SEARCH:   Advanced

This Article Abstract Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Rights and Permissions Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via CrossRef Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by del Hoyo, G. M. Articles by Ardavín, C. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by del Hoyo, G. M. Articles by Ardavín, C. Related Collections Immunobiology Social Bookmarking                   What's this?  Previous Article  |  Table of Contents  |  Next Article  Blood, 1 February 2002, Vol. 99, No. 3, pp. 999-1004 IMMUNOBIOLOGY CD8+ dendritic cells originate from the CD8 dendritic cell subset by a maturation process involving CD8, DEC-205, and CD24 up-regulation Gloria Martínez del Hoyo, Pilar Martín, Cristina Fernández Arias, Alvaro Rodríguez Marín, and Carlos Ardavín From the Department of Cell Biology, Faculty of Biology, Complutense University, Madrid, Spain.     Abstract Top Abstract Introduction Materials and methods Results Discussion References CD8+ and CD8 dendritic cells (DCs) have been considered as independent DC subpopulations both ontogenetically and functionally during recent years. However, it has been demonstrated that both DC subsets can be generated from a single precursor population, supporting the concept that they do not represent separate DC lineages. By using highly purified splenic CD8 DCs, which were injected intravenously and traced by means of an Ly5.1/Ly5.2 transfer system, this study shows that CD8 DCs acquired the phenotypic characteristics of CD8+ DCs, by a differentiation process involving CD8, DEC-205, and CD24 up-regulation, paralleled by the down-regulation of CD11b, F4/80, and CD4. These data demonstrate that CD8+ DCs derive from CD8 DCs, and strongly support that CD8 and CD8+ DCs represent different maturation or differentiation stages of the same DC population. Therefore, CD8+ DCs would represent the last stage of DC differentiation, playing an essential role in the induction of T-cell responses, due to their antigen-presenting potential, cross-priming ability, and capacity to secrete large amounts of key cytokines such as interferon  and interleukin-12. (Blood. 2002;99:999-1004) © 2002 by The American Society of Hematology.     Introduction Top Abstract Introduction Materials and methods Results Discussion References Despite the extensive research on dendritic cell (DC) biology developed over the last decade, essentially driven by the possibility of exploiting their antigen-presenting cell (APC) potential in vaccination and immunotherapeutic anticancer trials, their origin remains to be unraveled. In the mouse, the wide variety of DC subsets described so far, each of them endowed with unique functional capacities, can be classified on the basis of their CD8 expression. In this sense although CD8 and CD8+ DCs have been considered as myeloid- and lymphoid-derived, respectively (for a review, see Banchereau et al1), this concept has been challenged in a recent report by our group demonstrating that both subpopulations can be generated from a unique lymphoid-committed precursor population.2 These findings have been confirmed and extended in a recent report by Weissman and colleagues, showing that both CD8 and CD8+ DCs can be derived from either lymphoid- or myeloid-committed precursors.3 Therefore, no experimental evidence supports any longer the concept that CD8 and CD8+ DCs represent different DC lineages, and the question of the functional correlation between these DC subpopulations is reopened. Here we demonstrate that highly purified splenic CD8 DCs isolated from Ly5.2+ C57BL mice acquire the phenotypic characteristics of splenic CD8+ DCs on intravenous transfer into congenic Ly5.1+ C57BL mice, by a differentiation process involving CD8, DEC-205, and CD24 (heat-stable antigen [HSA]) up-regulation, paralleled by the down-regulation of CD11b (Mac-1), F4/80, and CD4. These results provide the first evidence of the derivation of splenic CD8+ DCs from the CD8 subpopulation, and demonstrate conclusively that these DC subsets do not represent independent DC subpopulations either ontogenetically or functionally.     Materials and methods Top Abstract Introduction Materials and methods Results Discussion References Mice For phenotypic experiments 5- to 6-week-old C57BL/6 mice were used. In transfer assays CD8 DCs were isolated from 5- to 6-week-old C57BL/Ka Ly5.2 (C57BL/Ly5.2) mice and injected into 8-week-old C57BL/6 Ly5.1 Pep3b (C57BL/Ly5.1) mice. DC-enriched cell fractions Spleens were cut into small fragments and then digested with collagenase A (0.5 mg/mL; Boehringer-Mannheim, Mannheim, Germany) and DNase I (40 µg/mL, Boehringer-Mannheim) in RPMI 1640 medium supplemented with 5% fetal calf serum (FCS) for 10 minutes at 37°C with continuous agitation. Digested fragments were filtered through a stainless-steel sieve, and cell suspensions washed twice in phosphate-buffered saline (PBS) solution supplemented with 5% FCS and 5 mM EDTA containing 5 µg/mL DNase I. The cells were then resuspended in cold isosmotic Optiprep solution (Nyegaard Diagnostics, Oslo, Norway), pH 7.2, density 1.061 g/cm3, containing 5 mM EDTA, and a low-density cell fraction, accounting for less than 1% of the starting cell population, was obtained by centrifugation at 1700g for 10 minutes. Splenic DC-enriched cell fractions