| Literature DB >> 28747688 |
Wei Jiang1,2,3,4, Yu Li1,2,3,4, Jin Sun1,2, Liang Li1,2,3,4, Jiang-Wei Li1,2,3,4, Chen Zhang1,2, Chen Huang1,2,5, Jun Yang1,2,6, Guang-Yao Kong7,8, Zong-Fang Li9,10,11,12.
Abstract
Psychological stress has great impacts on the immune system, particularly the leukocytes distribution. Although the impacts of acute stress on blood leukocytes distribution are well studied, however, it remains unclear how chronic stress affects leukocytes distribution in peripheral circulation. Furthermore, there is no report about the role of spleen in the blood leukocytes distribution induced by stress. Here we show that spleen contributes to the alteration of restraint stress induced blood leukocytes distribution. Our data confirmed that restraint stress induced anxiety-like behavior in mice. Furthermore, we found that restraint stress decreased the CD4/CD8 ratio and elevated the percentages of natural killer cells, monocytes and polymorphonuclear myeloid-derived suppressor cell. We demonstrated that activation of hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis (HPA) and sympathetic nervous system (SNS) contributes to restraint stress induced alteration of blood leukocyte distribution. Interestingly, we found that splenectomy could reverse the change of CD4/CD8 ratio induced by restraint stress. Together, our findings suggest that activation of HPA axis and SNS was responsible for the blood leukocyte subsets changes induced by restraint stress. Spleen, at least in part, contributed to the alteration in peripheral circulation induced by restraint stress.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28747688 PMCID: PMC5529540 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-017-06956-9
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Figure 1Restraint stress induced anxiety-like behavior in mice. Male C57BL/6 mice undergoing 1, 7 or 21 cycles of restraint stress (stress) or left undisturbed in home cage (control). (A) Experiment designs to test the impact of the restraint stress on mice. (B,C and D) Mice subjected to 21 cycles of restraint stress took longer to first enter the center of the open field (B), spent less time in the center of the open field (C), entered the center of the open field less often (D) than the controls. (E) There was no difference of the distance traveled in the open field between the restraint stressed mice and the control mice. (F) Body weight gain was reduced significantly after the mice undergoing 7 or 21 cycles of restraint stress. Data were shown as mean ± SEM (n = 10–15). *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01.
Figure 2Leukocyte subsets of blood were changed after restraint stress. Blood was collected from the mice 1 h following the 1st cycle restraint stress, the day after undergoing 7 or 21 cycles of restraint stress. (A) Experiment designs to examine the changes of Leukocyte subsets of blood after restraint stress. (B,C,D and E) Representative dot plots of CD4+, CD8+ T lymphocytes (B), CD3−NK1.1+ NK cells (C), CD11b+Ly-6low monocytes (D), and CD11b+Ly-6ClowLy-6G+ PMN-MDSCs (E) in the mice undergoing 21 cycles of restraint stress and controls. (F) Twenty-one cycles of restraint stress decreased CD4/CD8 ratio. (G,H and I) Twenty-one cycles of restraint stress elevated the percentage of CD3−NK1.1+ NK cells (G), CD11b+Ly-6low monocytes (H) and CD11b+Ly-6ClowLy-6G+PMN-MDSCs (I). Data were shown as mean ± SEM (n = 8). *p < 0.05 vs. control.
Figure 3Restraint stress increased serum norepinephrine and corticosterone. Immediately following the 1, 7 or 21st cycles of restraint stress, blood was drawn from the retro-orbital plexus to determine norepinephrine and corticosterone. (A) One h after the mice subjected the first cycle stress, the day after mice subjected 7 or 21 cycles stress, blood was collected to determine cytokines. (B) The level of serum IFN-γ increased 1 h following the 1st cycle of restraint stress. (C,D,E,F and G) The level of other cytokines was not significantly different as compared to the controls. (H and I) The stressed mice displayed significantly elevated the concentration of (H) serum norepinephrine and (I) serum corticosterone as compared to the control animals. Data were shown as mean ± SEM (n = 5–8). *p < 0.05 vs. control.
Figure 4RU486 could attenuate the increase of the percentages of CD11b+Ly-6low monocytes and CD11b+Ly-6ClowLy-6G+ PMN-MDSCs induced by restraint stress. (A) Mice were injected sc with vehicle or RU486 prior to restraint stress each day for 21 days. (B and C) Representative plots of CD11b+Ly-6low monocytes (B) and CD11b+Ly-6ClowLy-6G+ PMN-MDSCs (C) in blood. (D and E) The increased percentages of CD11b+Ly-6low monocytes (D) and CD11b+Ly-6ClowLy-6G+ PMN-MDSCs (E) were blocked by RU486. (F and G) RU486 could not attenuate the changes of the CD4/CD8 ratio (F) and the percentages of NK cells (G). Data were shown as mean ± SEM (n = 5). *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01 vs. control. #p < 0.05 vs. vehicle.
Figure 5Propranolol could attenuate the changes of the CD4/CD8 ratio and the percentages of NK cells induced by restraint stress. (A) Mice were injected sc with vehicle or proraonlol prior to restraint stress each day for 21 days. (B and C) Representative plots of CD4+, CD8+ T lymphocytes (B) and NK cells (C) in blood. (D and E) The changes of the CD4/CD8 ratio (D) and the percentages of NK cells (E) were blocked by proraonlol. (F and G) Proraonlol could not attenuate the changes of the percentages of CD11b+Ly-6low monocytes (F) and CD11b+Ly-6ClowLy-6G+ PMN-MDSCs (G). Data were shown as mean ± SEM (n = 6). *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01 vs. control. #p < 0.05, ##p < 0.01 vs. vehicle.
Figure 6Splenectomy before restraint stress reversed the CD4/CD8 ratio changing following 21 cycles of stress. (A) Mice were splenectomized 14 days before restraint stress and then exposed to 21 cycles of restraint stress. (B) Representative plots of CD4+, CD8+ T lymphocytes in blood. (C) Splenectomy before restraint stress could attenuate the changes of CD4/CD8 ratio. (D,E and F) Splenectomy could not block the changes of NK cells (D), CD11b+Ly-6low monocytes (E), CD11b+Ly-6ClowLy-6G+ PMN-MDSCs (F) induced by restraint stress. Data were shown as mean ± SEM (n = 5–6). *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01 vs. control. #p < 0.05 vs. sham.