|
|
||||||||
' in the CD4 Versus CD8 Lineage Choice1
Department of Molecular and Cell Biology, University of California, Berkeley, CA 94720
| Abstract |
|---|
|
|
|---|
') can influence the CD4 vs
CD8 lineage decision. Constitutive expression of a CD8 minigene
transgene that encodes both CD8
and CD8
' restores CD8 T cell
development in CD8
mutant mice, but fails to permit the development
of mismatched CD4 T cells bearing class I-specific TCRs. These results
indicate that CD8
' favors the development of CD8-lineage T cells,
perhaps by reducing Lck activity upon class I MHC recognition in the
thymus. | Introduction |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Based on the observation that CD4 is more effective than CD8 in recruiting Lck, it has been suggested that differential recruitment of Lck during class I or class II MHC recognition could influence the CD4 vs CD8 lineage choice (5, 6). CD8 engagement during class I MHC recognition would weakly activate Lck, promoting the CD8 cell fate, whereas CD4 engagement during class II MHC recognition would strongly activate Lck, promoting the CD4 cell fate. Several lines of evidence support this "quantitative Lck" hypothesis. Hybrid coreceptors consisting of the extracellular domain of CD8 and the cytoplasmic domain of CD4, which strongly activate Lck, were found to be effective at promoting the development of CD4 T cells bearing class I-specific TCRs (5, 7). In addition, while the expression of class II-specific TCR transgenes generally leads to the development of CD4 lineage T cells, the expression of class II-specific TCR transgenes in CD4 mutant mice leads to the development of CD8 lineage T cells (6). Since the absence of CD4 during class II MHC recognition would lead to reduced Lck activity, these results also support the quantitative Lck hypothesis.
Manipulations that quantitatively alter the TCR signal can also influence CD4 vs CD8 cell development. For example, enhancing signaling through the MAP kinase pathway by expression of an activated form of ERK favors the CD4 cell fate, while inhibiting the MAP kinase pathway using a MEK inhibitor favors CD8 cell development (8). Finally, in studies using Ab treatments to induce T cell development in thymic organ cultures, forms of anti-CD3 Ab that are agonists for mature T cells and that strongly activate Lck induce CD4 T cell development, whereas a form of anti-CD3 that is antagonistic for mature T cells and that weakly activates Lck induces CD8 cell development (9, 10). Thus, several lines of evidence support the idea that differential activation of Lck could influence the CD4 vs CD8 lineage decision.
The differential activation of Lck by CD4 vs CD8 can be attributed in
part to the fact that the cytoplasmic domain of CD4 interacts more
strongly with Lck than does the cytoplasmic domain of CD8
(11, 12, 13, 14). This differential Lck activation could be
further enhanced by the presence of an alternatively spliced form of
CD8 called CD8
' that lacks the cytoplasmic domain and is incapable
of interacting with Lck (15, 16). Interestingly, while
mature T cells express a CD8 heterodimer composed of full-length CD8
paired with CD8ß (CD8
ß), approximately half the CD8 on the
surface of murine thymocytes consists of CD8
'ß heterodimers
(15, 16). This suggests that CD8
' may act as a
naturally occurring dominant negative form of CD8 that serves to
further dampen Lck activation during recognition of class I MHC in the
thymus and may thereby contribute to promoting the CD8 cell
fate.
Despite evidence that MHC recognition can influence lineage commitment though the engagement of CD8 or CD4, there are also indications that lineage commitment does not always correlate with MHC class I or II recognition. This together with indications that continuous or prolonged MHC recognition may be required for T cell maturation (17, 18) suggest that the continued requirement for coreceptor recognition of MHC as thymocytes are turning off CD4 or CD8 expression could serve as a check to ensure that only thymocytes that retain expression of the correct coreceptor finally mature. Thus, CD4 committed thymocytes bearing class I-specific TCRs would be generated transiently but would fail to mature because, as they lose CD8 expression, they would also lose the ability to recognize class I MHC. This idea is supported by experiments showing that constitutive expression of CD8 can sometimes lead to the development of mismatched CD4 lineage T cells bearing class I-specific TCRs (19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25). These data together with similar evidence from CD4 transgenic mice (26, 27, 28) suggest that a late requirement for coreceptor engagement contributes to the strict correlation between CD8 or CD4 expression and MHC specificity that is normally observed.