were then treated for 50 minutes at 4°C with a monoclonal antibody (mAb) mixture including anti-CD3 (clone KT3-1.1), anti-B220 (clone RA3-6B2), and antigranulocyte antigen Gr1 (clone RB6-8C5). The unwanted cells were then removed magnetically after incubation for 30 minutes at 4°C with antirat immunoglobulin-coated magnetic beads (Dynabeads, Dynal, Oslo, Norway) at a 7:1 bead-to-cell ratio. Analysis of CD11c versus CD8 expression revealed that DC-enriched cell fractions used for phenotypic analysis were composed of more than 60% DCs. Purification of CD8 DCs CD8 DCs used in transfer experiments were purified from splenic DC-enriched cell fractions, from which CD8+ DCs were depleted with magnetic beads after incubation with anti-CD8 (clone 53-6.72), by magnetic cell sorting (MACS) with MACS separation columns (Miltenyi Biotec, Bergisch, Germany) after incubation with anti-CD11c-conjugated MACS microbeads (Miltenyi Biotec). After reanalysis the DC fraction had a purity of more than 98% and did not contain CD8+ DCs as assessed after analysis of CD11c versus CD8, using the anti-CD8 mAb CT-CD8a (Caltag, San Francisco, CA) recognizing a different epitope than the anti-CD8 mAb 53-6.72 used for magnetic bead depletion. DC sorting and electron microscopy For electron microscopy studies CD8 and CD8+ DCs were sorted from DC-enriched cell fractions as CD11c+ CD8 and CD11c+ CD8+ cells, respectively, on a FACSort flow cytometer (Becton Dickinson, Mountain View, CA). The sorted preparation had a purity of more than 98%. DCs were fixed with 1% glutaraldehyde and 1% paraformaldehyde in 0.1 M (pH 7.6) Sørensen phosphate buffer for 1 hour at 4°C, postfixed with 1% OsO4 in the same buffer for 1 hour at 4°C, dehydrated in graded acetone solutions, and embedded in Embed-812 (Electron Microscopy Sciences, Washington, PA). Ultrathin sections (70-80 nm) were counterstained with uranyl acetate and lead citrate and examined with a Jeol 1010 electron microscope (Jeol, Tokyo, Japan). CD8 DC transfer experiments Purified CD8 DCs (3 × 106 cells/mouse) isolated from C57BL/Ly5.2 mice were transferred intravenously into nonirradiated C57BL/Ly5.1 mice, which were analyzed at 18 hours and 2, 3, 4, and 5 days for the presence of donor-type splenic Ly5.2+ DCs. Flow cytometry Analysis of splenic DC-enriched fractions and purified CD8 DCs were performed after triple staining with fluorescein isothiocyanate (FITC)-conjugated anti-CD11c (clone N418), phycoerythrin (PE)-conjugated anti-CD8 (clone CT-CD8a, Caltag), and biotin-conjugated anti-CD8 (clone H35.17.2), anti-DEC-205 (clone NLDC-145), anti-CD24 (HSA, clone M1/69), anti-CD11b (Mac-1, clone M1/70), antimacrophage antigen F4/80 (clone 31-A3-1), anti-CD4 (clone GK1.5), anti-major histocompatibility complex (MHC) class II (clone FD11-54.3), anti-CD86 (B7-2, clone GL1, Pharmingen, San Diego, CA), or anti-CD40 (clone FGK45), followed by streptavidin-tricolor (Caltag). Analysis of donor-type CD8 DCs in transfer assays was performed after triple staining with FITC-conjugated anti-Ly5.2 (clone AL1-4A2), PE-conjugated anti-CD11c (clone HL3; Pharmingen), and biotin-conjugated anti-CD8, anti-CD8, anti-DEC-205, anti-CD24, anti-CD11b, antimacrophage antigen F4/80, anti-T-cell receptor  (TCR-) chain (clone H57-153-80N), or anti-CD4, followed by streptavidin-tricolor (Caltag). Analyses were performed on a FACSort instrument.     Results Top Abstract Introduction Materials and methods Results Discussion References The experimental system used in this study is based on the analysis of the phenotypic changes undergone by splenic CD8 DCs purified from C57BL/Ly5.2 donor mice on intravenous transfer into C57BL/Ly5.1 congenic mice. In this model, transferred donor-type DCs can be traced using an anti-Ly5.2-specific mAb. The working hypothesis was to address whether CD8+ DCs derive from the CD8 DC subset by a maturation process involving the up-regulation of CD8 together with the regulation of additional cell surface markers defining CD8 and CD8+ DCs subpopulations, such as CD8, DEC-205, CD24 (HSA), CD11b (Mac-1), F4/80, and CD4. The phenotype of CD8 versus CD8+ DCs is illustrated in Figure 1. This analysis has been performed in splenic DC-enriched cell suspensions obtained as described in "Materials and methods," after gating for CD11c+ CD8, or CD11c+ CD8+ cells. CD8 DCs were CD8 , DEC-205/lo, CD24/lo, CD11bhi, F4/80hi, and CD4+ (CD4 was expressed by 75%-80% of CD8 DCs). On the other hand, CD8+ DCs were CD8, DEC-205hi, CD24hi, CD11b/lo, F4/80/lo, CD4/lo. Importantly, as previously reported,4 neither splenic nor thymic DCs are positive for CD8, and therefore CD8+ DCs express in their surface CD8 homodimers, in contrast with CD8+ T cells, expressing CD8 heterodimers with the exception of thymus-independent intestinal intraepithelial CD8+ T cells, which also express CD8 homodimers (for a review, see Rocha et al5). This issue is of special relevance in the subsequent experiments, as a criterion to exclude the possibility of CD8 transfer from T cells to DCs. Although CD8+ DCs displayed slightly higher levels of MHC class II, CD86, and CD40 than CD8 DCs, these markers were not differentially expressed by CD8 versus CD8+ DCs, and therefore they were not considered in subsequent experiments. View larger version (70K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Figure 1. Phenotypic