↓ Skip to main content

TCR sequences and tissue distribution discriminate the subsets of naïve and activated/memory Treg cells in mice

Overview of attention for article published in European Journal of Immunology, April 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
23 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
49 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
TCR sequences and tissue distribution discriminate the subsets of naïve and activated/memory Treg cells in mice
Published in
European Journal of Immunology, April 2015
DOI 10.1002/eji.201445269
Pubmed ID
Authors

Anne-Sophie Bergot, Wahiba Chaara, Eliana Ruggiero, Encarnita Mariotti-Ferrandiz, Sophie Dulauroy, Manfred Schmidt, Christof von Kalle, Adrien Six, David Klatzmann

Abstract

Analyses of the regulatory T (Treg) cell TCR repertoire should help elucidate the nature and diversity of their cognate antigens and thus how Treg cells protect us from autoimmune diseases. We earlier identified CD44(hi) CD62L(low) activated/memory (am) Treg cells as a Treg-cell subset with a high turnover and possible self-specificity. We now report that amTreg cells are predominantly distributed in lymph nodes (LNs) draining deep tissues. Multivariate analyses of CDR3 spectratyping first revealed that amTreg TCR repertoire is different from that of naïve Treg cells and effector T (Teff) cells. Furthermore, in deep- versus superficial-LNs, TCRβ-deep-sequencing further revealed diversified naïve Treg-cell and amTreg-cell repertoires, although 2-fold less diverse than that of Teff cells, and with repertoire richness significantly lower in deep-LN versus superficial-LNs Treg cells. Importantly, expanded clonotypes were mostly detected in deep-LN amTreg cells, some accounting for 20% of the repertoire. Strikingly, these clonotypes were absent from naïve Treg cells, but found at low frequency in Teff cells. Our results, obtained in non-manipulated mice, indicate different antigenic targets for naïve and amTreg cells and that amTreg cells are self-specific. The data we present are consistent with an instructive component in Treg-cell differentiation. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 49 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 1 2%
Unknown 48 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 31%
Researcher 10 20%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 10%
Student > Bachelor 4 8%
Student > Master 4 8%
Other 4 8%
Unknown 7 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 16 33%
Immunology and Microbiology 11 22%
Medicine and Dentistry 6 12%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 10%
Computer Science 1 2%
Other 2 4%
Unknown 8 16%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 04 August 2015.
All research outputs
#22,029,081
of 24,577,646 outputs
Outputs from European Journal of Immunology
#6,552
of 6,814 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#231,881
of 269,599 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Journal of Immunology
#56
of 69 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,577,646 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,814 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.2. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 269,599 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 69 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.