↓ Skip to main content

Both TLR2 and TRIF Contribute to Interferon-β Production during Listeria Infection

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, March 2012
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
52 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
75 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
Both TLR2 and TRIF Contribute to Interferon-β Production during Listeria Infection
Published in
PLOS ONE, March 2012
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0033299
Pubmed ID
Authors

Camille Aubry, Sinéad C. Corr, Sebastian Wienerroither, Céline Goulard, Ruth Jones, Amanda M. Jamieson, Thomas Decker, Luke A. J. O'Neill, Olivier Dussurget, Pascale Cossart

Abstract

Synthesis of interferon-β (IFN-β) is an innate response to cytoplasmic infection with bacterial pathogens. Our recent studies showed that Listeria monocytogenes limits immune detection and IFN-β synthesis via deacetylation of its peptidoglycan, which renders the bacterium resistant to lysozyme degradation. Here, we examined signaling requirements for the massive IFN-β production resulting from the infection of murine macrophages with a mutant strain of L. monocytogenes, ΔpgdA, which is unable to modify its peptidoglycan. We report the identification of unconventional signaling pathways to the IFN-β gene, requiring TLR2 and bacterial internalization. Induction of IFN-β was independent of the Mal/TIRAP adaptor protein but required TRIF and the transcription factors IRF3 and IRF7. These pathways were stimulated to a lesser degree by wild-type L. monocytogenes. They operated in both resident and inflammatory macrophages derived from the peritoneal cavity, but not in bone marrow-derived macrophages. The novelty of our findings thus lies in the first description of TLR2 and TRIF as two critical components leading to the induction of the IFN-β gene and in uncovering that individual macrophage populations adopt different strategies to link pathogen recognition signals to IFN-β gene expression.

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 75 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 1%
France 1 1%
Norway 1 1%
Unknown 72 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 21 28%
Researcher 8 11%
Student > Master 7 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 8%
Professor 5 7%
Other 19 25%
Unknown 9 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 36 48%
Immunology and Microbiology 13 17%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 7%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 5%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 2 3%
Other 4 5%
Unknown 11 15%
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 14 March 2012.
All research outputs
#20,156,138
of 22,663,969 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#172,665
of 193,506 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#141,912
of 156,709 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#3,274
of 3,580 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,663,969 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 193,506 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.0. 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 156,709 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 3,580 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.