analysis of CD8+ and CD8 DCs performed on splenic DC-enriched cell fractions. The phenotype of purified CD8 DCs is also illustrated. The percentage of cells with a fluorescence intensity over the dotted vertical lines, corresponding to the background staining shown in MHC II histograms (white profiles), is indicated. In CD11c versus CD8 contour plots, the percentage of cells within each quadrant is indicated. Data are representative of 4 independent experiments with similar results. FSC, forward scatter; SSC, side scatter. The analysis by electron microscopy of FACS-sorted CD8 or CD8+ DCs revealed important ultrastructural differences between them (Figure 2). CD8 DCs were smaller than their CD8+ counterparts (7.2 ± 0.8 µm versus 9.1 ± 0.9 µm; n = 7). Besides, CD8 DCs had a rounded nucleus, short microvilli at the cell surface, and few rough endoplasmic reticulum profiles, Golgi cisternae, mitochondria, and endocytic vesicles. On the other hand, CD8+ DCs displayed the characteristic features described for interdigitating cells located in lymphoid organ T-cell zones,6 that is, an irregularly shaped lobulated nucleus, a complex cell surface with long microvilli, and a clearly defined perinuclear area containing a well-developed Golgi apparatus and numerous mitochondria and endocytic vesicles. View larger version (79K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Figure 2. Electron micrographs of FACS-sorted CD8 and CD8+ DCs showing their differential ultrastructural characteristics. See the text for details. On the basis of the phenotypic profiles described above, CD8 DCs were purified by negative selection of contaminating cells, including CD8+ DCs, T cells, B cells, and granulocytes using magnetics beads (M-450 antirat IgGs + antimouse IgGs Dynabeads, Dynal) followed by positive selection using CD11c-conjugated magnetic cell sorting beads (MACS microbeads, Miltenyi Biotec); the purity of the CD8 DC population was more than 98%. Purified CD8 DCs displayed an identical phenotype than that described for the same subset in DC-enriched cell suspensions (Figure 1), indicating that the purified CD8 DC preparation contained actually only CD8 DCs and did not include contaminating CD8+ DCs. In addition, no contaminating CD8+ DCs were detected, after staining with the anti-CD8 mAb CT-CD8a (Caltag) recognizing a different epitope than the anti-CD8 mAb 53-6.72 used for magnetic bead depletion. To explore whether CD8+ DCs could derive from the CD8 DC subset, purified Ly5.2+ CD8 DCs were transferred intravenously into nonirradiated congenic C57BL/Ly5.1 recipient mice, which were analyzed for donor-type Ly5.2+ DCs in splenic DC-enriched cell suspensions. At day 4 after CD8 DC transfer (Figure 3), donor-type DCs, detected as Ly5.2+ CD11c+ cells, constituted around 0.04% (ie, 0.5-1 × 104 Ly5.2+ DCs/spleen) of the splenic DC-enriched cell suspension. The low percentage of DCs detected in the spleen is in agreement with other reports dealing with the migration, after intravenous or subcutaneous transfer, of both ex vivo- and in vitro-obtained DCs,7-9 and is most likely related to the low viability of DCs after injection and/or to DC retention in other locations such as the liver or the lung. View larger version (60K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Figure 3. Analysis of donor-type Ly5.2+ DCs 4 days after transfer of highly purified CD8 DCs. The percentage of positive cells for each marker is indicated. TCR expression was used as a negative staining control. Data are representative of 4 independent experiments with similar results. Donor-type DCs that had migrated to the spleen were characterized phenotypically after triple immunofluorescence staining as described in "Materials and methods." Interestingly, these cells were negative for CD8 but about 60% to 80% of them expressed high levels of CD8, DEC-205, or CD24 (HSA), and a similar proportion did not express CD11b, F4/80, or CD4. These data revealed that 4 days after transfer more than 60% of CD8 DCs had up-regulated CD8 and acquired a CD8+ DC phenotype. As illustrated in Figure 4, showing the kinetics of the process, 18 hours after transfer around 20% of CD8 DCs had already up-regulated CD8, DEC-205, and CD24 (HSA) and correspondingly down-regulated CD11b and F4/80, this last marker being expressed by only 20% of DCs as soon as 18 hours after transfer. Differentiation of CD8 DCs into CD8+ DCs occurred progressively along the first 4 days after transfer when, as mentioned above, approximately two thirds of transferred DCs were CD8+. Donor-type DCs were almost undetectable by day 5 after transfer. View larger version (22K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Figure 4. Kinetics of CD8 DC differentiation on intravenous transfer. Histograms represent the percentage of positive cells for the indicated markers at 18 hours and 2, 3, and 4 days after transfer of highly purified CD8 DCs. Data are representative of 2 (for 18 hours and 2 days) or 4 (for 3 and 4 days) independent experiments with similar results. Donor-type CD8+ DCs cannot correspond to contaminating CD8+ DCs that could have been injected together with CD8 DCs first because CD8+ DCs were undetectable within the CD8 DC preparation injected (see "Materials and methods" and Figure 1, where even the 0.03% of cells present in the upper right quadrant did