Volume 12, Issue 2, Pages (August 2012)

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Deborah L. Berry, Eric H. Baehrecke  Cell 
Advertisements

Volume 138, Issue 2, Pages (July 2009)
Volume 14, Issue 3, Pages (September 2011)
Infection-Induced Intestinal Oxidative Stress Triggers Organ-to-Organ Immunological Communication in Drosophila  Shih-Cheng Wu, Chih-Wei Liao, Rong-Long.
Volume 5, Issue 5, Pages (May 2009)
Volume 19, Issue 4, Pages (April 2017)
PGRP-SD, an Extracellular Pattern-Recognition Receptor, Enhances Peptidoglycan- Mediated Activation of the Drosophila Imd Pathway  Igor Iatsenko, Shu Kondo,
Volume 47, Issue 1, Pages e7 (July 2017)
Laura Boulan, David Martín, Marco Milán  Current Biology 
Glucose Shortens the Life Span of C
Negative Regulation by Amidase PGRPs Shapes the Drosophila Antibacterial Response and Protects the Fly from Innocuous Infection  Juan C. Paredes, David P.
Lacy J. Barton, Belinda S. Pinto, Lori L. Wallrath, Pamela K. Geyer 
Volume 27, Issue 22, Pages e5 (November 2017)
Volume 6, Issue 3, Pages (September 2009)
Volume 18, Issue 5, Pages (November 2015)
Octavio Ramilo, Asunción Mejías  Cell Host & Microbe 
Volume 12, Issue 2, Pages (August 2012)
Jonathan B. Muyskens, Karen Guillemin  Cell Host & Microbe 
Volume 9, Issue 2, Pages (February 2011)
Volume 20, Issue 3, Pages (September 2016)
Mutual Repression by Bantam miRNA and Capicua Links the EGFR/MAPK and Hippo Pathways in Growth Control  Héctor Herranz, Xin Hong, Stephen M. Cohen  Current.
Volume 21, Issue 6, Pages e6 (June 2017)
Volume 57, Issue 2, Pages (January 2015)
Matthew H. Sieber, Carl S. Thummel  Cell Metabolism 
Volume 18, Issue 4, Pages (October 2015)
Volume 23, Issue 3, Pages (February 2013)
Volume 36, Issue 4, Pages (April 2012)
Volume 22, Issue 5, Pages (March 2012)
Volume 11, Issue 4, Pages (April 2012)
HBL-1 Patterns Synaptic Remodeling in C. elegans
Volume 3, Issue 5, Pages (May 2008)
Boss/Sev Signaling from Germline to Soma Restricts Germline-Stem-Cell-Niche Formation in the Anterior Region of Drosophila Male Gonads  Yu Kitadate, Shuji.
Volume 4, Issue 5, Pages (November 2008)
Volume 40, Issue 1, Pages (January 2014)
BTB/POZ-Zinc Finger Protein Abrupt Suppresses Dendritic Branching in a Neuronal Subtype-Specific and Dosage-Dependent Manner  Wenjun Li, Fay Wang, Laurent.
Volume 28, Issue 4, Pages e5 (February 2018)
Alejandro Murad, Myai Emery-Le, Patrick Emery  Neuron 
Volume 17, Issue 2, Pages (February 2015)
Volume 21, Issue 1, Pages (January 2017)
Volume 17, Issue 4, Pages (April 2015)
Volume 12, Issue 8, Pages (August 2015)
Mario R. Pagani, Kimihiko Oishi, Bruce D. Gelb, Yi Zhong  Cell 
Drosophila CRYPTOCHROME Is a Circadian Transcriptional Repressor
Volume 124, Issue 5, Pages (March 2006)
Volume 4, Issue 2, Pages (August 2008)
Volume 14, Issue 2, Pages (August 2013)
Host Translational Inhibition by Pseudomonas aeruginosa Exotoxin A Triggers an Immune Response in Caenorhabditis elegans  Deborah L. McEwan, Natalia V.
Volume 17, Issue 6, Pages (June 2015)
Volume 6, Issue 3, Pages (September 2009)
Drosophila ASPP Regulates C-Terminal Src Kinase Activity
Infection-Induced Host Translational Blockage Inhibits Immune Responses and Epithelial Renewal in the Drosophila Gut  Sveta Chakrabarti, Peter Liehl,
Conditioning Protects C
Chunli Ren, Paul Webster, Steven E. Finkel, John Tower  Cell Metabolism 
Volume 14, Issue 7, Pages (February 2016)
Volume 42, Issue 1, Pages (January 2015)
Volume 2, Issue 1, Pages (July 2007)
Volume 5, Issue 5, Pages (May 2009)
Volume 21, Issue 4, Pages e4 (April 2017)
Volume 30, Issue 4, Pages (April 2009)
Volume 48, Issue 5, Pages e3 (May 2018)
Volume 4, Issue 3, Pages (September 2008)
Volume 25, Issue 2, Pages (February 2017)
Tumor Suppressor CYLD Regulates JNK-Induced Cell Death in Drosophila
Negative Regulation by Amidase PGRPs Shapes the Drosophila Antibacterial Response and Protects the Fly from Innocuous Infection  Juan C. Paredes, David P.
Matthew H. Sieber, Carl S. Thummel  Cell Metabolism 
Volume 17, Issue 5, Pages (October 2016)
Coordination of Triacylglycerol and Cholesterol Homeostasis by DHR96 and the Drosophila LipA Homolog magro  Matthew H. Sieber, Carl S. Thummel  Cell Metabolism 
Volume 4, Issue 2, Pages (August 2006)
Volume 5, Issue 3, Pages (September 2003)
Volume 18, Issue 6, Pages (June 2010)
Presentation transcript:

