By
From the Department of Immunology, The Scripps Research Institute, La Jolla, California 92037
Lipopolysaccharide (LPS) from gram-negative bacteria causes polyclonal activation of B cells
and stimulation of macrophages and other APC. We show here that, under in vivo conditions,
LPS also induces strong stimulation of T cells. As manifested by CD69 upregulation, LPS injection stimulates both CD4 and CD8+ T cells, and, at high doses, stimulates naive (CD44lo)
cells as well as memory (CD44hi) cells. However, in terms of cell division, the response of T cells after LPS injection is limited to the CD44hi subset of CD8+ cells. In contrast with B cells,
proliferative responses of CD44hi CD8+ cells require only very low doses of LPS (10 ng). Based
on studies with LPS-nonresponder and gene-knockout mice, LPS-induced proliferation of
CD44hi CD8+ cells appears to operate via an indirect pathway involving LPS stimulation of
APC and release of type I (,
) interferon (IFN-I). Similar selective stimulation of CD44hi
CD8+ cells occurs in viral infections and after injection of IFN-I, implying a common mechanism. Hence, intermittent exposure to pathogens (gram-negative bacteria and viruses) could
contribute to the high background proliferation of memory-phenotype CD8+ cells found in
normal animals.
CD4+ and CD8+ T cells can be subdivided into naive
and memory cells on the basis of various surface markers, especially CD44, CD45RB, and CD62L (L-selectin) (1).
Thus, naive T cells express a CD44lo CD45RBhi CD62Lhi
phenotype, whereas most memory cells are CD44hi CD45RBlo CD62Llo. T cells with a naive phenotype are resting
cells and show a very slow turnover as measured by incorporation of the DNA precursor, bromodeoxyuridine (BrdU)
(2, 3). By contrast, the majority of memory-phenotype cells
have a rapid turnover.
T cells with a memory-phenotype are presumed to be
the progeny of naive T cells responding to specific antigen.
Why these cells show a high rate of turnover is unclear.
The most obvious possibility is that memory-phenotype
cells are engaged in chronic, low level proliferative responses to residual depots of specific antigen and/or to
cross-reactive environmental antigens (4, 5). In addition to
such TCR-mediated stimulation, memory-phenotype cells
may also be subject to nonantigen-specific stimulation via cytokines. In support of this idea, infection of mice with viruses such as lymphocytic choriomeningitis virus (LCMV)1
causes an intense T proliferative response, which appears to be predominantly nonantigen specific (6). This bystander
response preferentially affects memory-phenotype (CD44hi)
CD8+ cells and can be mimicked by injection of type I ( To assess this possibility, we have examined the effects of
injecting mice with LPS, a component of the cell wall of
gram-negative bacteria (10). LPS (endotoxin) is well known
for its capacity to cause polyclonal activation of B cells.
However, in addition, LPS is strongly stimulatory for APC
such as macrophages, and induces these cells to release various cytokines, e.g., IFN-I, TNF- Mice and Treatments.
C57BL/6J (B6) mice were purchased from
either the rodent breeding colony at The Scripps Research Institute or The Jackson Laboratory (Bar Harbor, ME). C3H/HeOuJ,
C3H/HeJ, B cell-deficient (µMT), and IFN- Spleen Cell Transfer.
Spleens from C3H/HeOuJ mice were
disrupted using a tissue homogenizer and the resulting cell suspension was depleted of T cells by treatment with anti-CD8 and
anti-CD4 mAbs plus complement (15). After antibody and complement treatment, cells were washed three times and resuspended in PBS. Cells were injected intravenously in a final volume of 0.5 ml (2.3 × 108 cells/recipient) into C3H/HeJ mice.
Flow Cytometry.
mAbs used for cell surface staining were the
following: anti-CD8-PE (GIBCO BRL, Gaithersburg, MD),
anti-CD4-PE (Collaborative Biomedical Products, Bedford, MA),
anti-Ly-6C-biotin (PharMingen, San Diego, CA), anti-B220-PE
(PharMingen), anti-CD69-biotin (PharMingen), anti-CD44-
FITC (PharMingen), and anti-CD44-biotin (IM7.8.1).
