4.6 Article

Microglia recognize double-stranded RNA via TLR3

期刊

JOURNAL OF IMMUNOLOGY
卷 176, 期 6, 页码 3804-3812

出版社

AMER ASSOC IMMUNOLOGISTS
DOI: 10.4049/jimmunol.176.6.3804

关键词

-

资金

  1. NIAID NIH HHS [AI 055749] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Microglia are CNS resident innate immune cells of myeloid origin that become activated and produce innate proinflammatory molecules upon encountering bacteria or viruses. TLRs are a phylogenetically conserved diverse family of sensors for pathogen-associated molecular patterns that drive innate immune responses. We have recently shown that mice deficient in TLR3 (TLR3(-/-) mice) are resistant to lethal encephalitis and have reduced microglial activation after infection with West Nile virus, a retrovirus that produces dsRNA. We wished to determine whether microglia recognize dsRNA through the TLR3 pathway. In vitro, murine wild-type primary cultured microglia responded to synthetic dsRNA polyinosinic-polycytidylic acid (poly(I:Q) by increasing TLR3 and IFN-beta mRNA and by morphologic activation. Furthermore, wild-type microglia dose dependently secreted TNF-alpha and IL-6 after poly(I:C) challenge, whereas TLR3(-/-) microglia produced diminished cytokines. Activation of MAPK occurred in a time-dependent fashion following poly(I:Q treatment of wild-type microglia, but happened with delayed kinetics in TLR3(-/-) microglia. As an in vivo model of encephalitis, wild-type or TLR3(-/-) mice were injected intracerebroventricularly with poly(I:C) or LPS, and microglial activation was assessed by cell surface marker or phospho-MAPK immunofluorescence. After intracere-broventricular injection of poly(I:C), microgliosis was clearly evident in wild-type mice but was nearly absent in TLR3(-/-) animals. When taken together, our results demonstrate that microglia recognize dsRNA through TLR3 and associated signaling molecules and suggest that these cells are key sensors of dsRNA-producing viruses that may invade the CNS.

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