4.5 Article

Intraperitoneal transfer of wild-type bone marrow repopulates tissue macrophages in the Csf1r knockout rat without contributing to monocytopoiesis

期刊

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF IMMUNOLOGY
卷 -, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/eji.202250312

关键词

bone marrow; CSF1R; rat; tissue macrophage; transgenic

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Homozygous null mutation of the Csf1r gene (Csf1rko) in rats leads to the loss of most tissue macrophage populations and pleiotropic impacts on postnatal growth and organ maturation, leading to early mortality. The phenotype can be reversed by intraperitoneal transfer of WT BM cells (BMT) at weaning. Rat BM contains progenitor cells that are able to restore, replace, and maintain all tissue macrophage populations in a Csf1rko rat directly without contributing to the BM progenitor or blood monocyte populations.
Homozygous null mutation of the Csf1r gene (Csf1rko) in rats leads to the loss of most tissue macrophage populations and pleiotropic impacts on postnatal growth and organ maturation, leading to early mortality. The phenotype can be reversed by intraperitoneal transfer of WT BM cells (BMT) at weaning. Here, we used a Csf1r-mApple transgenic reporter to track the fate of donor-derived cells. Following BMT into Csf1rko recipients, mApple(+ve) cells restored IBA1(+) tissue macrophage populations in every tissue. However, monocytes, neutrophils, and B cells in the BM, blood, and lymphoid tissues remained of recipient (mApple(-ve)) origin. An mApple(+ve) cell population expanded in the peritoneal cavity and invaded locally in the mesentery, fat pads, omentum, and diaphragm. One week after BMT, distal organs contained foci of mApple(+ve), IBA1(-ve) immature progenitors that appeared to proliferate, migrate, and differentiate locally. We conclude that rat BM contains progenitor cells that are able to restore, replace, and maintain all tissue macrophage populations in a Csf1rko rat directly without contributing to the BM progenitor or blood monocyte populations.

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

4.5
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