not represent CD8+ DCs because of their CD8 levels). Secondly, because if CD8+ DCs obtained after injection (> 60% of Ly5.2+ DCs after 4 days) were contaminants, that would mean that this minute CD8+ DC population (in any case constituting < 0.03% of the injected cells) would have migrated with an extremely high efficiency, whereas the CD8 DCs (constituting > 98% of the cells injected) would have migrated with an almost null efficiency. Importantly, it has been demonstrated that CD8 DCs migrate more efficiently to the spleen than CD8+ DCs after intravenous injection, that is, in equivalent experimental conditions to those of our assays.7 Finally, the kinetics of CD8 up-regulation shown in Figure 4 provide further support against the possibility that CD8+ DCs could represent contaminants of the transferred CD8 DC preparation.     Discussion Top Abstract Introduction Materials and methods Results Discussion References Data presented in this report demonstrate conclusively that CD8+ DCs can be derived in vivo from CD8 DCs by a process of differentiation and maturation involving the up-regulation of CD8+ DC-characteristic markers, such as CD8, DEC-205, and HSA, that was paralleled by the down-regulation of CD8 DC markers, such as CD11b, F4/80, and CD4. These results indicate that, in fact, physiologically CD8+ DCs represent a mature form of CD8 DCs. Several experimental evidences support this concept: 1. In vivo DC migration studies performed in our laboratory have demonstrated that FITC-induced CD8 Langerhans cell migration from the epidermis to the draining lymph nodes determined a Langerhans cell maturation process involving CD8 and leukocyte-associated function antigen 1 (LFA-1) up-regulation, generating the lymph node-related CD8int DC subset.10 2. It has been shown that splenic CD8 DCs are located at the periphery of the white pulp in relation with the marginal zone, whereas CD8+ DCs are found in the inner part of the white pulp.11 Interestingly, bacterial lipopolysaccharide (LPS) or soluble Toxoplasma gondii tachyzoite antigen (SATg), known to promote DC maturation causes splenic CD8 DC migration toward the inner white pulp, where CD8+ DCs are located, and this is paralleled by the up-regulation of DEC-205,12,13 described as an endocytic receptor expressed in vivo and ex vivo by CD8+ but not by CD8 DCs.14 Although these reports did not address whether CD8 was up-regulated by CD8 DCs, they suggested that LPS and STAg actually promoted a CD8 DC migration/maturation process involving CD8 up-regulation. Similar data, supporting the CD8 up-regulation on CD8 DC maturation, were provided by a report analyzing Peyer patch CD8 DC migration from the intestinal subepithelial dome to the interfollicular T-cell areas, induced by STAg intravenous administration.15 3. With regard to chemokine receptor expression splenic CD8 DCs but not CD8+ DCs are positive for CCR6,16 which has been shown to be expressed by immature DCs, such as DCs differentiated in vitro from bone marrow cells with granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF) and tumor necrosis factor  (TNF-), as well as Langerhans cells.17,18 4. Splenic CD8+ DCs but not CD8 DCs produce interleukin-12 (IL-12)19 and, interestingly, the capacity to secrete IL-12 by DCs has been correlated with DC maturation,20 and with in vivo STAg-induced migration of splenic marginal DCs to the white pulp, accompanied by DEC-205 up-regulation.13 On the other hand, the functional correlation between CD8 DCs and CD8+ DCs described here contrasts with the hypothesis supported by certain authors during recent years that CD8 and CD8+ DCs might represent different DC lineages, particularly myeloid- and lymphoid-derived DCs, respectively. However, this hypothesis has been recently challenged by our data,2 demonstrating that both DC subsets can be generated from the CD4low lymphoid-committed precursor population. These data were subsequently extended in 2 recent reports showing that CD8 and CD8+ DCs could be derived from either lymphoid- or myeloid-committed progenitors.3,21 Therefore, experimental evidence no longer supports the concept that CD8 and CD8+ DCs correspond to myeloid and lymphoid DCs, respectively, and represent different DC lineages. Moreover, current information dealing with the derivation of DCs is controversial, and no definitive conclusions can be drawn about the lymphoid or myeloid origin of the different mouse DC subpopulations. Interestingly, on the basis on their results dealing with the differential kinetics of splenic CD8 and CD8+ DC differentiation after transfer of lymphoid progenitors versus bone marrow precursors, Manz et al21 proposed that CD8+ DCs could represent a mature form of the CD8 DC subset. In conclusion, our data and those derived from the reports described above strongly support the view that splenic CD8 and CD8+ DCs, considered until recently as representative of different DC lineages, correspond in fact to different maturation/differentiation stages of the same DC population. A model of mouse splenic DC differentiation is presented in Figure 5. CD8 DCs gain access to the splenic marginal zone either from the blood via the marginal sinuses (Figure 5, 1a) or by intrasplenic differentiation from a yet undefined DC precursor (Figure 5, 1b). CD8 DCs are transiently retained in the reticular meshwork of the