Project description:On the basis of the cell-surface molecule expression, CD16+ monocytes are likely comprised of distinct subpopulations of monocytes rather than a continuum of CD14+ monocytes with differing levels of cell activation. To better study this, we used gene array analysis that compared overall gene expression profiles of CD16+ subpopulations (CD14+CD16+ and CD16+) with that of CD14+CD16-. Gene expression in three FACS-sorted monocyte subsets was assessed by Affymetrix rhesus macaque oligonucleotide gene arrays that contain 52,024 probe sets covering 47,000 monkey genes. There were 29,361 probe sets that expressed in at least one subpopulation (raw array signal intensity > 32). Raw data were processed using robust multi-array average. To identify the most strongly, differentially expressed genes in each subpopulation, we only selected transcripts with consistently greater than four-fold difference (P < .05). In comparison to CD14+CD16- monocyte subset, a large number of genes (9098/29361, 30.9%) were differentially expressed in both CD14+CD16+ and CD16+ subsets: 1999 genes down-regulated; and 7099 genes up-regulated. Altogether, we observed large-scale gene expression differences between the CD14+CD16- subset and the two CD16+ subsets (CD14+CD16+ and CD16+), demonstrating transcriptional heterogeneity. The differential gene expression between CD16- and CD16+ monocytes underscore the fundamental differences between these cells. Comparisons between CD14+CD16+ and CD16+ were made to identify the genes that distinguish between these two CD16+ subpopulations. A relatively small number of genes were specifically associated with each subpopulation. Thirty-one genes were expressed strongly in CD14+CD16+ subset compared to CD16+ subset, and 94 genes were expressed strongly in CD16+ subset compared to CD14+CD16+ subset. A small set of genes that were expressed differentially between the two CD16+ subpopulations highlights similarity between the two cell types, but differentially expressed genes of function observed in each subset suggest different roles that these two subpopulations may play in vivo.

Project description:On the basis of the cell-surface molecule expression, CD16+ monocytes are likely comprised of distinct subpopulations of monocytes rather than a continuum of CD14+ monocytes with differing levels of cell activation. To better study this, we used gene array analysis that compared overall gene expression profiles of CD16+ subpopulations (CD14+CD16+ and CD16+) with that of CD14+CD16-. Gene expression in three FACS-sorted monocyte subsets was assessed by Affymetrix rhesus macaque oligonucleotide gene arrays that contain 52,024 probe sets covering 47,000 monkey genes. There were 29,361 probe sets that expressed in at least one subpopulation (raw array signal intensity > 32). Raw data were processed using robust multi-array average. To identify the most strongly, differentially expressed genes in each subpopulation, we only selected transcripts with consistently greater than four-fold difference (P < .05). In comparison to CD14+CD16- monocyte subset, a large number of genes (9098/29361, 30.9%) were differentially expressed in both CD14+CD16+ and CD16+ subsets: 1999 genes down-regulated; and 7099 genes up-regulated. Altogether, we observed large-scale gene expression differences between the CD14+CD16- subset and the two CD16+ subsets (CD14+CD16+ and CD16+), demonstrating transcriptional heterogeneity. The differential gene expression between CD16- and CD16+ monocytes underscore the fundamental differences between these cells. Comparisons between CD14+CD16+ and CD16+ were made to identify the genes that distinguish between these two CD16+ subpopulations. A relatively small number of genes were specifically associated with each subpopulation. Thirty-one genes were expressed strongly in CD14+CD16+ subset compared to CD16+ subset, and 94 genes were expressed strongly in CD16+ subset compared to CD14+CD16+ subset. A small set of genes that were expressed differentially between the two CD16+ subpopulations highlights similarity between the two cell types, but differentially expressed genes of function observed in each subset suggest different roles that these two subpopulations may play in vivo. To identify differentially expressed genes in subpopulations of monkey monocytes, three monocyte subsets from two normal uninfected rhesus macaques were FACS sorted based on their CD14 and CD16 expression. RNA purification and labeling, hybridization, array scanning, and image quantification were performed according to the manufacturerâs instructions. Briefly, FACS-isolated monocytes were spun down and lysed in Trizol reagents (Invitrogen), and total RNA was prepared using PureLink Micro-to-Midi Total RNA Purification system (Invitrogen). Quality of RNA was determined by 2100 Bioanalyzer RNA LabChip (Agilent Technologies). One hundred ng of high-quality total RNA was subjected to Affymetrix 1-cycle or 2-cycle synthesis amplification, fluorescent labeling, and hybridization to Affymetrix Rhesus Genome Arrays. Expression data was obtained from two aligned replicates using an Affymetrix GSC3000 scanner and processed by GCOS software (Affymetrix). Partek Genomic Suite System was used for downstream analysis of GCOS processed data. Signals from all probe sets were normalized using Rhesus Array Normalization Controls.

Project description:The advent of recent cutting-edge technologies has allowed the discovery and characterization of novel hematopoietic progenitors, including SSCloCD66b+CD15+CD11b-CD49dhiproNeu1s and SSChiCD66b+CD15+CD11b-CD49dintproNeus2s, CD66b+CD15+CD11b+CD49d+CD101-preNeus and Lin-CD66b+CD117+CD71+eNePs along human neutropoiesis process. In this research field, we recently identified CD66b-CD38+CD64dimCD115-, CD34+ and CD34dim/-cells exclusively committed to the neutrophil lineage [which we renamed as CD34+ and CD34dim/- neutrophil-committed progenitors (NCPs)], representing the earliest neutrophil precursors identifiable and sorted by flow cytometry. Moreover, based on their differential CD34 and CD45RA expression, we could identify four populations of NCPs, namely: CD34+CD45RA-/NCP1s, CD34+CD45RA+/NCP2s, CD34dim/-CD45RA+/NCP3s and CD34dim/-CD45RA-/NCP4s. This said, a very recent study by Ikeda and coworkers (PMID: 36862552) reported that neutrophil precursors termed either neutrophil progenitors (NePs) or “early neutrophil-committed progenitors” would generate immunosuppressive neutrophil-like CXCR1+CD14+CD16-monocytes. Hence, presuming that NePs/alias “early neutrophil-committed progenitors” correspond to NCPs, the selective neutrophil-commitment that we attributed to NCPs is contradicted by Ikeda and coworkers’ paper. In this study, by performing a more analytical reevaluation at the phenotypic and molecular levels of the cells generated by NCP2s and NCP4s (selected as representatives of NCPs), we categorically exclude that NCPs generate neutrophil-like CXCR1+CD14+CD16-monocytes. Rather, we provide substantial evidence indicating that the cells generated by NePs/alias “early neutrophil-committed progenitors” are neutrophilic cells at different stage of maturation, displaying moderate levels of CD14, instead of neutrophil-like CXCR1+CD14+CD16-monocytes as pointed by Ikeda and coworkers. Hence, the conclusion that NePs/alias “early neutrophil-committed progenitors” aberrantly differentiate into neutrophil-like monocytes derives, in our opinion, from data misinterpretation

Dataset Information

Complexity of synovial fluid-derived monocyte–macrophage lineage cells in knee osteoarthritis

Shared Molecules

Only show the datasets with similarity scores above: 0.5

Threshold

0.5

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets