Changes of macrophage subsets and polarization in spleen of mice infected with Echinococcus multilocularis

doi:10.12140/j.issn.1000-7423.2021.06.007

Abstract

Abstract:

Objective To investigate the changes of splenic macrophages subsets and their polarization phenotype in mice infected with different numbers of Echinococcus multilocularis protoscoleces. Methods Sixty female C57BL/6 mice were randomly assigned to mild, moderate, and heavy infection groups and control group with 15 mice in each group. The mice in mild, moderate and heavy infection groups were inoculated with 50, 500, and 2 000 protoscoleces via hepatic portal vein puncture, respectively, while the control group was injected with the same volume of saline. At 2, 12, and 24 weeks after infection, the spleens from five mice randomly selected from each group were collected, followed by calculating the spleen coefficients after weighted, and isolating splenic lymphocytes. The proportions and numbers of different macrophages subsets were determined by flow cytometry. The total RNA of splenic lymphocytes was extracted, and the relative level of mRNA transcription of M1 and M2 polarization related genes in splenic macrophages were examined with real-time quantitative PCR. The M1 type polarization related genes were those involving interleukin-1β (IL-1β), interferon-γ (IFN-γ), chemokine (C-X-C motif) ligand 11 (CXCL11), chemokine (C-C motif) receptor 7 (CCR7) and CD86, and the M2 type polarization related genes were involving mannose receptor C-type 1 (MRC1), resistin like alpha (Retnla) and arginase 1 (ARG1). Glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenase (GAPDH) was used as an internal reference. SPSS 26.0 software was used for statistical analysis. The comparison between multiple groups at different time points was analyzed by one-way ANOVA, and the pairwise comparative analysis at the same time point was tested by LSD method. Results Two weeks after infection, the spleen weight, spleen coefficient, the number of splenic lymphocytes, the proportion of splenic macrophages, the number of splenic macrophages and Ly-6C^high splenic macrophage subset proportion in heavy infection group were (157.2 ± 22.8) mg,(0.8 ± 0.1)%,(10.3 ± 2.9) × 10⁷, (9.2 ± 6.4)%,(48.9 ± 32.7) × 10⁵ and (75.8 ± 4.6)%, respectively, which were all significantly higher than that in the control group [(75.0 ± 18.3) mg, (0.4 ± 0.1)%, (3.1 ± 1.3) × 10⁷, (4.3 ± 0.7)%, (7.7 ± 4.1) × 10⁵, (52.1 ± 8.4)%], mild infection group [(89.2 ± 7.4) mg, (0.4 ± 0.0)%, (5.4 ± 2.3) × 10⁷, (3.0 ± 0.9)%, (9.3 ± 6.9) × 10⁵, (50.1 ± 8.8)%], and in moderate infection group [(102.6 ± 15.2) mg, (0.5 ± 0.1)%, (7.0 ± 2.1) × 10⁷, (3.5 ± 0.3)%, (13.7 ± 3.9) × 10⁵, (60.3 ± 8.7)%] (F = 22.744, 23.542, 9.318, 3.935, 6.617, 11.197, P < 0.05 or P < 0.01). Ly-6C^low macrophage subset proportion (20.3 ± 4.2)% was significantly milder than that in the control group (39.0 ± 7.1)%, mild infection group (41.2 ± 8.6)% and in moderate infection group (34.2 ± 7.1)%(F = 9.157, P < 0.01). At 12 weeks after infection, the spleen weight, spleen coefficient, the proportion and number of macrophages and the proportion of the Ly-6C^high macrophage subset in the spleen were significantly higher in heavy infection group than that in the control group, mild and moderate infection groups (F = 12.730, 14.173, 20.380, 7.943, 25.838, P < 0.01), the proportion of Ly-6C^low macrophages was significantly lower than that in the control group, mild and moderate infection groups (F = 27.668, P < 0.01). At 24 weeks after infection, the spleen weight, spleen coefficient, the number of lymphocytes, the proportion and number of macrophages in the spleen were also significantly higher in heavy infection group (F = 8.664, 7.318, 13.047, 3.315, 6.007, P < 0.05 or P < 0.01). The proportions of Ly-6C^high and Ly-6C^low macrophages were not significantly different from those of the control group, mild and moderate infection groups (F = 3.177 and 2.709, P > 0.05). With longer time of infection, the proportion of Ly-6C^high macrophages was gradually decreased (F = 30.649, P < 0.01), and the proportion of Ly-6C^low macrophages was gradually increased (F = 32.407, P < 0.01). Real-time quantitative PCR showed that at 24 weeks after infection, the relative level of mRNA transcription of CXCL11 in heavy infection group (28.2 ± 36.3) was higher than that in control group (1.9 ± 2.7) (t = 2.243, P < 0.05), and the relative level of mRNA transcription of CD86 (0.2 ± 0.1) was significantly lower than that in the control group (0.5 ± 0.3) (t = -2.255, P < 0.05). The relative transcription level of mRNA of MRC1, Retnla, and ARG1 (5.2 ± 2.9, 201.8 ± 176.4, 51.2 ± 69.6) were significantly higher than those in control group (1.8 ± 1.5, 0.8 ± 0.8, 1.2 ± 0.8, respectively) (t = 2.313, 3.470 and 2.185, P < 0.05) Conclusion Two weeks after infection, large numbers of Ly-6C positive monocyte derived macrophages were recruited into spleen in the heavy infection group and the Ly-6C^high macrophage subset gradually transformed shifted to the Ly-6C^low subset during infection. At 12 weeks and 24 weeks after infection, the macrophages in the spleen were dominated by the M2 type, inducing immune tolerance, favorable to chronic infection of Echinococcus multilocularis metacestode.