,
) interferon (IFN-I) and by Poly I:C, an inducer of IFN-I
(9). These findings suggest that the constant proliferation of
memory-phenotype T cells seen in normal animals may be
mediated in part by IFN-I and other cytokines released
during contact with various infectious agents. If so, any microorganism capable of stimulating IFN-I production in
vivo would be expected to cause bystander stimulation of
T cells.
, and IL-12 (11).
Hence, the production of these cytokines might be expected to stimulate T cells. In line with this prediction, evidence is presented that even small doses of LPS cause
marked proliferation of CD44hi CD8+ cells in vivo.
-deficient (IFN
/
) mice were purchased from The Jackson Laboratory. 129/
SvEvTacfBR (129) mice were purchased from Taconic Farms
(Germantown, NY). 129 background mice defective in IFN-
/
receptor function (IFN-IR
/
) (14) were originally purchased
from B&K Universal (North Humberside, UK) and were maintained and bred in the animal facility at The Scripps Research Institute. Where indicated, mice were injected intravenously with
LPS (from Escherichia coli serotype 055:B5, prepared by trichloroacetic acid extraction) (Sigma Chemical Co., St. Louis, MO) or
Poly I:C (Sigma Chemical Co.) dissolved in 0.2 ml PBS. For bromodeoxyuridine (BrdU) treatment, mice were given sterile drinking
water containing 0.8 mg/ml BrdU (Sigma Chemical Co.). BrdUcontaining drinking water was changed daily.
To examine the effects of LPS on T cell turnover, normal adult C57BL/6 (B6) mice were injected intravenously with graded doses of LPS and immediately placed on BrdU water. After 3 d, suspensions of spleen and LN cells were stained for expression of cell surface markers, fixed, and then stained for BrdU incorporation (see Materials and Methods). The data shown below are representative of at least two separate experiments.
As expected, LPS injection caused significant proliferation of B cells, especially in spleen (Fig. 1). However, relative to the background proliferation in uninjected mice,
BrdU incorporation by B cells was only seen after injection
of relatively high doses of LPS (10 µg). For T cells, LPS
injection had minimal effects on CD4+ cells. Thus, even
high doses of LPS had no effect on naive (CD44lo) CD4+
cells and caused only a slight increase in the high (30%) background rate of proliferation of memory-phenotype (CD44hi)
cells. Quite different results applied to CD8+ cells. As for
CD4+ cells, LPS injection did not alter the slow turnover
of CD44lo cells. However, even very low doses of LPS (10 ng) caused substantial proliferation of CD44hi CD8+ cells,
both in spleen and LN; with higher doses of LPS, BrdU labeling of CD44hi CD8+ cells reached 70% (compared with
20% in uninjected mice). Significantly, LPS injection caused a
considerable increase in Ly6C expression on CD8+ cells.
Upregulation of Ly6C expression on (total) CD8+ cells is
prominent in mice injected with Poly I:C and IFN-I and is
reported to be controlled specifically by IFN-I (16). Hence, the upregulation of Ly6C on CD8+ cells after LPS injection signified the production of IFN-I.
Role of B Cells.
To examine whether stimulation of CD8+
T cells by LPS required B cells, we examined the effects of
injecting LPS into B cell-deficient µMT mice. As shown
in Fig. 2, BrdU labeling of CD44hi CD8+ cells after LPS
injection was almost as high in B6 µMT mice as in normal
B6 mice. These data indicate that stimulation of CD8+
cells by LPS does not require the presence of B cells.
T Cell Responses in LPS-nonresponder Mice.
