HOST defense peptides BMAP-27 and BMAP-28 down-regulate proliferation of T cells through the induction of T cell anergy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Host Defense Peptides (HDPs) are small, cationic and amphipathic molecules with inherent antimicrobial and immunomodular function.However their effects on blood-derived T cells is unknown and is the focus of this investigation.In this thesis, porcine peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) were stimulated with bovine myeloid antimicrobial peptide (BMAP)-27, BMAP-28, Indolicidin (Indol), or HH2 in the presence and absence of Concanavalin A (ConA).It was observed that BMAP-27, BMAP-28, and Indol inhibited ConA-stimulated porcine PBMC proliferation.To ensure that the observed effect on cell proliferation was not simply due to a physical interaction between the peptide and ConA, addition of peptide and ConA was staggered.Porcine CD4 + /CD8 + T cells were isolated from blood using magnetic activating cell sorting (MACS) and it was determined that BMAP-27 and BMAP-28 inhibited ConA-stimulated T cell proliferation.They did not promote T cell necrosis, but approximately 40 % of the activated T cells undergoes apoptosis in the presence of BMAP-27 and BMAP-28.The remaining 60 % of the T cells consumed very little ATP and showed an increase in expression of cytotoxic T lymphocyte antigen-4 (CTLA-4), indicating the induction of T cell anergy.The addition of exogenous IL-2 decreased the surface expression of CTLA-4 in ConAactivated CD4 + T cells and induced renewed CD4 + /CD8 + T cell proliferation, an indicator that these cells underwent activation-induced anergy.Thus, we submit that BMAP-27 and BMAP-28 may play a role in returning the activated T cell population to a homeostatic state through induction of peripheral tolerance mechanisms.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".