Volume 12, Issue 2, Pages 153-165 (August 2012) Peptidoglycan Sensing by the Receptor PGRP-LE in the Drosophila Gut Induces Immune Responses to Infectious Bacteria and Tolerance to Microbiota  Virginie Bosco-Drayon, Mickael Poidevin, Ivo Gomperts Boneca, Karine Narbonne-Reveau, Julien Royet, Bernard Charroux  Cell Host & Microbe  Volume 12, Issue 2, Pages 153-165 (August 2012) DOI: 10.1016/j.chom.2012.06.002 Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Inc. Terms and Conditions

Figure 1 Larval and Adult Midgut Immune Responses Are Regionalized (A) Ecc-mediated AMP gene induction (after 4 hr) in larval midgut requires PGRP-LE. (B) Ecc-GFP bacteria localization in larval (left) and adult (right) guts is shown. Ecc-GFP (green) accumulate preferentially in the larval Vtr and Cc regions while food uptake (visualized here with Bromophenol blue [BPB]) reaches the Pmg. In adults, Ecc-GFP is found uniformly along the entire midgut. Pictures were taken 4 hr post infection. Pv: proventriculus, Vtr: ventriculus, Cc: copper cells, Pmg: posterior midgut. Scale bar is 500 μm. (C) PGRP-LC and PGRP-LE are differently required along the anteroposterior axis of the larval gut. Confocal pictures of Ecc-infected larval gut regions of the following genotypes: Control (yw;;Dpt-Cherry), PGRP-LC- (yw;;PGRP-LCΔE12, Dpt-Cherry), and PGRP-LE- (yw PGRP-LE112;;Dpt-Cherry). Scale bar is 100 μm. (D and E) AMP gene expression in larval (D) and adult (E) gut domains of PGRP-LC and PGRP-LE mutants 4 hr post feeding with Ecc is shown. For (A), (D), and (E), mRNA levels in axenic control flies were set to 1, and values obtained with other genotypes were expressed as a fold of this value. Histograms correspond to the mean value ± SD of three experiments. Values indicated by symbols (∗) are statistically significant (p < 0.05). ns: not significantly different. See also Figure S1. Cell Host & Microbe 2012 12, 153-165DOI: (10.1016/j.chom.2012.06.002) Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Inc. Terms and Conditions

Figure 2 PGRP-LE Detects TCT in the Drosophila Gut (A–D) Transcriptional activation of various IMD target genes in adult midgut domains 24 hr post feeding with TCT. mRNA levels in axenic control flies were set to 1, and values obtained with other genotypes were expressed as a fold of this value. Histogram corresponds to the mean value ± SD of three experiments. Values indicated by symbols (∗) are statistically significant (p < 0.05). ns: not significantly different. (E) Confocal pictures of uninfected or Ecc-infected pgrp-PGRP-LE::GFP;Dpt-Cherry larval guts. PGRP-LE::GFP (green) accumulates in intracytoplasmic vesicles in Ecc infected guts. These cells also express the Dpt-Cherry transgene (red). Images were taken 24 hr post infection. Scale bar is 50 μm. Cell Host & Microbe 2012 12, 153-165DOI: (10.1016/j.chom.2012.06.002) Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Inc. Terms and Conditions