marginal zone by interacting with stromal reticular cells (Figure 5, 2) or eventually with other marginal zone cells, such as marginal zone B cells or macrophages. MadCAM-1/47 could be involved in such interactions because the mucosal addressin MadCAM-1 mediates transient interactions between migrating lymphocytes and the endothelial cells of intestinal high endothelial venules, and is expressed by marginal zone reticular cells.22 Additionally, chemokine-based mechanisms could participate in this process. Reversal of CD8 DC retention in the marginal zone (Figure 5, 3) occurs as the result of passive destabilization of cell-to-cell interactions or chemokine receptor desensitization, or massively during an immune response as the consequence of CD8 DC contact with antigen. CD8 DCs migrate to the T-cell area of the white pulp (Figure 5, 4) under the control of chemotactic mechanisms that could involve the chemokine receptor CCR7 and its ligands SLC and macrophage inflammatory protein 3 (MIP-3) known to mediate DC recruitment to the lymph node and Peyer patch T-cell areas.15,23 Migration to the white pulp is accompanied by CD8 up-regulation and acquisition of the additional phenotypic and functional characteristics of CD8+ DCs. Finally, CD8+ DCs die in situ or leave the spleen via lymphatic vessels, the kinetics of these processes being most likely greatly influenced by their involvement in an immune response. View larger version (32K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Figure 5. Model of DC differentiation in the mouse spleen. (1) Access of CD8 DCs to the marginal zone either from the blood via the marginal sinus (a) or by intrasplenic differentiation from an unknown precursor (b). (2) Transient retention of CD8 DCs in the marginal zone reticular meshwork. (3) Reversal of CD8 DC retention in the marginal zone. (4) Migration of CD8 DCs to the inner white pulp accompanied by the acquisition of the phenotypic and functional features of CD8+ DCs. Finally, CD8+ DCs die in situ or leave the spleen via lymph vessels (see "Discussion" for a detailed explanation). Principal changes accompanying the proposed maturation of CD8 DCs into CD8+ DCs are indicated. IFN- indicates interferon . Therefore, a stable CD8 DC subpopulation located transiently as sentinels in the marginal zone, which represents the most efficient antigen-trapping zone in the spleen, would continuously generate a stable CD8+ DC subpopulation located in the inner white pulp, by a migration process involving important phenotypical and functional changes. This process would globally determine the acquisition by CD8+ DCs of a strong potential to induce MHC I- or II-restricted T-cell responses, due to their high antigen presentation efficiency, cross-priming ability,24 and capacity to secrete key cytokines such as interferon 25 and IL-12.26 Importantly, this model of CD8 DC maturation provides a convincing explanation to certain DC differentiation anomalies described in genetically modified mice, such as Ikaros C/ mice,27 PU.1-deficient mice,28 or RelB-deficient mice29 displaying very low numbers of splenic CD8 DCs, concomitant with important defects in T-cell, B-cell, or myelomonocytic development. According to our model, the absence in Ikaros C/ mice of B cells, which are required for a correct marginal zone development22 and for splenic expression of MadCAM-1,30 and the existence of a disrupted marginal zone in PU.1- or RelB-deficient mice, would prevent the stabilization in the microenvironment of the marginal zone of CD8 DCs, that will acquire a CD8+ DC phenotype immediately on migration to the area surrounding the white pulp. Additional experiments are being conducted in our laboratory to define conclusively the in vivo differentiation pathway generating the different DC subsets in physiologic conditions.     Acknowledgments The authors would like to thank Dr A. Rolink (Basel Institute for Immunology, Basel, Switzerland) for the anti-CD40 hybridoma FGK45.     Footnotes Submitted August 9, 2001; accepted October 3, 2001. Supported by the European Commission (grant QLRT-1999-00276), the Comunidad de Madrid of Spain (grant 08.1/0076/2000), and the Ministerio de Ciencia y Tecnología of Spain (grant BOS 2000-0558). The publication costs of this article were defrayed in part by page charge payment. Therefore, and solely to indicate this fact, this article is hereby marked "advertisement" in accordance with 18 U.S.C. section 1734. Reprints: Carlos Ardavín, Department of Cell Biology, Faculty of Biology, Complutense University, 28040 Madrid, Spain; e-mail: ardavin{at}bio.ucm.es.     References Top Abstract Introduction Materials and methods Results Discussion References 1. Banchereau B, Briere F, Caux C, et al. Immunobiology of dendritic cells. Annu Rev Immunol. 2000;18:767-811[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]. 2. Martín P, Martínez del Hoyo G, Anjuère F, et al. Concept of lymphoid versus myeloid dendritic cell lineages revisited: both CD8 and CD8+ dendritic cells are generated from CD4low lymphoid-committed precursors. Blood. 2000;96:2511-2519[Abstract/Free Full Text]. 3. Traver D, Akashi K, Manz M, et al. Development of CD8alpha-positive dendritic cells from a common myeloid progenitor. Science. 2000;290:2152-2154[Abstract/Free Full Text]. 