4.6 Article

RIG-I Detects Triphosphorylated RNA of Listeria monocytogenes during Infection in Non-Immune Cells

期刊

PLOS ONE
卷 8, 期 4, 页码 -

出版社

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0062872

关键词

-

资金

  1. BMBF Biofuture [0311896]
  2. BMBF [01KI0771]
  3. Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft [SFB670, SFB704, SFB832, KFO177]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The innate immune system senses pathogens by pattern recognition receptors in different cell compartments. In the endosome, bacteria are generally recognized by TLRs; facultative intracellular bacteria such as Listeria, however, can escape the endosome. Once in the cytosol, they become accessible to cytosolic pattern recognition receptors, which recognize components of the bacterial cell wall, metabolites or bacterial nucleic acids and initiate an immune response in the host cell. Current knowledge has been focused on the type I IFN response to Listeria DNA or Listeria-derived second messenger c-di-AMP via the signaling adaptor STING. Our study focused on the recognition of Listeria RNA in the cytosol. With the aid of a novel labeling technique, we have been able to visualize immediate cytosolic delivery of Listeria RNA upon infection. Infection with Listeria as well as transfection of bacterial RNA induced a type-I-IFN response in human monocytes, epithelial cells or hepatocytes. However, in contrast to monocytes, the type-I-IFN response of epithelial cells and hepatocytes was not triggered by bacterial DNA, indicating a STING-independent Listeria recognition pathway. RIG-I and MAVS knock-down resulted in abolishment of the IFN response in epithelial cells, but the IFN response in monocytic cells remained unaffected. By contrast, knockdown of STING in monocytic cells reduced cytosolic Listeria-mediated type-I-IFN induction. Our results show that detection of Listeria RNA by RIG-I represents a non-redundant cytosolic immunorecognition pathway in nonimmune cells lacking a functional STING dependent signaling pathway.

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

4.6
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