In the case of
B cells, the C3H/HeJ strain of mice is largely refractory to
stimulation by LPS (17). To test whether the LPS-nonresponder status of C3H/HeJ mice applies to T cells, we examined the effects of injecting LPS into C3H/HeJ versus
LPS-responder C3H/HeOuJ mice; injection of Poly I:C
was used as a control. As shown in Fig. 3, BrdU labeling of
CD44hi CD8+ cells after injection of a relatively high dose
of LPS (12.5 µg) was prominent in C3H/HeOuJ mice but
virtually undetectable in C3H/HeJ mice; similar findings
applied to upregulation of Ly6C expression. By contrast,
injection of Poly I:C caused BrdU labeling of CD8+ cells
and Ly6C upregulation in both strains of mice. These data indicate that the defective response of C3H/HeJ mice to
LPS applies to T cells.
If T cell stimulation induced by LPS injection reflects
cytokine production by APC rather than direct binding of
LPS to T cells, reconstituting C3H/HeJ mice with normal
LPS-responder APC would be expected to restore the response of T cells to LPS. To examine this question, C3H/
HeJ mice were injected intravenously with large numbers
of T-depleted spleen cells taken from normal C3H/HeOuJ
mice ± LPS. As shown in Fig. 4, the presence of normal spleen APC at the time of LPS injection led to significant
stimulation of the host C3H/HeJ CD44hi CD8+ cells, especially in spleen. The failure of LPS-nonresponder T cells
to proliferate after LPS injection could thus be restored by
coinjecting normal APC.
Role of Receptors for IFN-I.
The above findings suggest
that stimulation of T cells after LPS injection requires a direct action of LPS on APC, presumably leading to the production of stimulatory cytokines. To examine whether
IFN-I is required for LPS-induced T cell proliferation, we
examined the effects of injecting LPS into mice lacking receptors for IFN-I (IFN-IR mice); mice lacking the gene
for IFN-
(IFN-
mice) were used as a control. As shown
in Fig. 5, injecting an intermediate dose of 1 µg of LPS
caused prominent proliferation of CD44hi CD8+ cells in
IFN-
hosts (Fig. 5 B) but virtually no proliferation in
IFN-IR
hosts (Fig. 5 A). However, a higher dose of 12.5 µg LPS did cause substantial proliferation of CD8+ cells in
IFN-IR
mice, as well as in IFN-
mice. These findings
indicate that IFN-I production does play a crucial role in
LPS stimulation of T cells, though only with a moderate
dose of LPS. It should be noted that LPS-induced proliferation of B cells was not reduced in IFN-IR
mice, implying that the response of B cells does not require IFN-I (data
not shown).
Stimulation of Naive T Cells.
In all of the above experiments, the capacity of LPS injection to stimulate T cells
was restricted to the CD44hi subset of CD8+ cells. However, this finding refers only to T cell proliferation. To examine other parameters of cell activation, T cells from
LPS-injected mice were examined 1 d later for upregulation of CD69 expression, a highly sensitive indicator of T
(and B) cell activation (18). The results shown in Fig. 6 A
make three points. First, high doses of LPS caused upregulation of CD69 not only on CD8+ cells and B cells (as expected from the BrdU labeling studies) but also on CD4+
cells. Second, based on the results of injecting graded doses of LPS, the sensitivity of CD8+ cells, B cells, and CD4+
cells to LPS-induced CD69 upregulation seemed to be remarkably similar. Third, with high doses of LPS, CD69
upregulation applied to a high proportion (60-80%) of total
CD4+ and CD8+ cells, suggesting that the LPS-stimulated
cells included naive T cells. In support of this possibility,
CD69 upregulation was clearly apparent on both CD44lo
and CD44hi T cell subsets, both for CD4+ cells and CD8+
cells (Fig. 6 B). Although CD44hi cells were more sensitive
to CD69 upregulation than CD44lo cells, injection of a
high dose of LPS induced CD69 expression on >50% of
CD44lo cells, both for CD4+ and CD8+ cells.
Although LPS-induced proliferation of lymphoid cells is thought to be primarily restricted to B cells, there are a number of reports that LPS can stimulate T cells. Thus, it is well established that LPS can act as a powerful adjuvant for T cell responses to specific antigen (19). It has also been found that LPS can stimulate certain T cell clones and a small proportion (1-3%) of splenic T cells in vitro (22). However, quantitative information on the capacity of LPS to stimulate normal T cells in vivo has not been reported.
