Background An innate immune memory response can manifest in two ways: immune training and immune tolerance, which refers to an enhanced or suppressed immune response to a second challenge, respectively. Exposing monocytes to moderate-to-high amounts of bacterial lipopolysaccharide (LPS) induces immune tolerance, whereas fungal β-glucan (BG) induces immune training. In microglia, it has been shown that different LPS inocula in vivo can induce either immune training or tolerance. Few studies focused on impact of BG on microglia and were only performed in vitro. The aim of the current study was to determine whether BG activates and induces immune memory in microglia upon peripheral administration in vivo. Methods Two experimental designs were used. In the acute design, mice received an intraperitoneal (i.p.) injection with PBS, 1 mg/kg LPS or 20 mg/kg BG and were terminated after 3 h, 1 or 2 days. In the preconditioning design, animals were first challenged i.p. with PBS, 1 mg/kg LPS or 20 mg/kg BG. After 2, 7 or 14 days, mice received a second injection with PBS or 1 mg/kg LPS and were sacrificed 3 h later. Microglia were isolated by fluorescence-activated cell sorting, and cytokine gene expression levels were determined. In addition, a self-developed program was used to analyze microglia morphological changes. Cytokine concentrations in serum were determined by a cytokine array. Results Microglia exhibited a classical inflammatory response to LPS, showing significant upregulation of Tnf, Il6, Il1β, Ccl2, Ccl3 and Csf1 expression, three h after injection, and obvious morphological changes 1 and 2 days after injection. With an interval of 2 days between two challenges, both BG and LPS induced immune training in microglia. The training effect of LPS changed into immune tolerance after a 7-day interval between 2 LPS challenges. Preconditioning with BG and LPS resulted in increased morphological changes in microglia in response to a systemic LPS challenge compared to naïve microglia. Conclusions Our results demonstrate that preconditioning with BG and LPS both induced immune training of microglia at two days after the first challenge. However, with an interval of 7 days between the first and second challenge, LPS-preconditioning resulted in immune tolerance in microglia.
The DNA excision repair protein Ercc1 is important for nucleotide excision, double strand DNA break, and interstrand DNA crosslink repair. In constitutive Ercc1‐knockout mice, microglia display increased phagocytosis, proliferation and an enhanced responsiveness to lipopolysaccharide (LPS)‐induced peripheral inflammation. However, the intrinsic effects of Ercc1‐deficiency on microglia are unclear. In this study, Ercc1 was specifically deleted from Cx3cr1‐expressing cells and changes in microglia morphology and immune responses at different times after deletion were determined. Microglia numbers were reduced with approximately 50% at 2–12 months after Ercc1 deletion. Larger and more ramified microglia were observed following Ercc1 deletion both in vivo and in organotypic hippocampal slice cultures. Ercc1‐deficient microglia were progressively lost, and during this period, microglia proliferation was transiently increased. Ercc1‐deficient microglia were gradually replaced by nondeficient microglia carrying a functional Ercc1 allele. In contrast to constitutive Ercc1‐deficient mice, microglia‐specific deletion of Ercc1 did not induce microglia activation or increase their responsiveness to a systemic LPS challenge. Gene expression analysis suggested that Ercc1 deletion in microglia induced a transient aging signature, which was different from a priming or disease‐associated microglia gene expression profile.
BackgroundAn innate immune memory response can manifest in two ways: immune training and immune tolerance, which refers to an enhanced or suppressed immune response to a second challenge, respectively. Exposing monocytes to moderate-to-high amounts of bacterial lipopolysaccharide (LPS) induces immune tolerance, whereas fungal β-glucan (BG) induces immune training. In microglia, it has been shown that different LPS inocula in vivo can induce either immune training or tolerance. Few studies focused on impact of BG on microglia and were only performed in vitro. The aim of the current study was to determine whether BG activates and induces immune memory in microglia upon peripheral administration in vivo.MethodsTwo experimental designs were used. In the acute design, mice received an intraperitoneal (i.p.) injection with PBS, 1 mg/kg LPS or 20 mg/kg BG and were terminated after 3 h, 1 or 2 days. In the preconditioning design, animals were first challenged i.p. with PBS, 1 mg/kg LPS or 20 mg/kg BG. After 2, 7 or 14 days, mice received a second injection with PBS or 1 mg/kg LPS and were sacrificed 3 h later. Microglia were isolated by fluorescence-activated cell sorting, and cytokine gene expression levels were determined. In addition, a self-developed program was used to analyze microglia morphological changes. Cytokine concentrations in serum were determined by a cytokine array.ResultsMicroglia exhibited a classical inflammatory response to LPS, showing significant upregulation of Tnf, Il6, Il1β, Ccl2, Ccl3 and Csf1 expression, three h after injection, and obvious morphological changes 1 and 2 days after injection. With an interval of 2 days between two challenges, both BG and LPS induced immune training in microglia. The training effect of LPS changed into immune tolerance after a 7-day interval between 2 LPS challenges. Preconditioning with BG and LPS resulted in increased morphological changes in microglia in response to a systemic LPS challenge compared to naïve microglia.ConclusionsOur results demonstrate that preconditioning with BG and LPS both induced immune training of microglia at two days after the first challenge. However, with an interval of 7 days between the first and second challenge, LPS-preconditioning resulted in immune tolerance in microglia.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.