4. Vremec D, Zorbas M, Scollay R, et al. The surface phenotype of dendritic cells purified from mouse thymus and spleen: investigation of the CD8 expression by a subpopulation of dendritic cells. J Exp Med. 1992;176:47-58[Abstract/Free Full Text]. 5. Rocha B, Guy-Grand D, Vassalli P. Extrathymic T cell differentiation. Curr Opin Immunol. 1995;7:235-242[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]. 6. Steinman RM. The dendritic cell system and its role in inmunogenicity. Annu Rev Immunol. 1991;9:271-296[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]. 7. Ruedl C, Bachmann MF. CTL priming by CD8+ and CD8 dendritic cells in vivo. Eur J Immunol. 1999;29:3762-3767[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]. 8. Lappin MB, Weiss JM, Delattre V, et al. Analysis of mouse dendritic cell migration in vivo upon subcutaneous and intravenous injection. Immunology. 1999;98:181-188[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]. 9. Hirao M, Onai N, Hiroishi K, et al. CC chemokine receptor-7 on dendritic cells is induced after interaction with apoptotic tumor cells: critical role in migration from the tumor site to draining lymph nodes. Cancer Res. 2000;60:2209-2217[Abstract/Free Full Text]. 10. Anjuère F, Martín P, Ferrero I, et al. Definition of dendritic cell subpopulations present in the spleen, Peyer's patches, lymph nodes and skin of the mouse. Blood. 1999;93:590-598[Abstract/Free Full Text]. 11. Leenen PJM, Radosevic K, Voerman JSA, et al. Heterogeneity of mouse spleen dendritic cells: in vivo phagocytic activity, expression of macrophage markers, and subpopulation turnover. J Immunol. 1998;160:2166-2173[Abstract/Free Full Text]. 12. De Smedt T, Pajak B, Muraille E, et al. Regulation of dendritic cell numbers and maturation by lipopolysaccharide in vivo. J Exp Med. 1996;184:1413-1424[Abstract/Free Full Text]. 13. Reis e Sousa C, Hieny S, Scharton-Kersten T, et al. In vivo microbial stimulation induces rapid CD40 ligand-independent production of Interleukin 12 by dendritic cells and their redistribution to T cell areas. J Exp Med. 1997;186:1819-1829[Abstract/Free Full Text]. 14. Vremec D, Shortman K. Dendritic cell subtypes in mouse lymphoid organscross-correlation of surface markers, changes with incubation, and differences among thymus, spleen, and lymph nodes. J Immunol. 1997;159:565-573[Abstract]. 15. Iwasaki A, Kelsall BL. Localization of distinct Peyer's patch dendritic cell subsets and their recruitment by chemokines macrophage inflammatory protein (MIP)-3alpha, MIP-3beta, and secondary lymphoid organ chemokine. J Exp Med. 2000;191:1381-1393[Abstract/Free Full Text]. 16. Varona R, Zaballos A, Gutierrez J, et al. Molecular cloning, functional characterization and mRNA expression analysis of the murine chemokine receptor CCR6 and its specific ligand MIP-3alpha. FEBS J. 1998;440:188-194[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]. 17. Dieu MC, Vanbervliet B, Vicari A, et al. Selective recruitment of immature and mature dendritic cells by distinct chemokines expressed in different anatomic sites. J Exp Med. 1998;188:373-386[Abstract/Free Full Text]. 18. Dieu-Nosjean MC, Massacrier C, Homey B, et al. Macrophage inflammatory protein 3 is expressed at inflamed epithelial surfaces and is the most potent chemokine known in attracting Langerhans cell precursors. J Exp Med. 2000;192:705-717[Abstract/Free Full Text]. 19. Maldonado-López R, De Smedt T, Michel P, et al. CD8+ and CD8 subclasses of dendritic cells direct the development of distinct T helper cells in vivo. J Exp Med. 1999;189:587-592[Abstract/Free Full Text]. 20. Kalinski P, Schuitemaker JHN, Hilkens CMU, Kapsenberg ML. Prostaglandin E2 induces the final maturation of IL-12-deficient CD1a+CD83+ dendritic cells: the levels of IL-12 are determined during the final dendritic cell maturation and are resistant to further modulation. J Immunol. 1998;161:2804-2809[Abstract/Free Full Text]. 21. Manz MG, Traver D, Miyamoto T, Weissman IL, Akashi K. Dendritic cell potentials of early lymphoid and myeloid progenitors. Blood. 2001;97:3333-3341[Abstract/Free Full Text]. 22. Kraal G. Cells in the marginal zone of the spleen. Int Rev Cytol. 1992;132:31-74[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]. 23. Förster R, Schubel A, Breitfeld D, et al. CCR7 coordinates the primary immune response by establishing functional microenvironments in secondary lymphoid organs. Cell. 1999;99:23-33[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]. 24. Den Haan JMM, Lehar SM, Bevan MJ. CD8+ but not CD8 dendritic cells cross-prime cytotoxic T cells in vivo. J Exp Med. 2000;192:1685-1695[Abstract/Free Full Text]. 25. Ohteki T, Fukao T, Suzue K, et al. Interleukin 12-dependent interferon gamma production by CD8+ lymphoid dendritic cells. J Exp Med. 1999;189:1981-1986[Abstract/Free Full Text]. 26. Aliberti J, Reis e Sousa C, Schito M, Hieny S, Wells T, Huffnagle GB. CCR5 provides a signal for microbial induced production of IL-12 by CD8alpha dendritic cells. Nat Immunol. 2000;1:83-87[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]. 27. Wu L, Nichogiannopoulou A, Shortman K, Georgopoulos K. Cell-autonomous defects in dendritic cell populations of Ikaros mutant mice point to a developmental relationship with the lymphoid lineage. Immunity. 1997;7:483-492[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]. 