| Literature DB >> 31408528 |
Jack Yang1, Cornelis Van't Veer1, Marieke S Ten Brink1, Alex F de Vos1, Tom van der Poll1,2.
Abstract
Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31408528 PMCID: PMC7216942 DOI: 10.1111/all.14021
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Allergy ISSN: 0105-4538 Impact factor: 13.146
Figure 1Generation of bone marrow‐derived eosinophils ex vivo and adoptive transfer in HDM‐challenged eosinophil‐deficient mice. A, BALF C3a in WT and ΔdblGATA KO mice 24 h after the last saline or HDM challenge. B, Identification of bone marrow‐derived eosinophils in the lung by flow cytometry in WT and ΔdblGATA KO mice 24 h following last HDM challenge. C, Identification of eosinophils by double‐positive staining for CCR3 and Siglec‐F in response to IL‐5 on each indicated time point. Percentage of eosinophils following incubation with IL‐5 from day 4 till 14. Number of eosinophils in the (D) lung or (E) BALF of recipient (ΔdblGATA KO) mice following adaptive transfer of either WT or C3aR KO bmEos. A parametric t test was used for the comparison between groups. Data are representatives of at least two independent experiments and expressed as means ± SEM from 6 to 8 separate cultures or mice per group. ***P < .001
Figure 2C3A is not an important chemoattractant for bone marrow‐derived eosinophils ex vivo. Chemotaxis of WT bmEos in response to increasing dose of hCCL24 or C3a. Chemotactic index (CI) is used as measure for the extent of ex vivo chemotaxis. A parametric t test was used for the comparison between groups. Data are representatives of at least two independent experiments (n = 6‐8 per group) and expressed as means ± SEM. *P < .05, **P < .01 for comparison between hCCL24 and C3a at the indicated dose