The idea that CD8
' might play a role in CD8 lineage commitment by
reducing Lck activation upon class I MHC recognition suggests a
potential problem with the interpretation of experiments using CD8
transgenic mice. All the previously described CD8 transgenes are
derived from CD8
cDNA that do not encode CD8
'. Thus, these CD8
transgenes may not accurately reflect the normal function of CD8 in the
thymus. Indeed, in our previous analysis of CD8 transgenic mice, we
noted that transgene-encoded CD8 has a higher level of associated Lck
activity compared with endogenous CD8 (5). This raises the
possibility that some of the class I-specific CD4 lineage T cells found
in CD8 transgenic mice could result from abnormally high Lck activation
rather than constitutive CD8 expression per se.
To explore this question, we have constructed a new constitutive CD8
transgene that can encode both the
and
' forms of CD8. The CD8
encoded by this transgene has associated levels of Lck activity very
similar to those of endogenous CD8. Compared with previously described
constitutive CD8 transgenes, the CD8 minigene
(CD8mg)4 transgene is
ineffective at promoting the development of mismatched CD4 lineage T
cells bearing class I-specific TCRs. Moreover, expression of the CD8mg
transgene inhibits the ability of a constitutive CD8
transgene to
promote the development of class I-specific CD4 lineage T cells. These
data suggest that expression of CD8
' in thymocytes serves to dampen
Lck activation upon class I MHC recognition and provide additional
support for a model in which weak activation of Lck during positive
selection favors the CD8 T cell fate.
| Materials and Methods |
|---|
|
|
|---|
The CD8mg construct was generated by modifying the previously
described CD8.1 transgenic construct (T11-8) (19) by
replacing the sequences containing the 3' half of the CD8
cDNA and
the human CD2 minigene with CD8
genomic sequences. In brief, a 3-kb
EcoRI-BamHI fragment from T11-8 was replaced with
a 1.3-kb EcoRI-BamHI genomic fragment of CD8
(29) (provided by Paul Gottlieb) that extends from the
EcoRI site within the CD8
-coding region to a
BamHI site in the third intron of the CD8
gene. The
resulting plasmid was then linearized at the unique BamHI
site, and a 3.3-kb BamHI fragment containing exons 4 and 5
(encoding IC1 and IC2) of the CD8
genomic clone was inserted in the
correct orientation with respect to CD8 transcription. Plasmid
sequences were removed by digestion with SalI, and the
fragment was coinjected into (B6 x CBA/J)F2
embryos along with a 17-kb BamHI genomic DNA clone
containing the entire CD8ß-coding region (30).
