4.6 Article

Tissue distribution of products of the mouse decay-accelerating factor (DAF) genes.: Exploitation of a Daf1 knock-out mouse and site-specific monoclonal antibodies

期刊

IMMUNOLOGY
卷 104, 期 2, 页码 215-225

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-2567.2001.01287.x

关键词

-

资金

  1. NEI NIH HHS [P30 EY011373, P30 EY11373, R01 EY11288, R01 EY011288] Funding Source: Medline
  2. NIAID NIH HHS [R01 AI23598, R01 AI023598] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Decay-accelerating factor (DAF) is a membrane regulator of C3 activation that protects self cells from autologous complement attack. In humans, DAF is uniformly expressed as a glycosylphosphatidylinositol (GPI)-anchored molecule. In mice, both GPI-anchored and transmembrane-anchored DAF proteins are produced, each of which can be derived from two different genes (Daf1 and Daf2). In this report, we describe a Daf1 gene knock-out mouse arising as the first product of a strategy for targeting one or both Daf genes. As part of the work, we characterize recently described monoclonal antibodies against murine DAF protein using deletion mutants synthesized in yeast, and then employ the monoclonal antibodies in conjunction with wild-type and the Daf1 knock-out mice to determine the tissue distribution of the mouse Daf1 and Daf2 gene products. To enhance the immunohistochemical detection of murine DAF protein, we utilized the sensitive tyramide fluorescence method. In wild-type mice, we found strong DAF labelling of glomeruli, airway and gut epithelium, the spleen, vascular endothelium throughout all tissues, and seminiferous tubules of the testis. In Daf1 knock-out mice, DAF labelling was ablated in most tissues, but strong labelling of the testis and splenic dendritic cells remained. In both sites, reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction analyses identified both GPI and transmembrane forms of Daf2 gene-derived protein. The results have relevance for studies of in vivo murine DAF function and of murine DAF structure.

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