2A). The following Selleckchem Everolimus day, the mice were immunized with their cognate peptide in CFA, and the numbers and activation status of transferred Teff cells were analyzed at various time points. As our studies in the EAE model demonstrated that fewer Teff cells were present in the target organ, we hypothesized that, in the presence of Treg cells, a decrease in Teff-cell proliferation would be observed. Surprisingly, Treg cells had no effect on Teff cells proliferation as measured by CFSE dilution and a two-fold increase in the percentage
and absolute number of Teff cells present in the draining LN was observed (Fig. 2B and D; Supporting Information Fig. S1A). Further analysis of the transferred T cells demonstrated that there was no difference in the percentage of cells differentiating into either Th1 or Th17 lineages, nor were there differences in the level of expression of the activation marker CD44 (Fig. 2C). As it remained possible that potential suppressive effects of Treg cell were blocked by the use of CFA as an adjuvant, we also immunized the mice with peptide-pulsed splenic DCs. The results were identical to those observed in
HTS assay the presence of CFA. Teff-cell proliferation was not blocked, and there was a greater than two-fold increase in the total number of the Teff cells in the spleen in the presence of Treg cells (Fig. 2D). Although the experiments in Fig. 2D were performed with CD4+CD25− T cells
from 2D2 mice that might contain a small number of CD25−Foxp3+ T cells, identical results were observed when Foxp3 Teff cells were purified from TCR-Tg mice on a RAG−/− background (Supporting Information Figs. S1A and S1B). Similar results were observed when we immunized the mice with pigeon cytochrome C (PCC) protein i.v. or transferred cytochrome-specific T cells to mice that transgenically expressed PCC (Supporting EGFR antibody inhibitor Information Fig. S2). Overall, these studies demonstrate the effects of polyclonal Treg cell under immunization strategies ranging from highly immunogenic (CFA) to tolerogenic (i.v. antigen or endogenous expression of antigen) all resulted in an amplification of the total number of Teff cells at the site of immunization. The protocol used in the previous experiments had the disadvantage of only being able to track one cell population at a time. We were therefore limited in our ability to track the relative dynamics of Teff cells and Treg cells at the same time. We addressed this issue by cotransferring CFSE-labeled CD45.2+Thy1.1− 2D2 TCR-Tg (specific for MOG35–55) Teff cells in the presence or absence of CFSE-labeled CD45.2+Thy1.1+ Treg cells into CD45.1+ recipients at a Teff cells to Treg cells ratio of 1:4. The ratio of Teff cells to Treg cells was chosen on the basis of previous experiments that demonstrated that the engraftment efficiency of Treg cells is far lower than that of Teff cells.