Analysis of Lck activation
Cells (20 x 106) were incubated with
saturating amount of rat anti-murine CD8 IgM (3.155) for 15 min on
ice, then with 100 µl of goat anti-rat IgM (Cappel, Durham, NC)
for 15 min on ice. Cells were then washed with 500 µl of cold DMEM
(Life Technologies, Grand Island, NY) with 0.5% bovine albumin
fraction V (Sigma, St. Louis, MO) and lysed in 500 µl of ice-cold
lysis buffer containing 50 mM Tris (pH 7.5), 150 mM NaCl, 1 mM
Na3VO4, 10 mM NaF, 10 mM
Na2P2O8,
1% Brij97, 1 mM PMSF, and 10 µg/ml each of pepstatin A, aprotinin,
and leupeptin for 15 min on ice. Lysates were cleared by centrifugation
for 10 min at 10,000 x g and were incubated with 50
µl of protein G-Sepharose beads for 2 h at 4°C. Beads were
then washed three times with ice-cold wash buffer (50 mM Tris (pH 7.5),
150 mM NaCl, 1 mM Na3VO4,
10 mM NaF, 0.1% Brij97, and 10 µg/ml each of pepstatin A, aprotinin,
and leupeptin) and once with kinase reaction buffer (50 mM Tris (pH
7.5), 150 mM NaCl, and 10 mM MnCl2), and
resuspended in 20 µl of kinase reaction buffer with 10 µCi of
[
-32P]ATP and 10 µg of acid-denatured
enolase (Sigma). Kinase assays were performed for 3 min at 30°C and
quenched with 20 µl 3x sample buffer (150 mM Tris (pH 6.8), 30%
glycerol, 6% SDS, 3% 2-ME, and 0.05% bromophenol blue). The samples
were boiled for 5 min, and the reaction products were analyzed by 10%
PAGE-SDS. The gel was then soaked in a solution of 10% AcOH and 40%
MeOH for 15 min, dried, and visualized by autoradiography.
Quantification of radioactive bands was performed using the
PhosphorImager/ImageQuant system (Molecular Dynamics, Sunnyvale,
CA).
Analysis of T cell populations
F5 TCR (31), A-ß mutant (32), CD8.1 (19), and CD884 transgenic (5) mice have been previously described. Transgenic offspring were identified by Southern blot and PCR typing. For analysis by flow cytometry, thymus and lymph nodes (cervical, axillary, brachia, and mesenteric) were teased apart in cold medium 199 (Life Technologies) supplemented with 2% FBS, and the cells were filtered through nylon mesh. For analysis of mature thymocytes, thymocytes were treated with anti-HSA (Jll.D) and complement. Cells (106) were incubated with 10 µl of Ab on ice for 20 min, then washed twice with staining buffer containing 1x HBSS (Fisher, Fairlawn, NJ), 0.2% sodium azide, and 0.2% bovine albumin (Sigma). Data (50,000 events) were collected and analyzed using a FACScan flow cytometer (Becton Dickinson, Mountain View, CA) or EPICS XL-MCL flow cytometer (Coulter, Hialeah, FL). Dead cells were excluded on the basis of forward and side scatter. Dot-plot images were produced with the aid of WinMDI version 2.1.2 by Joseph Trotter (Scripps Research Institute, La Jolla, CA).
The Abs used were T3.70 (culture supernatant), FITC-labeled
anti-CD8
(53-6.7; PharMingen, San Diego, CA), FITC-labeled
anti-CD8ß.2 (53-5.8; PharMingen), anti-CD8ß.1 (5034-29.5;
Serotec, Oxford, U.K.), FITC-labeled goat anti-mouse IgG1 (Caltag,
South San Francisco, CA), anti-vß11 (KT11), RED613-labeled
goat anti-rat IgG (Life Technologies), rat
-globulin
(Calbiochem-Novabiochem, San Diego, CA), PE-labeled
anti-CD4 (GK1.5; Becton Dickinson), anti-CD8.1 (49-31.1;
Cedarlane, Westbury, NY), FITC-labeled goat anti-mouse IgG3
(Caltag), HO-3.1 (culture supernatant) (33), FITC-labeled
goat anti-mouse IgM (Caltag), FITC-labeled anti-mouse
I-Ab (AF6-120.1; PharMingen), RED613-labeled
anti-CD4 (H129.19; Life Technologies), FITC-labeled
anti-CD8.2
(2.43; rat anti-mouse IgG2b affinity
purified), and PE-labeled anti-TCR-
ß (H57597;
PharMingen).
| Results |
|---|
|
|
|---|
and
'
A previously described constitutively expressed CD8.1 transgene
consists of CD8.1
cDNA under the control of the human CD2 promoter
and locus control region (19). To generate a new CD8mg
construct that encodes both CD8
and
', we modified the original
CD8.1 transgenic construct by replacing the 3' half of the CD8
cDNA
and human CD2 minigene with CD8
genomic sequences (Fig. 1
). We then generated transgenic mice by
coinjecting the CD8mg construct with a CD8ß.1 genomic clone
(30). We chose the founder line with levels of CD8
expression that were closest to endogenous CD8 for further analysis.
