4.3 Article

A method to differentiate chicken monocytes into macrophages with proinflammatory properties

期刊

IMMUNOBIOLOGY
卷 225, 期 6, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER GMBH
DOI: 10.1016/j.imbio.2020.152004

关键词

chicken macrophages; pro-inflammatory cytokines; immune response

资金

  1. China Scholarship Council (CSC)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Macrophages are part of the first line of defense against invading pathogens. In mammals, the in vitro culture of macrophages from blood monocytes or bone marrow cells is well established, including culturing conditions to differentiate them towards M1 or M2-like macrophages. In chicken, monocyte-derived macrophages have been used in several studies, but there is no uniform protocol or actual characterization of these cells. Therefore, to generate proinflammatory M1-like macrophages, in this study blood monocytes were differentiated using GMCSF for 4 days and characterized based on cell morphology, surface marker expression and cytokine expression response to TLRs stimulation at each (daily) time point. Cell morphology showed that one-day-cultured cells contained a mixture of cell populations, while the homogenous population of cells on day 3 and day 4 were flat and had a 'fried-egg' like shape, similar to human M1 macrophages. In addition, cell surface marker staining showed that 3 and 4-days-cultured cells expressed a high level of MRC1L-B (KUL01) and MHC-II. Furthermore, LPS stimulation of the cultured cells induced gene expression of the proinflammatory cytokines IL-1 beta, IL-6 and IL-8 after 3 days of culture. Finally, it was shown that day 3 macrophages were able to phagocytose avian pathogenic E. coli (APEC) and respond by nitric oxide production. Overall, our systematic characterization of the monocyte derived cells from blood showed that a 3-days culture was optimal to obtain pro-inflammatory M1 like macrophages, increasing our knowledge about chicken macrophage polarization and providing useful information for studies on chicken macrophage phenotypes.

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