4.2 Article

Quantification of newly developed T cells in mice by real-time quantitative PCR of T-cell receptor rearrangement excision circles

期刊

EXPERIMENTAL HEMATOLOGY
卷 30, 期 7, 页码 745-750

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/S0301-472X(02)00825-1

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective. Thymic output of newly developed alphabeta T cells in humans can be measured via signal joint T-cell receptor rearrangement excision circles (sjTRECs). Deletion of the TCRD locus via deltaRec to psiJalpha recombination during TCRA rearrangement results in the production of such sjTRECs. The deleting elements deltaRec and psiJalpha are highly conserved between humans and mice and used in a comparable manner. We developed and evaluated a real-time quantitative PCR (RQ-PCR) to detect and quantify deltaRec-psiJalpha sjTRECs in murine peripheral blood leukocytes for estimation of thymic output of newly developed alphabeta T cells in mice. Methods. The threshold cycle (Ct) of the sjTREC RQ-PCR was related to the Ct value of an endogenous reference gene. The difference in Ct value (DeltaCt) was correlated to the absolute numbers of CD45(+) and CD3(+)cells per muL of blood, as obtained by a single platform flow cytometric assay, resulting in the frequency of sjTRECs in CD45(+) and CD3(+) cells. Results. The RQ-PCR proved to be sensitive with a detection level of approximately one sjTREC copy in 100 ng of DNA. SjTRECs could not be detected in peripheral blood leukocytes of RAG-1(-/-) mice, demonstrating the specificity of the assay. As in humans and primates, sjTREC levels declined in aging and thymectomized mice. Remarkably, significant mouse strain-dependent differences in sjTREC levels were observed. 129Sv and C57BL/6 mice had significantly lower sjTREC levels in blood than Balb/c and DBA2 mice. Conclusion. Quantification of murine sjTRECs by RQ-PCR may allow for accurate assessment of thymic output in mice. (C) 2002 International Society for Experimental Hematology. Published by Elsevier Science Inc.

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

4.2
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