Flow cytometric analysis of total CD8
surface expression on
thymocytes of transgenic and nontransgenic mice is shown in Fig. 2
A. Thymocytes from CD8mg
transgenic mice express several times more surface CD8
than
thymocytes from nontransgenic mice and slightly higher levels than the
previously described CD8.1 and CD884 transgenic mice. Flow cytometric
analysis using a transgene-specific Ab (CD8.1; Fig. 2
B)
likewise shows comparable, but slightly higher, CD8.1
expression on
thymocytes of CD8mg transgenic mice compared with CD8.1 and CD884
transgenic mice. Although the CD8mg transgene, like the CD8.1 and CD884
transgenes, is cointegrated with a CD8ß genomic clone (data not
shown), surface expression of transgenic CD8ß (CD8ß.1) on
thymocytes from CD8mg transgenic mice is low and variable (Fig. 2
, C and D). The reason for this difference in
CD8ß expression between the two CD8 transgenes is unknown.
|
|
6-fold higher Lck activity compared
with CD8 immunoprecipitates from nontransgenic mice (5).
This was consistent with observations that the cytoplasmic domain of
CD4 associates more strongly with Lck than does the cytoplasmic domain
of CD8 (11, 12, 13, 14). In contrast, CD8 immunoprecipitates from
thymocytes of CD8mg transgenic mice had levels of CD8associated Lck
comparable to those in nontransgenic mice. Although we have not
directly measured the ratio of CD8
to CD8
' produced by the CD8
transgene, the observation that thymocytes from CD8mg transgenic mice
have lower levels of CD8associated Lck activity than the CD8.1
transgene despite the higher level of CD8 expression is consistent with
the idea that CD8
' encoded by the CD8mg transgene acts to reduce the
Lck activity associated with CD8. These data indicate that the CD8mg
transgene may be more similar to endogenous CD8 than the previously
described CD8 transgene.
|
locus
(34) and examined lymph nodes for the presence of
ßTCR+CD4- cells
(Table I
|
To determine whether the CD8mg transgene can permit the
development of CD4 lineage T cells bearing class I-specific TCRs, we
crossed the CD8mg transgenic mice with Aß knockout mice
(32). Because Aß mutant mice are deficient for class II
MHC, the appearance of a large population of CD4 lineage T cells in
these mice is likely to reflect the selection of T cells bearing class
I-specific TCRs into the CD4 lineage. As previously shown (32, 35), the lymph nodes of class II-deficient mice contain a very
small population of
ßTCR+CD4+CD8-
cells, resulting in a CD4:CD8 ratio of 0.03 compared with
2.0 in
wild-type mice (Table II
). Expression of
the CD8.1 transgene in class II-deficient mice leads to significant
increase in CD4 lineage lymph node T cells (CD4:CD8 ratio of 0.19)
(22), whereas expression of the CD884 transgene results in
an even further increase in lymph node CD4 lineage T cells (CD4:CD8
ratio of 0.6) (5). In contrast, in CD8mg transgenic, class
II-deficient mice there is only a small increase in
ßTCR+CD4+CD8.2-
lymph node cells (CD4:CD8 ratio of 0.05) over that seen in class
II-deficient mice without a CD8 transgene. These results indicate that
the CD8mg transgene is relatively ineffective at permitting the
development of CD4 lineage T cells bearing class I-specific
TCRs.
|
ßTCR. When analyzed in this manner, mature thymocytes
from class II-deficient mice display a CD4 to CD8 ratio of <0.1
(5, 22) (Table II
We also examined the ability of the CD8mg transgene to permit the
development of class I-specific CD4 lineage T cells using a rearranged
TCR transgene encoding the class I-specific F5 TCR (31).