Key words: Alveolar echinococcoisis, Echinococcus multilocularis, Spleen, Macrophage, Polarization

CLC Number:

R532.32

HOU Jiao, WEN Hao, WANG Ming-kun, LI Wen-ding, LI liang, LI Jing, ZHANG Chuan-shan, WANG Hui. Changes of macrophage subsets and polarization in spleen of mice infected with Echinococcus multilocularis[J]. CHINESE JOURNAL OF PARASITOLOGY AND PARASITIC DISEASES, 2021, 39(6): 771-778.

Figures/Tables 5

Table 1

Fig. 1

Fig. 2

Fig. 3

Table 2

References 21

[1]	Wen H, Vuitton L, Tuxun T, et al. Echinococcosis: advances in the 21st century[J]. Clin Microbiol Rev, 2019, 32(2): e00075-18.
[2]	Tuerhongjiang T, Shao YM, Wen H, et al. Consensus on Chinese terminology in the clinical field of echinococcosis[J]. Chin J Parasitol Parasit Dis, 2021, 39(1): 76-84. (in Chinese)
	(吐尔洪江·吐逊, 邵英梅, 温浩, 等. 棘球蚴病临床领域相关中文专业术语专家共识[J]. 中国寄生虫学与寄生虫病杂志, 2021, 39(1): 76-84.)
[3]	Wang TP, Cao ZG. Current status of echinococcosis control in China and the existing challenges[J]. Chin J Parasitol Parasit Dis, 2018, 36(3): 291-296. (in Chinese)
	(汪天平, 操治国. 中国棘球蚴病防控进展及其存在的问题[J]. 中国寄生虫学与寄生虫病杂志, 2018, 36(3): 291-296.)
[4]	Abudusalamu A, Shao YM, Tuerganaili A, et al. Establishment and innovative practice of integrative system of prevention, diagnosis and management for echinococcosis in China[J]. Chin J Parasitol Parasit Dis, 2019, 37(4): 388-394. (in Chinese)
	(阿卜杜萨拉姆·艾尼, 邵英梅, 吐尔干艾力·阿吉, 等. 中国棘球蚴病防诊治体系建设与创新实践[J]. 中国寄生虫学与寄生虫病杂志, 2019, 37(4): 388-394.)
[5]	Aji T, Dong JH, Shao YM, et al. Ex vivo liver resection and autotransplantation as alternative to allotransplantation for end-stage hepatic alveolar echinococcosis[J]. J Hepatol, 2018, 69(5): 1037-1046. doi: 10.1016/j.jhep.2018.07.006
[6]	Mosser DM, Edwards JP. Exploring the full spectrum of macrophage activation[J]. Nat Rev Immunol, 2008, 8(12): 958-969. doi: 10.1038/nri2448 pmid: 19029990
[7]	Murray PJ, Allen JE, Biswas SK, et al. Macrophage activation and polarization: nomenclature and experimental guidelines[J]. Immunity, 2014, 41(1): 14-20. doi: 10.1016/j.immuni.2014.06.008 pmid: 25035950
[8]	Mantovani A, Biswas SK, Galdiero MR, et al. Macrophage plasticity and polarization in tissue repair and remodelling[J]. J Pathol, 2013, 229(2): 176-185. doi: 10.1002/path.4133
[9]	Kong D, Zhou C, Guo H, et al. Praziquantel targets M1 macrophages and ameliorates splenomegaly in chronic schistosomiasis[J]. Antimicrob Agents Chemother, 2017, 62(1): e00005-17.