28. Guerriero A, Langmuir PB, Spain LM, Scott EW. PU.1 is required for myeloid-derived but not lymphoid-derived dendritic cells. Blood. 2000;95:879-885[Abstract/Free Full Text]. 29. Wu L, D'Amico A, Winkel K, Suter M, Lo D, Shortman K. RelB is essential for the development of myeloid-related CD8alpha dendritic cells but not of lymphoid-related CD8 alpha+ dendritic cells. Immunity. 1998;9:839-847[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]. 30. Crowley MT, Reilly CR, Lo D. Influence of lymphocytes on the presence and organization of dendritic cell subsets in the spleen. J Immunol. 1999;163:4894-4900[Abstract/Free Full Text]. © 2002 by The American Society of Hematology.   CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    What's this? This article has been cited by other articles: C. A. Beamer and A. Holian Silica suppresses Toll-like receptor ligand-induced dendritic cell activation FASEB J, June 1, 2008; 22(6): 2053 - 2063. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] D. Yadav and N. Sarvetnick B7-2 Regulates Survival, Phenotype, and Function of APCs J. Immunol., May 15, 2007; 178(10): 6236 - 6241. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] D. Vremec, M. O'Keeffe, H. Hochrein, M. Fuchsberger, I. Caminschi, M. Lahoud, and K. Shortman Production of interferons by dendritic cells, plasmacytoid cells, natural killer cells, and interferon-producing killer dendritic cells Blood, February 1, 2007; 109(3): 1165 - 1173. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] G. Martinez del Hoyo, M. Lopez-Bravo, P. Metharom, C. Ardavin, and P. Aucouturier Prion Protein Expression by Mouse Dendritic Cells Is Restricted to the Nonplasmacytoid Subsets and Correlates with the Maturation State J. Immunol., November 1, 2006; 177(9): 6137 - 6142. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] J. K. H. Tan and H. C. O'Neill Maturation requirements for dendritic cells in T cell stimulation leading to tolerance versus immunity J. Leukoc. Biol., August 1, 2005; 78(2): 319 - 324. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] K. M. Kerksiek, F. Niedergang, P. Chavrier, D. H. Busch, and T. Brocker Selective Rac1 inhibition in dendritic cells diminishes apoptotic cell uptake and cross-presentation in vivo Blood, January 15, 2005; 105(2): 742 - 749. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] A. E. Morelli, A. T. Larregina, W. J. Shufesky, M. L. G. Sullivan, D. B. Stolz, G. D. Papworth, A. F. Zahorchak, A. J. Logar, Z. Wang, S. C. Watkins, et al. Endocytosis, intracellular sorting, and processing of exosomes by dendritic cells Blood, November 15, 2004; 104(10): 3257 - 3266. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] O. Li, P. Zheng, and Y. Liu CD24 Expression on T Cells Is Required for Optimal T Cell Proliferation in Lymphopenic Host J. Exp. Med., October 18, 2004; 200(8): 1083 - 1089. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] K. A. Swanson, Y. Zheng, K. M. Heidler, Z.-D. Zhang, T. J. Webb, and D. S. Wilkes Flt3-Ligand, IL-4, GM-CSF, and Adherence-Mediated Isolation of Murine Lung Dendritic Cells: Assessment of Isolation Technique on Phenotype and Function J. Immunol., October 15, 2004; 173(8): 4875 - 4881. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] B. Quah, K. Ni, and H. C. O'Neill In vitro hematopoiesis produces a distinct class of immature dendritic cells from spleen progenitors with limited T cell stimulation capacity Int. Immunol., April 1, 2004; 16(4): 567 - 577. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] B. J. Masten, G. K. Olson, D. F. Kusewitt, and M. F. Lipscomb Flt3 Ligand Preferentially Increases the Number of Functionally Active Myeloid Dendritic Cells in the Lungs of Mice J. Immunol., April 1, 2004; 172(7): 4077 - 4083. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] T. Kruger, D. Benke, F. Eitner, A. Lang, M. Wirtz, E. E. Hamilton-Williams, D. Engel, B. Giese, G. Muller-Newen, J. Floege, et al. Identification and Functional Characterization of Dendritic Cells in the Healthy Murine Kidney and in Experimental Glomerulonephritis J. Am. Soc. Nephrol., March 1, 2004; 15(3): 613 - 621. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] H. L. Wilson and H. C. O'Neill Identification of differentially expressed genes representing dendritic cell precursors and their progeny Blood, September 1, 2003; 102(5): 1661 - 1669. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] J. A. Shah, P. A. Darrah, D. R. Ambrozak, T. N. Turon, S. Mendez, J. Kirman, C.-Y. Wu, N. Glaichenhaus, and R. A. Seder Dendritic Cells Are Responsible for the Capacity of CpG Oligodeoxynucleotides to Act as an Adjuvant for Protective Vaccine Immunity Against Leishmania major in Mice J. Exp. Med., July 21, 2003; 198(2): 281 - 291. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] C.-M. Sun, L. Fiette, M. Tanguy, C. Leclerc, and R. Lo-Man Ontogeny and innate properties of neonatal dendritic cells Blood, July 15, 2003; 102(2): 585 - 591. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] S. Naik, D. Vremec, L. Wu, M. O'Keeffe, and K. Shortman CD8{alpha}+ mouse spleen dendritic cells do not originate from the CD8{alpha}- dendritic cell subset Blood, July 15, 2003; 102(2): 601 - 604. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] D. S. Gregerson and J. Yang CD45-Positive Cells of the Retina and Their Responsiveness to In Vivo and In Vitro Treatment with IFN-{gamma} or Anti-CD40 Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci., July 1, 2003; 44(7): 3083 - 3093. