. NIFA [810833, 2016-67015-24948] Funding Source: Federal RePORTER

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Bovine memory T cells are identified based on CD45RO and CD45RA expression. Not all cows express CD45RO, and the expression of CD45RA/RO is associated with distinct T cell subtypes.
Effective vaccination induces immune memory to protect animals upon pathogen re-encounter. Despite contradictory reports, bovine memory T cells are identified based on two isoforms of CD45, expression of CD45RO plus exclusion of CD45RA. In this report, we contrasted CD45RA/RO expression on circulatory T cells with IFN gamma and IL4 expression induced by a conventional method. To our surprise, 20% of cattle from an enclosed herd did not express CD45RO on T cells without any significant difference on CD45RA expression and IFN gamma or IL4 induction. In CD45RO expressing cattle, CD45RA and CD45RO expressions excluded each other, with dominant CD45RO (>90%) expression on gamma delta (gamma delta) followed by CD4+ (60%) but significantly higher CD45RA expression on CD8+ T cells (about 80%). Importantly, more than 80% of CD45RO expressing CD4+ and CD8+ T cells failed to produce IFN gamma and IL-4; however, within the cytokine inducing cells, CD4+ T cells highly expressed CD45RO but those within CD8+ T cells mostly expressed CD45RA. Hence, CD45RO is not ubiquitously expressed in cattle, and rather than with memory phenotype, CD45RA/RO expression are more associated with distinct T cell subtypes.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available