[10]	Faz-López B, Mayoral-Reyes H, Hernández-Pando R, et al. A dual role for macrophages in modulating lung tissue damage/repair during L2 Toxocara canis infection[J]. Pathogens, 2019, 8(4): 280. doi: 10.3390/pathogens8040280
[11]	Wang H, Zhang CS, Fang BB, et al. Dual role of hepatic macrophages in the establishment of the Echinococcus multilocularis metacestode in mice[J]. Front Immunol, 2021, 11: 600635. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2020.600635
[12]	Lewis SM, Williams A, Eisenbarth SC. Structure and function of the immune system in the spleen[J]. Sci Immunol, 2019, 4(33): eaau6085.
[13]	Audia S, Samson M, Guy J, et al. Immunologic effects of rituximab on the human spleen in immune thrombocytopenia[J]. Blood, 2011, 118(16): 4394-400.
[14]	Wang H, Li J, Guo BP, et al. Establishment of secondary hydatid disease infection in mice with cystic and alveolar Echinococcus cysts cultured in vitro[J]. Chin J Zoonoses, 2016, 32(9): 784-788. (in Chinese)
	(王慧, 李军, 郭宝平, 等. 微囊法棘球蚴继发感染小鼠动物模型的建立[J]. 中国人兽共患病学报, 2016, 32(9): 784-788.)
[15]	Zhang CS, Shao YM, Yang ST, et al. T-cell tolerance and exhaustion in the clearance of Echinococcus multilocularis: role of inoculum size in a quantitative hepatic experimental model[J]. Sci Rep, 2017, 7(1): 11153. doi: 10.1038/s41598-017-11703-1
[16]	He YS, Hui HY, Yu R, et al. Effects of asparagus on organ indexes and blood biochemistry in high-fat diet mice[J]. Chin J Microecol, 2018, 30(11): 1261-1265. (in Chinese)
	(何云山, 惠华英, 喻嵘, 等. 芦笋对高脂饮食小鼠脏器指数及血生化的影响[J]. 中国微生态学杂志, 2018, 30(11): 1261-1265.)
[17]	Bronte V, Pittet MJ. The spleen in local and systemic regulation of immunity[J]. Immunity, 2013, 39(5): 806-818. doi: 10.1016/j.immuni.2013.10.010
[18]	Meinderts SM, Oldenborg PA, Beuger BM, et al. Human and murine splenic neutrophils are potent phagocytes of IgG-opsonized red blood cells[J]. Blood Adv, 2017, 1(14): 875-886. doi: 10.1182/bloodadvances.2017004671 pmid: 29296731
[19]	Muraille E, Leo O, Moser M. TH1/TH2 paradigm extended: macrophage polarization as an unappreciated pathogen-driven escape mechanism?[J]. Front Immunol, 2014, 5: 603. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2014.00603 pmid: 25505468
[20]	Xu J, Zhang H, Chen L, et al. Schistosoma japonicum infection induces macrophage polarization[J]. J Biomed Res, 2014, 28(4): 299-308.
[21]	Gui T, Shimokado A, Sun Y, et al. Diverse roles of macrophages in atherosclerosis: from inflammatory biology to biomarker discovery[J]. Mediators Inflamm, 2012, 2012: 693083.

