4.6 Article

Rictor Is Required for Early B Cell Development in Bone Marrow

期刊

PLOS ONE
卷 9, 期 8, 页码 -

出版社

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0103970

关键词

-

资金

  1. Ministry of Science and Technology of China [2012CB966604, 2013CB966902, 2011CB964801, 2013BA101B09]
  2. National Natural Science Foundation [81090410, 81130074, 81330015, 81070390, 81300374, 81300436]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The development of early B cells, which are generated from hematopoietic stem cells (HSCs) in a series of well-characterized stages in bone marrow (BM), represents a paradigm for terminal differentiation processes. Akt is primarily regulated by phosphorylation at Thr308 by PDK1 and at Ser473 by mTORC2, and Akt signaling plays a key role in hematopoiesis. However, the role of mTORC2 in the development of early B cells remains poorly understood. In this study, we investigated the functional role of mTORC2 by specifically deleting an integral component, Rictor, in a hematopoietic system. We demonstrated that the deletion of Rictor induced an aberrant increase in the FoxO1 and Rag-1 proteins in BM B cells and that this increase was accompanied by a significant decrease in the abundance of B cells in the peripheral blood (PB) and the spleen, suggesting impaired development of early B cells in adult mouse BM. A BM transplantation assay revealed that the B cell differentiation defect induced by Rictor deletion was not affected by the BM microenvironment, thus indicating a cell-intrinsic mechanism. Furthermore, the knockdown of FoxO1 in Rictor-deleted HSCs and hematopoietic progenitor cells (HPCs) promoted the maturation of B cells in the BM of recipient mice. In addition, we revealed that treatment with rapamycin (an mTORC1 inhibitor) aggravated the deficiency in B cell development in the PB and BM. Taken together, our results provide further evidence that Rictor regulates the development of early B cells in a cell-intrinsic manner by modifying the expression of FoxO1 and Rag-1.

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