Mice expressing the F5 TCR transgene have increased numbers of mature
CD8 lineage T cells and decreased numbers of CD4 lineage T cells
compared with nontransgenic mice, reflecting the selection of the
majority of thymocytes on class I MHC (31) (Fig. 4
). As previously shown, coexpression of
the CD8.1 transgene with the F5 TCR transgene leads to increased
numbers of CD4 lineage T cells bearing the F5 TCR. These CD4 lineage
cells are selected using the F5 TCR rather than endogenous TCRs, as
indicated by the reduced frequency of endogenous V
2 on these cells
(21) as well as the fact that the number of CD4 lineage T
cells in CD8.1 transgenic, F5 TCR transgenic mice remains high in
a recombinase-activating gene-2 mutant background (24).
Coexpression of the CD884 transgene leads to an even further increase
in CD4 lineage T cells as well as a decrease in CD8 lineage T cells
(5) (Fig. 4
). In contrast, coexpression of the CD8mg
transgene with the F5 TCR transgene leads to a very modest increase in
CD4 lineage thymocytes, and no detectable increase in CD4 lineage lymph
node cells compared with those in F5 TCR transgene only mice. These
data are in line with the results from class II-deficient mice and
indicate that the CD8mg transgene does not permit the development of
CD4 lineage thymocytes bearing class I-specific TCRs.
|
The absence of class I-specific CD4 lineage T cells in CD8mg
transgenic mice could be due to the presence of transgene-encoded
CD8
'. However, CD8mg transgenic mice express low and variable levels
of transgenic CD8ß compared with the CD8.1 transgenic mice (Fig. 2
, C and D). Because CD8ß is known to participate
in class I recognition during thymic development (42, 43, 44),
we considered the possibility that the failure to develop class
I-specific CD4 lineage T cells in these mice could be due to the
absence of sufficient levels of CD8ß expression. To distinguish
between these possibilities, we generated mice bearing the F5 TCR
transgene, the CD8mg transgene, and the CD8.1 transgene. If CD8
' is
preventing the development of CD4 lineage cells, we would expect that
F5 TCR mice bearing both CD8 transgenes would have reduced numbers of
CD4 lineage T cells compared with F5 TCR transgenic mice expressing
only the CD8.1 transgene. On the other hand, if the lack of CD8ß
expression from the CD8mg transgene is responsible, F5 TCR transgenic
mice expressing both CD8 transgenes should resemble F5 TCR/CD8,1
transgenic mice. The results of flow cytometric analysis of thymocytes
and lymph node cells from F5 TCR/CD8mg/CD8.1 transgenic mice are
presented in Figs. 2
D and 4D. As expected,
expression of transgene-encoded CD8ß is high in F5 TCR/CD8mg/CD8.1
transgenic mice due to the contribution of CD8ß expression from the
CD8.1 transgene (Fig. 2
D). Interestingly, the number of
mature CD4 T cells in both the thymus and the lymph node is reduced
2-fold in triple transgenic mice compared with that in mice expressing
only the F5 TCR and CD8.1 transgenes. The observation that the CD8mg
transgene is dominant over the CD8.1 transgene in reducing the
development of class I-specific CD4 lineage T cells implies that the
difference between the CD8mg and the CD8.1 transgene is due to the
presence of CD8
' in the former, rather than the lack of transgenic
CD8ß expression.
| Discussion |
|---|
|
|
|---|
', an alternatively spliced form of CD8 that cannot interact with
Lck and that constitutes half the surface CD8 on murine thymocytes.
