Figure 5. CD101 expression by pTreg... | Rockefeller University Press

Figure 5.

$CD101 expression by pTreg cells, thymocytes, and peripheral T cells in WT mice. (A) Experimental scheme for assessing pTreg development in WT mice. Naïve CD4+ T cells from DORe mice were transferred into WT (Thy1.1-eFox) mice, which were then fed with EWP for 3 days. (B) Foxp3+CD4+ T cells in transferred DORe CD4+ T cells and in the host. Representative flow cytometry profiles of CD4+ T cells in mLNs of WT mice treated as shown in A and frequency of WT- and DORe-derived Foxp3+ cells (n = 4). (C) Frequencies and cell numbers of WT- and DORe-derived Treg cells in total CD4+ T cells. (D) CD101 and Nrp-1 expression by WT- and DORe-derived Foxp3+ cells. Representative flow cytometry profile and MFI of the expression (n = 4). (E) Gating strategy of thymocytes in WT mice. Whole thymocytes (left), CD4/CD8 DN thymocytes (middle), and CD4 SP thymocytes (right). (F) CD101 expression by thymocyte subpopulations. Representative histograms and frequencies of CD101+ cells in thymocyte fractions shown in E (n = 4). (G) Gating strategy of mLN-derived cells in WT mice. (H) Representative histogram of CD101 expression and frequencies of CD101+ cells in WT-mLN–derived T-cell fractions (n = 6). (I) Representative flow cytometry profiles of CD101 and costained T cell–related molecules on Foxp3+ Treg or Foxp3− T cells from mLNs. MFIs of the costained molecules expressed by CD101+ and CD101− cells are also shown. Vertical bars indicate the mean ± SEM. Statistical significance was assessed by an unpaired t test (I). P values were shown in the figures. DP, double-positive; DN, double-negative; SP, single-positive.$

CD101 expression by pTreg cells, thymocytes, and peripheral T cells in WT mice. (A) Experimental scheme for assessing pTreg development in WT mice. Naïve CD4⁺ T cells from DORe mice were transferred into WT (Thy1.1-eFox) mice, which were then fed with EWP for 3 days. (B) Foxp3⁺CD4⁺ T cells in transferred DORe CD4⁺ T cells and in the host. Representative flow cytometry profiles of CD4⁺ T cells in mLNs of WT mice treated as shown in A and frequency of WT- and DORe-derived Foxp3⁺ cells (n = 4). (C) Frequencies and cell numbers of WT- and DORe-derived Treg cells in total CD4⁺ T cells. (D) CD101 and Nrp-1 expression by WT- and DORe-derived Foxp3⁺ cells. Representative flow cytometry profile and MFI of the expression (n = 4). (E) Gating strategy of thymocytes in WT mice. Whole thymocytes (left), CD4/CD8 DN thymocytes (middle), and CD4 SP thymocytes (right). (F) CD101 expression by thymocyte subpopulations. Representative histograms and frequencies of CD101⁺ cells in thymocyte fractions shown in E (n = 4). (G) Gating strategy of mLN-derived cells in WT mice. (H) Representative histogram of CD101 expression and frequencies of CD101⁺ cells in WT-mLN–derived T-cell fractions (n = 6). (I) Representative flow cytometry profiles of CD101 and costained T cell–related molecules on Foxp3⁺ Treg or Foxp3⁻ T cells from mLNs. MFIs of the costained molecules expressed by CD101⁺ and CD101⁻ cells are also shown. Vertical bars indicate the mean ± SEM. Statistical significance was assessed by an unpaired t test (I). P values were shown in the figures. DP, double-positive; DN, double-negative; SP, single-positive.