引物 Primer	NCBI基因 ID NCBI Gene ID	引物序列（5′→3′） Primer sequence (5′→3′)	片段长度/bp Fragment length/bp
IL-1β-F	16176	CCTCGTGCTGTCGGACCCATA	344
IL-1β-R		CAGGCTTGTGCTCTGCTTGTGA
IFN-γ-F	15978	TAGCCAAGACTGTGATTGCGG	159
IFN-γ-R		AGACATCTCCTCCCATCAGCAG
CXCL11-F	56066	GAACAGGAAGGTCACAGCCATAGC	180
CXCL11-R		TCAACTTTGTCGCAGCCGTTACTC
CCR7-F	12775	TGTACGAGTCGGTGTGCTTC	162
CCR7-R		GGTAGGTATCCGTCATGGTCTTG
CD86-F	12524	CTGGACTCTACGACTTCACAATG	131
CD86-R		AGTTGGCGATCACTGACAGTT
MRC1-F	17533	CATGAGGCTTCTCCTGCTTCT	143
MRC1-R		TTGCCGTCTGAACTGAGATGG
Retnla-F	57262	GGTCCCAGTGCATATGGATGAGA-CCATAGA	296
Retnla-R		CACCTCTTCACTCGAGGGACAGTT-GGCAGC
ARG1-F	11846	CAGAAGAATGGAAGAGTCAG	250
ARG1-R		CAGATATGCAGGGAGTCACC
GAPDH-F	14433	GATGCAGGGATGATGTTCTG	106
GAPDH-R		GTGAAGGTCGGTAACGG

巨噬细胞极化相关基因Macrophage polarization related gene	感染后2周2 weeks after infection				感染后12周12 weeks after infection				感染后24周 24 weeks after infection
	对照组	低感染组	中感染组	高感染组	对照组	低感染组	中感染组	高感染组	对照组	低感染组	中感染组	高感染组
	Control group	Mild infection group	Moderate infection group	Heavy infection group	Control group	Mild infection group	Moderate infection group	Heavy infection group	Control group	Mild infection group	Moderate infection group	Heavy infection group
M1
IL-1β	1.2 ± 0.9	1.2 ± 0.6	0.7 ± 0.7	2.2 ± 1.8	1.1 ± 0.4	1.8 ± 0.8	0.9 ± 0.5	3.1 ± 3.4	1.2 ± 0.6	4.6 ± 1.8^b	1.0 ± 1.3	2.8 ± 1.5
IFN-γ	1.2 ± 0.7	1.1 ± 0.7	0.4 ± 0.3	1.7 ± 2.5	1.8 ± 2.2	0.3 ± 0.1	0.7 ± 0.4	0.4 ± 0.5	1.1 ± 0.4	0.8 ± 0.3	1.0 ± 0.5	0.9 ± 0.9
CXCL11	1.0 ± 0.1	1.0 ± 0.6	0.6 ± 0.4	1.7 ± 2.1	1.6 ± 2.0	0.7 ± 0.8	0.6 ± 0.6	2.3 ± 3.6	1.9 ± 2.7	1.7 ± 1.0	6.1 ± 7.2	28.2 ± 36.3^a
CCR7	1.1 ± 0.6	2.3 ± 0.7	0.5 ± 0.3	0.3 ± 0.2^a	1.4 ± 1.1	1.8 ± 1.2	1.8 ± 0.8	2.2 ± 1.5	0.7 ± 0.6	0.4 ± 0.2	0.3 ± 0.1	1.1 ± 0.8
CD86	1.3 ± 1.0	1.9 ± 1.1	1.4 ± 1.2	1.0 ± 0.3	1.1 ± 0.5	2.1 ± 1.7	2.2 ± 0.7	0.6 ± 0.2	0.5 ± 0.3	0.5 ± 0.1	0.3 ± 0.2	0.2 ± 0.1^a
M2
MRC1	1.2 ± 0.9	2.1 ± 1.9	1.3 ± 1.1	1.0 ± 1.2	1.2 ± 0.6	1.0 ± 0.9	2.7 ± 2.3	1.9 ± 1.2	1.8 ± 1.5	2.9 ± 1.3	3.6 ± 3.2	5.2 ± 2.9^a
Retnla	1.1 ± 0.5	1.0 ± 0.9	0.5 ± 0.3	0.9 ± 0.5	1.4 ± 1.0	1.7 ± 0.9	1.1 ± 0.6	1.6 ± 1.1	0.8 ± 0.8	0.7 ± 1.0	6.8 ± 5.3	201.8 ± 176.4^b
ARG1	1.0 ± 0.3	1.1 ± 1.0	0.6 ± 0.5	0.7 ± 0.6	2.8 ± 4.8	2.2 ± 2.3	0.6 ± 0.4	12.1 ± 28.2	1.2 ± 0.8	0.7 ± 0.6	5.0 ± 4.3	51.2 ± 69.6^b