4.3 Article

Effects of age and macrophage lineage on intracellular survival and cytokine induction after infection with Rhodococcus equi

期刊

VETERINARY IMMUNOLOGY AND IMMUNOPATHOLOGY
卷 160, 期 1-2, 页码 41-50

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.vetimm.2014.03.010

关键词

Rhodococcus equi; Macrophage; Foal; Pneumonia; Cytokines

资金

  1. Morris Animal Foundation [D10EQ-403]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Rhodococcus equi, a facultative intracellular pathogen of macrophages, causes life-hreatening pneumonia in foals and in people with underlying immune deficiencies. As a basis for this study, we hypothesized that macrophage lineage and age would affect intracellular survival of R. equi and cytokine induction after infection. Monocyte-derived and bronchoalveolar macrophages from 10 adult horses and from 10 foals (sampled at 1-3 days, 2 weeks, 1 month, 3 months, and 5 months of age) were infected ex vivo with virulent R. equi. Intracellular R. equi were quantified and mRNA expression of IL-1 beta, IL-4, IL-6, IL-8, IL-10, IL-12 p40, IL-18, IFN-gamma, and TNF-alpha was measured. Intracellular replication of It equi was significantly (P < 0.001) greater in bronchoalveolar than in monocyte-derived macrophages, regardless of age. Regardless of the macrophage lineage, replication of R. equi was significantly (P = 0.002) higher in 3-month-old foals than in 3-day old foals, 2-week-old foals, 1-month-old foals, and adult horses. Expression of IL-4 mRNA was significantly higher in monocyte-derived macrophages whereas expression of IL-6, IL-18, and TNF-alpha was significantly higher in bronchoalveolar macrophages. Induction of IL-1 beta, IL-10, IL-12 p40, and IL-8 mRNA in bronchoalveolar macrophages of 1-3-day old foals was significantly higher than in older foals or adult horses. Preferential intracellular survival of R. equi in bronchoalveolar macrophages of juvenile horses may play a role in the pulmonary tropism of the pathogen and in the window of age susceptibility to infection. (C) 2014 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

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

4.3
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