We show here that injecting LPS into normal mice placed on BrdU water induced substantial proliferation of T cells. Whereas proliferation of B cells required quite high doses of LPS (10 µg), even very low doses of LPS (10 ng) were sufficient to cause T cell proliferation. At all doses of LPS tested, the proliferative response of T cells was restricted to a single subset of T cells, namely CD44hi CD8+ cells. However, in terms of CD69 upregulation, LPS injection led to activation of nearly all T cells, including naive (CD44lo) CD8+ and CD4+ cells.
The strong proliferation of CD44hi CD8+ cells induced
by LPS injection correlated closely with the selective proliferation of CD44hi CD8+ cells seen previously in viral infections and in mice injected with IFN-I or Poly I:C (9).
Hence, it is highly likely that LPS-induced proliferation of
CD44hi CD8+ cells requires the production of IFN-I, presumably via a direct action of LPS on APC. A critical role
for APC is apparent from the finding that the failure of LPS
to stimulate T cell proliferation in LPS-nonresponder mice
could be overcome by coinjecting normal T-depleted
spleen cells as a source of APC. Although LPS can stimulate APC to produce a spectrum of different cytokines (11-
13, 23-25), it is notable that T cell stimulation after LPS
injection was substantially reduced in IFN-IR mice,
though only with limiting doses of LPS. Therefore, the implication is that LPS stimulation of CD8+ cells is strongly
dependent on IFN-I production but only at moderate or low
doses of LPS. At higher LPS doses, IFN-I production is apparently no longer essential, and T cell proliferation is controlled by a different mechanism. Two obvious questions arise:
Does IFN-I act directly on T cells? This possibility is unlikely because we have found no evidence that IFN-I is capable of causing proliferation of purified T cells in vitro
(our unpublished data). Moreover, based on studies with
bone marrow chimeras constructed with a mixture of normal and IFN-IR stem cells, the inability of IFN-IR
T cells
to proliferate after IFN-I (Poly I:C) injection can be overcome by providing a source of normal APC (our unpublished data). These findings suggest that IFN-I induces T cell
proliferation by an indirect pathway involving APC. The
simplest possibility is that IFN-I stimulates APC to produce
other cytokines, which then act directly on T cells.
Which cytokines elicit T cell proliferation in vivo? Because a wide variety of different cytokines are capable of stimulating activated T cells in vitro, defining which particular cytokines stimulate T cells after LPS injection in vivo is a formidable task. IL-12 is a logical candidate because this cytokine is synthesized by APC in response to LPS (13). Moreover, we have observed strong stimulation of CD44hi CD8+ cells in mice injected with rIL-12 (our unpublished data). Nevertheless, we have seen only minimal proliferation of T cells after culture with IL-12 in vitro. Hence, as with IFN-I, it is doubtful whether IL-12 acts directly on T cells. In considering other cytokines, IL-15 is of special interest because this IL-2-like cytokine is produced by APC and, like IL-2, IL-15 is directly stimulatory for activated T cells in vitro (25, 26). Experiments with IL-15 (and various other cytokines) are currently underway.
Because LPS is a major component of gram-negative bacteria, one would expect to see prominent evidence of T cell proliferation during bacterial infections. In fact, as with LPS, we have found that injecting mice with killed Brucella abortus causes marked proliferation of CD44hi CD8+ cells (our unpublished data). However, in contrast with LPS, B. abortus induces T cell proliferation in both normal and LPS-nonresponder mice, indicating that T cell stimulation by bacteria is not controlled solely by LPS. Hence, bearing in mind that bystander stimulation of CD44hi CD8+ cells is also conspicuous in viral infections (9), it would seem quite likely that many different products of infectious microorganisms have the capacity to stimulate memory-phenotype T cells in vivo. However, in normal animals it is notable that the background rate of proliferation of memory-phenotype T cells is substantially higher for CD4+ cells than for CD8+ cells (3). This is surprising because the stimulation of CD44hi cells induced by viruses, LPS, and killed B. abortus is heavily skewed to CD8+ cells. Therefore, the implication is that stimulation of CD44hi CD4+ cells is controlled by a separate mechanism. In this respect, preliminary work has shown that certain bacteria induce poor proliferation of CD44hi CD8+ cells in vivo but strong proliferation of CD44hi CD4+ cells (our unpublished data). Which cytokines control the proliferation of CD44hi CD4+ cells has yet to be resolved.