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] A. D. Edwards, D. Chaussabel, S. Tomlinson, O. Schulz, A. Sher, and C. Reis e Sousa Relationships Among Murine CD11chigh Dendritic Cell Subsets as Revealed by Baseline Gene Expression Patterns J. Immunol., July 1, 2003; 171(1): 47 - 60. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] J.-X. Gao, X. Liu, J. Wen, H. Zhang, J. Durbin, Y. Liu, and P. Zheng Differentiation of Monocytic Cell Clones into CD8{alpha}+ Dendritic Cells (DC) Suggests that Monocytes Can Be Direct Precursors for Both CD8{alpha}+ and CD8{alpha}- DC in the Mouse J. Immunol., June 15, 2003; 170(12): 5927 - 5935. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] C. M. Smith, G. T. Belz, N. S. Wilson, J. A. Villadangos, K. Shortman, F. R. Carbone, and W. R. Heath Cutting Edge: Conventional CD8{alpha}+ Dendritic Cells Are Preferentially Involved in CTL Priming After Footpad Infection with Herpes Simplex Virus-1 J. Immunol., May 1, 2003; 170(9): 4437 - 4440. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] T. Nishi, K. Okazaki, K. Kawasaki, T. Fukui, H. Tamaki, M. Matsuura, M. Asada, T. Watanabe, K. Uchida, N. Watanabe, et al. Involvement of Myeloid Dendritic Cells in the Development of Gastric Secondary Lymphoid Follicles in Helicobacter pylori-Infected Neonatally Thymectomized BALB/c Mice Infect. Immun., April 1, 2003; 71(4): 2153 - 2162. [Abstract] [Full Text] E. Donskoy and I. Goldschneider Two Developmentally Distinct Populations of Dendritic Cells Inhabit the Adult Mouse Thymus: Demonstration by Differential Importation of Hematogenous Precursors Under Steady State Conditions J. Immunol., April 1, 2003; 170(7): 3514 - 3521. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] H. Tsujimura, T. Tamura, C. Gongora, J. Aliberti, C. Reis e Sousa, A. Sher, and K. Ozato ICSBP/IRF-8 retrovirus transduction rescues dendritic cell development in vitro Blood, February 1, 2003; 101(3): 961 - 969. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] A. E. Morelli, A. T. Larregina, W. J. Shufesky, A. F. Zahorchak, A. J. Logar, G. D. Papworth, Z. Wang, S. C. Watkins, L. D. Falo Jr, and A. W. Thomson Internalization of circulating apoptotic cells by splenic marginal zone dendritic cells: dependence on complement receptors and effect on cytokine production Blood, January 15, 2003; 101(2): 611 - 620. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] J. Aliberti, O. Schulz, D. J. Pennington, H. Tsujimura, C. R. e Sousa, K. Ozato, and A. Sher Essential role for ICSBP in the in vivo development of murine CD8alpha + dendritic cells Blood, January 1, 2003; 101(1): 305 - 310. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] P. Brawand, D. R. Fitzpatrick, B. W. Greenfield, K. Brasel, C. R. Maliszewski, and T. De Smedt Murine Plasmacytoid Pre-Dendritic Cells Generated from Flt3 Ligand-Supplemented Bone Marrow Cultures Are Immature APCs J. Immunol., December 15, 2002; 169(12): 6711 - 6719. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] G. Schiavoni, F. Mattei, P. Sestili, P. Borghi, M. Venditti, H. C. Morse III, F. Belardelli, and L. Gabriele ICSBP Is Essential for the Development of Mouse Type I Interferon-producing Cells and for the Generation and Activation of CD8{alpha}+ Dendritic Cells J. Exp. Med., December 2, 2002; 196(11): 1415 - 1425. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] C. Scheinecker, R. McHugh, E. M. Shevach, and R. N. Germain Constitutive Presentation of a Natural Tissue Autoantigen Exclusively by Dendritic Cells in the Draining Lymph Node J. Exp. Med., October 21, 2002; 196(8): 1079 - 1090. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] G. Miller, V. G. Pillarisetty, A. B. Shah, S. Lahrs, Z. Xing, and R. P. DeMatteo Endogenous Granulocyte-Macrophage Colony-Stimulating Factor Overexpression In Vivo Results in the Long-Term Recruitment of a Distinct Dendritic Cell Population with Enhanced Immunostimulatory Function J. Immunol., September 15, 2002; 169(6): 2875 - 2885. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] P. Martin, G. M. del Hoyo, F. Anjuere, C. F. Arias, H. H. Vargas, A. Fernandez-L, V. Parrillas, and C. Ardavin Characterization of a new subpopulation of mouse CD8alpha + B220+ dendritic cells endowed with type 1 interferon production capacity and tolerogenic potential Blood, June 28, 2002; 100(2): 383 - 390. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] G. Moron, P. Rueda, I. Casal, and C. Leclerc CD8{alpha}2 CD11b+ Dendritic Cells Present Exogenous Virus-like Particles to CD8+ T Cells and Subsequently Express CD8{alpha} and CD205 Molecules J. Exp. Med., May 20, 2002; 195(10): 1233 - 1245. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] This Article Abstract Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Rights and Permissions Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via CrossRef Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by del Hoyo, G. M. Articles by Ardavín, C. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by del Hoyo, G. M. Articles by Ardavín, C. Related Collections Immunobiology Social Bookmarking                   What's this?

	Copyright © 2002 by American Society of Hematology         Online ISSN: 1528-0020