| Literature DB >> 24238038 |
Bruna Bizzarro, Michele S Barros, Ceres Maciel, Daniele I Gueroni, Ciro N Lino, Júlia Campopiano, Michalis Kotsyfakis, Gustavo P Amarante-Mendes, Eric Calvo, Margareth L Capurro, Anderson Sá-Nunes1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Saliva is a key element of interaction between hematophagous mosquitoes and their vertebrate hosts. In addition to allowing a successful blood meal by neutralizing or delaying hemostatic responses, the salivary cocktail is also able to modulate the effector mechanisms of host immune responses facilitating, in turn, the transmission of several types of microorganisms. Understanding how the mosquito uses its salivary components to circumvent host immunity might help to clarify the mechanisms of transmission of such pathogens and disease establishment.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2013 PMID: 24238038 PMCID: PMC3843549 DOI: 10.1186/1756-3305-6-329
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Parasit Vectors ISSN: 1756-3305 Impact factor: 3.876
Figure 1SGE does not interfere with DC differentiation. BMDC from BALB/c mice were cultured with GM-CSF in the presence or absence of A. aegypti SGE (final concentration: 2.5, 5, 10, 20 and 40 μg/mL) for 4 and 7 days and analyzed by flow cytometry. Dot plots (A) and the mean of relative percentage of CD11b+/CD11c+ cells present in culture at 4 days (B) and 7 days (C) are presented.
Figure 2DC maturation is not affected by SGE. DCs were differentiated with GM-CSF for 6 days, preincubated overnight in the presence or absence of A. aegypti SGE (final concentration: 5 and 40 μg/mL) and stimulated or not with LPS (100 ng/mL), as indicated. Expression of MHC class II (A) and CD40 (B) was evaluated in CD11c+ cells by flow cytometry.
Figure 3SGE inhibits T cell proliferation in a DC-independent fashion. DCs were pre-incubated overnight in the presence or absence of A. aegypti SGE (final concentrations indicated) and stimulated for 4 h with OVA (100 μg/mL) plus LPS (100 ng/mL). After 3 washings, DCs were co-incubated with CD4+ cells from DO11.10 mice for 72 h (A and B). Similar DC/CD4+ cultures were also stimulated by Con A for 72 h (C). In some groups, SGE was added again after washing the cells (B and C). Concentration-response effect of A. aegypti SGE on Con A-induced spleen cells proliferation (D). Absence of effect of An. aquasalis (E) and P. dubosqi SGE (F) on Con A-induced spleen cells proliferation. *p < 0.05 versus “C” (control); #p < 0.05 versus stimulated with OVA + LPS or Con A.
Figure 4SGE induces lymphocyte apoptosis and cleavage of pro-caspase 3 and pro-caspase-8. Total spleen cells were incubated with Con A in medium only or in presence of A. aegypti SGE for 4 h. Annexin V staining was evaluated by flow cytometry in total cells, CD4+, CD8+ and CD19+ cells from WT mice (A) or CD4+ T cells from Bim+/− and Bim−/− mice (C). Lysates of similar cell cultures were blotted against a monoclonal antibody against pro-caspase-3 and pro-caspase-8 (B).
Figure 5Memory cells are resistant to SGE effects. Spleen cells from non-sensitized (A) and A. aegypti-sensitized BALB/c mice (B) were incubated with medium only or with A. aegypti SGE (5 μg/mL) and/or stimulated with Con A (0.5 μg/mL) for 72 h. Cells from An. aquasalis-sensitized mice were cultured with medium only or in the presence of 5 μg/mL An. aquasalis SGE (An.) and/or 5 μg/mL A. aegypti SGE (Ae.) and then stimulated with 0.5 μg/mL Con A (C). Non-adherent DO11.10 spleen cells were adoptively transferred to BALB/c mice and after 7 days, recipient mice were sensitized with OVA and complete Freund’s adjuvant (40 μg/animal). Spleen cells from non-sensitized (D) and sensitized mice (E) were obtained after 7 days and cultured in the presence of medium or A. aegypti SGE and stimulated with Con A (0.5 μg/mL) or OVA (100 μg/mL). Phenotype of naïve cells (CD62LHIGH/CD44LOW), TEM subset (CD62LLOW and CD44HIGH) and TCM subset (CD62LHIGH and CD44HIGH) from non-sensitized (F) or sensitized mice (G) were evaluated by flow cytometry after 72 h cultured in presence of medium or A. aegypti SGE and stimulated with Con A or OVA. *p < 0.05 versus respective control group.