As a final comment, it is striking that high doses of LPS caused marked CD69 upregulation on CD44lo (naive) cells as well as on CD44hi cells, both for CD4+ cells and CD8+ cells. How LPS induces activation of naive T cells but without causing these cells to enter cell cycle is unknown. Future work will be needed to resolve this paradox.
Address correspondence to Jonathan Sprent, Department of Immunology, IMM4, The Scripps Research Institute, 10550 North Torrey Pines Road, La Jolla, California 92037.
Received for publication 19 March 1997 and in revised form 8 April 1997.
1Abbreviations used in this paper: BrdU, bromodeoxyuridine; IFN-I, type I (We thank Ms. B. Marchand for typing the manuscript and Dr. M. Aguet for IFN-IR/
mice.
This work was supported by grants CA38355, CA25803, AI21487, AI32068, and AG01743 from the United States Public Health Service. D.F. Tough is the recipient of a Centennial Fellowship from the Medical Research Council of Canada. Publication number 10656-IMM from the Scripps Research Institute. Dr. Tough's current address is The Edward Jenner Institute for Vaccine Research, Compton, Newbury, Berkshire RG20 7NN, UK.
1. | Sprent, J.. 1993. Lifespans of naive, memory and effector lymphocytes. Curr. Opin. Immunol. 5: 433-438 [Medline]. |
2. | MacKay, C.R., W.L. Marston, and L. Dudler. 1990. Naive and memory T cells show distinct pathways of lymphocyte recirculation. J. Exp. Med. 171: 801-817 [Abstract]. |
3. | Tough, D.F., and J. Sprent. 1994. Turnover of naive- and memory-phenotype T cells. J. Exp. Med. 179: 1127-1135 [Abstract]. |
4. | Sprent, J., and D.F. Tough. 1994. Lymphocyte life-span and memory. Science (Wash. DC). 265: 1395-1400 [Medline]. |
5. | Zinkernagel, R.M., M.F. Bachmann, T.E. Kundig, S. Oehen, H. Pircher, and H. Hengartner. 1996. On immunological memory. Annu. Rev. Immunol. 14: 333-368 [Medline]. |
6. |
Yang, H.,
P.L. Dundon,
S.R. Nahill, and
R.M. Welsh.
1989.
Virus-induced polyclonal cytotoxic T lymphocyte stimulation.