Figure 3 IMD Target Gene Activation by L. plantarum Requires PGRP-LE Transcriptional activation of various IMD targets in the gut of L. plantarum recolonized flies. mRNA levels in axenic control flies were set to 1, and values obtained with other genotypes were expressed as a fold of this value. Histograms correspond to the mean value ± SD of three experiments. Values indicated by symbols (∗) are statistically significant (p < 0.05). ns: not significantly different. See also Figure S2. Cell Host & Microbe 2012 12, 153-165DOI: (10.1016/j.chom.2012.06.002) Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Inc. Terms and Conditions

Figure 4 Loss of Immune Tolerance in Pirk Mutant Gut Is PGRP-LE-Dependent (A and B) AMP overexpression in pirk mutant gut monoassociated with L. plantarum requires PGRP-LE but not PGRP-LC. (C) Loss of immune tolerance, visualized by the expression of the Dpt-Cherry reporter gene is restricted to the Cc region of pirk mutant gut. Confocal images of L. plantarum-associated wild-type and mutant guts. Scale bar is 100 μm. (D) L. plantarum-dependent induction of pirk requires PGRP-LE in both larval and adult guts. (E) PGRP-LE: GFP colocalizes with pirk::Tomato. Confocal images of a Copper cell from an Ecc-infected pgrp-PGRP-LE::GFP; ubi-pirk::Tomato larval gut. Pictures were taken 24 hr post infection. Scale bar is 5 μm. For (A), (B), and (D), mRNA levels in axenic control flies were set to 1, and values obtained with other genotypes were expressed as a fold of this value. Histograms correspond to the mean value ± SD of three experiments. Values indicated by symbols (∗) are statistically significant (p < 0.05). ns: not significantly different. See also Figure S3. Cell Host & Microbe 2012 12, 153-165DOI: (10.1016/j.chom.2012.06.002) Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Inc. Terms and Conditions

Figure 5 Amidase PGRPs Prevent Excessive IMD Activation in L. plantarum-Colonized Guts (A and B) L. plantarum-triggered Attacin-D and Diptericin mRNA expressions are shown in larval (A) and adult (B) midgut domains. mRNA levels in axenic control flies were set to 1, and values obtained with other genotypes were expressed as a fold of this value. Histogram corresponds to the mean value ± SD of three experiments. Values indicated by symbols (∗) are statistically significant (p < 0.05). ns: not significantly different. See also Figure S4. Cell Host & Microbe 2012 12, 153-165DOI: (10.1016/j.chom.2012.06.002) Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Inc. Terms and Conditions

Figure 6 PGRP-LB Mutant Lethality Is Suppressed by Removing PGRP-LE Function Survival curves of Ecc orally infected flies revealing that PGRP-LB mutant susceptibility can be partially suppressed by removing PGRP-LE function. Each survival curve corresponds to seven independent experiments with ten flies for each experiment. Survival curves of PGRP-LB only and PGRP-LE, PGRP-LB double mutant are statistically significantly different (∗). Cell Host & Microbe 2012 12, 153-165DOI: (10.1016/j.chom.2012.06.002) Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Inc. Terms and Conditions

Figure 7 Gut PGRP-LE Prevents Systemic Immune Response Activation after Oral Infection with Ecc (A) Transcriptional activation of various IMD targets in fat body and gut of adult flies 24 hr post oral infection with Ecc. mRNA levels in axenic flies were set to 1, and values obtained with other genotypes were expressed as a fold of this value. Histogram corresponds to the mean value ± SD of nine experiments. (B) Expression of Dpt in fat body of Ecc infected larvae, 24 hr post infection. mRNA levels in axenic control flies were set to 1, and values obtained with other genotypes were expressed as a fold of this value. Histogram corresponds to the mean value ± SD of three experiments. Dorsal view of yw;;Dpt-Cherry and yw PGRP-LE112;;Dpt-Cherry Ecc-infected third instar larvae. Pictures were taken 24 hr post infection. Fb: fat body. (C) Expression of UAS-PGRP-LE or PGRP-LB specifically in the gut is sufficient to rescue activation of the systemic response in PGRP-LE mutant flies. Expression of Dpt and pirk in the fat body and expression of PGRP-LB, PGRP-SC1 and pirk in midgut are shown in Ecc-infected adult flies, 24 hr post infection. mRNA levels in Ecc infected control flies were set to 1, and values obtained with other genotypes were expressed as a fold of this value. Histograms correspond to the mean value ± SD of six experiments. For (A), (B), and (C), values indicated by symbols (∗) are statistically significant (p < 0.05). ns: not significantly different. See also Figure S5. Cell Host & Microbe 2012 12, 153-165DOI: (10.1016/j.chom.2012.06.002) Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Inc. Terms and Conditions