Here we describe a constitutively expressed CD8mg transgene (CD8mg)
that encodes both CD8
and
', and we compare this new CD8
transgene to a previously described CD8 transgene that does not encode
CD8
'. We find that while CD8 from CD8
only transgenic thymocytes
has abnormally high Lck activity, CD8 from CD8mg transgenic thymocytes
has levels of associated Lck activity comparable to those of endogenous
CD8. Both CD8 transgenes can restore CD8 T cell development in CD8
mutant mice. However, while the CD8
-only transgene can permit the
development of mismatched CD4 lineage T cells bearing class I-specific
TCRs, the CD8mg transgene is ineffective at promoting the development
of such mismatched CD4 T cells. Finally, we show that the CD8mg
transgene inhibits the production of class I-specific, CD4 lineage T
cells when coexpressed with the CD8
only transgene. These results
support the hypothesis that CD8
' acts to reduce Lck recruitment upon
class I MHC recognition in the thymus, and that reduced Lck recruitment
may, in turn, favor the CD8 lineage over the CD4 lineage.
In light of our results, it is worth re-examining the interpretation of
earlier experiments using constitutive CD8 transgenic mice. In those
experiments, the appearance of mismatched CD4 T cells bearing class
I-specific TCRs was generally interpreted in terms of a
stochastic/selection model for CD4 vs CD8 lineage commitment
(21, 22, 23, 24, 25). In this model, thymocytes bearing class
I-specific TCRs randomly choose either the CD4 or CD8 lineage.
Thymocytes that choose the CD4 lineage and turn off CD8 expression
would normally die because they can no longer bind class I MHC, but are
rescued by the presence of the constitutive CD8 transgene. However, in
light of our results, the appearance of CD4 T cells bearing class
I-specific TCRs could be attributed in part to the abnormally high Lck
activity associated with transgene-encoded CD8 that does not contain
CD8
'.
To what extent can the effect of constitutive CD8 or CD4 expression be attributed to the rescue of lineage-committed thymocytes with mismatches between TCR specificity and endogenous coreceptor expression? The observation that CD8mg transgenic mice do show a slight increase in CD4 lineage T cells bearing class I-specific TCRs over that seen without a CD8 transgene suggests that constitutive CD8 expression per se may also allow some mismatched T cells to develop. In addition, constitutive expression of CD4 leads to the appearance of a small number of mismatched thymocytes (CD8 lineage bearing class II-specific TCRs) (26, 27, 28). Thus, we favor a model in which the initial encounter with MHC imposes a bias on lineage commitment, such that the majority of thymocytes that recognize class I MHC develop along the CD8 pathway, and the majority of thymocytes that recognize class II MHC develop along the CD4 pathway. The continued requirement for MHC recognition following CD4 or CD8 down-regulation then serves as a reinforcement step to ensure that no mismatched T cells emerge.
Our data indicate that in mouse thymocytes, CD8
' serves to reduce
Lck signaling and favor the CD8 cell fate. Interestingly, the human
CD8
gene also undergoes alternative splicing to produce a truncated
form, but in contrast to mouse CD8
', which lacks the cytoplasmic
domain, alternatively spliced human CD8 encodes a secreted form that
lacks the transmembrane domain (45, 46). Human CD8 can be
found in association with CD1 (47, 48). In addition,
multiple forms of CD8ß have been described in the human
(49). It is possible that some of these modifications of
CD8 serve a function equivalent to that proposed for mouse CD8
'.
Alternative forms of CD8 have not been detected in rat thymocytes
(50). Interestingly, rat thymocytes also differ from mouse
thymocytes in that strong TCR signals induce CD8 cell development, and
it has been suggested that the lack of CD8
' in the rat may underlie
this difference in lineage commitment between the mouse and the rat
(50). These observations suggest that alternative
structures of CD8 are rapidly evolving, and that different species have
found different solutions to the problem of how to discriminate between
class I and class II MHC recognition during thymic development.