J. Immunol.
142:
1710-1718
|
7. | Nahill, S.R., and R.M. Welsh. 1993. High frequency of cross-reactive cytotoxic T lymphocytes elicited during the virus-induced polyclonal cytotoxic T lymphocyte response. J. Exp. Med. 177: 317-327 [Abstract]. |
8. | Carding, S.R., W. Allan, A. McMickle, and P.C. Doherty. 1993. Activation of cytokine genes in T cells during primary and secondary murine influenza pneumonia. J. Exp. Med. 177: 475-482 [Abstract]. |
9. | Tough, D.F., P. Borrow, and J. Sprent. 1996. Induction of bystander T cell proliferation by viruses and type I interferon in vivo. Science (Wash. DC). 272: 1947-1950 [Abstract]. |
10. | Raetz, C.R.H.. 1990. Biochemistry of endotoxins. Annu. Rev. Biochem. 59: 129-170 [Medline]. |
11. | Bellardelli, F., S. Gessani, E. Proitte, C. Locardi, P. Borghi, Y. Watanabe, Y. Kawade, and I. Gresser. 1987. Studies on the expression of spontaneous and induced interferons in mouse peritoneal macrophages by means of monoclonal antibodies to mouse interferons. J. Gen. Virol. 68: 2203-2212 [Abstract]. |
12. | Sherry, B., and A. Cerami. 1988. Cachectin/tumor necrosis factor exerts endocrine, paracrine and autocrine control of inflammatory responses. J. Cell Biol. 107: 1269-1277 [Medline]. |
13. | D'Andrea, A., M. Rengaraju, N.M. Valiante, J. Chehimi, M. Kubin, M. Aste, S.H. Chan, M. Kobayashi, D. Young, E. Nickborg, et al . 1992. Production of natural killer cell stimulatory factor (interleukin 12) by peripheral blood mononuclear cells. J. Exp. Med. 176: 1387-1398 [Abstract]. |
14. | Muller, U., U. Steinhoff, L.F. Reis, S. Hemmi, J. Pavlovic, R.M. Zinkernagel, and M. Aguet. 1994. Functional role of type I and type II interferons in antiviral defense. Science (Wash. DC). 264: 1918-1921 [Medline]. |
15. | Sprent, J., and M. Schaefer. 1985. Properties of purified T cell subsets. I. In vitro responses to class I vs. class II H-2 alloantigens. J. Exp. Med. 162: 2068-2088 [Abstract]. |
16. |
Dumont, F.J., and
L.Z. Coker.
1986.
Interferon-![]() ![]() |
17. | Sultzer, B.M., and B.S. Nilsson. 1972. PPD tuberculin: a B cell mitogen. Nature New Biol. 240: 198-200 [Medline]. |
18. |
Yokoyama, W.M.,
F. Koning,
P.J. Kehn,
G.M.B. Pereira,
G. Stingl,
J.E. Coligan, and
E.M. Shevach.
1988.
Characterization of a cell surface-expressed disulfide-linked dimer involved in murine T cell activation.
J. Immunol.
141:
369-376
|
19. | Armerding, D., and D.H. Katz. 1974. Activation of T and B lymphocytes in vitro. I. Regulatory influence of bacterial lipopolysaccharide (LPS) on specific T cell helper function. J. Exp. Med. 139: 24-43 [Medline]. |
20. | McGhee, J.R., J.J. Farrar, S.M. Michalek, S.E. Mergenhagen, and D.L. Rosenstreich. 1979. Cellular requirements for lipopolysaccharide adjuvanticity. A role for both T lymphocytes and macrophages for in vitro responses to particulate antigens. J. Exp. Med. 149: 793-807 [Abstract]. |
21. | Goodman, M.G., and W.O. Weigle. 1979. T cell regulation of polyclonal B cell responsiveness. I. Helper effects of T cells. J. Immunol. 122: 2548-2553 [Abstract]. |
22. |
Vogel, S.N.,
M.L. Hilfiker, and
M.J. Caulfield.
1983.
Endotoxin-induced T lymphocyte proliferation.
J. Immunol.
130:
1774-1779
|
23. |
Mukaida, N.,
Y. Ishikawa,
N. Ikeda,
N. Fujioka,
S. Watanabe,
K. Kuno, and
K. Matsushima.
1996.
Novel insight
into molecular mechanism of endotoxin shock: biochemical
analysis of LPS receptor signaling in a cell-free system targeting NF-![]() ![]() |
24. |
Fultz, M.J.,
S.A. Barber,
C.W. Dieffenbach, and
S.N. Vogel.
1993.
Induction of IFN-![]() |
25. |
Grabstein, K.H.,
J. Eisenman,
K. Shanebeck,
C. Rauch,
S. Srinivasan,
V. Fung,
C. Beers,
J. Richardson,
M.A. Schoenborn,
M. Ahdieh, et al
.
1994.
Cloning of a novel T cell
growth factor that interacts with the ![]() |
26. |
Kanegane, H., and
G. Tosato.
1996.
Activation of naive and
memory T cells by interleukin-15.
Blood.
88:
230-235
|