How might a quantitative difference in Lck recognition influence the
CD4 vs CD8 lineage decision? Lck is thought to phosphorylate the ITAMs
in the CD3 and
-chains of the TCR complex, and the Lck recruited to
the TCR complex by CD4 or CD8 may thus contribute to ITAM
phosphorylation (3). Greater Lck recruitment by CD4
engagement might lead to more extensive phosphorylation of ITAMs, and
this may, in turn, favor the CD4 fate over the CD8 fate. It is also
possible that the Lck recruited by CD4 or CD8 acts on other substrates
(51, 52, 53). Finally, in addition to its catalytic function,
Lck may serve an adapter function, increasing the association between
coreceptor and the TCR complex and thereby enhancing the adhesive
function of CD4 and CD8 (54, 55). According to this idea,
CD4 might make a greater adhesive contribution than CD8, since it would
be expected to spend more time associated with the TCR complex by
virtue of its stronger association with Lck. This improved binding to
MHC could, in turn, influence the CD4 vs CD8 lineage decision by
increasing the overall strength of the TCR signal.
In addition to the effects of MHC recognition, Notch activity has been shown to influence CD4 vs CD8 lineage commitment (56). An activated form of Notch causes thymocytes bearing class II-specific TCRs that would normally develop as CD4 lineage T cells to choose the CD8 lineage instead. Although alternative interpretations of the data are possible (57), we favor the view that Notch activity is normally regulated by MHC class I or II recognition. Thus, it is tempting to speculate that class I MHC recognition would lead to weak Lck activation, which would, in turn, up-regulate Notch signaling, thus favoring the CD8 cell fate. Class II MHC recognition would lead to strong Lck activation, which would, in turn, down-regulate Notch signaling, thus favoring the CD4 cell fate. A more complete understanding of the function and regulation of both Lck and Notch during thymic development is essential to dissecting the molecular events underlying the CD4 vs CD8 lineage decision.
| Acknowledgments |
|---|
| Footnotes |
|---|
2 Current address: Department of Microbiology, Geneva School of Medicine (CMU), 1 rue Michel Servet, CH-1211 Geneva 4, Switzerland. ![]()
3 Address correspondence and reprint requests to Dr. Ellen Robey, Department of Molecular and Cell Biology, University of California, Berkeley, CA 94720. E-mail address: ![]()
4 Abbreviations used in this paper: CD8mg, CD8 minigene; HSA, heat-stable Ag; ITAM, immunoreceptor tyrosine-based activation motif. ![]()
Received for publication July 13, 1999. Accepted for publication September 7, 1999.
| References |
|---|
|
|
|---|
-ß T cell receptors. Curr. Opin. Immunol. 9:250.[Medline]
in yeast. Eur. J. Immunol. 25:2408.[Medline]
' polypeptides to associate with p56lck correlates with impaired function in vitro and lack of expression in vivo. Nature 342:278.[Medline]
: characterization of the human CD8
gene. J. Immunol. 142:3312.[Abstract]
chain in mice but not rats. J. Immunol. 160:700.
complex. Eur. J. Immunol. 26:2093.[Medline]
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
E. Jouvin-Marche, V. Attuil-Audenis, C. Aude-Garcia, W. Rachidi, M. Zabel, V. Podevin-Dimster, C. Siret, C. Huber, M. Martinic, J. Riondel, et al. Overexpression of Cellular Prion Protein Induces an Antioxidant Environment Altering T Cell Development in the Thymus J. Immunol., March 15, 2006; 176(6): 3490 - 3497. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
A. M. Norment, L. Y. Bogatzki, M. Klinger, E. W. Ojala, M. J. Bevan, and R. J. Kay Transgenic Expression of RasGRP1 Induces the Maturation of Double-Negative Thymocytes and Enhances the Production of CD8 Single-Positive Thymocytes J. Immunol., February 1, 2003; 170(3): 1141 - 1149. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |