Mast cell‐expressed complement receptor, not TLR2, is the main detector of zymosan in peritonitis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The in vitro macrophage response to zymosan has been attributed to Toll-like receptor 2 (TLR2). Whether TLR2 is obligatory for the zymosan-induced in vivo response has not been assessed. The importance of this question is underscored by the fact that zymosan activates complement in a cell-independent manner. We have investigated whether the in vitro observation of TLR2 as the dominant zymosan receptor on macrophages would translate to an experimental peritonitis model in vivo. We have treated mice with zymosan, resulting in significant leukocyte (primarily neutrophil) accumulation in the peritoneum at 4 h. Zymosan-mediated leukocyte recruitment was TLR2 independent, but was predominantly dependent on the complement components, C3 and C5a with a minor contribution from LTB4. Peritoneal neutrophilia was 50% mast cell dependent and this defect was reproduced using C5a receptor (C5aR)-deficient mast cells in mast cell-deficient mice, suggesting that C5aR is responsible for mast cell activation following zymosan challenge. By 24 h, the response to zymosan involved primarily monocyte recruitment and was C3 and C5aR independent. Taken together, these studies indicate that the in vivo inflammatory response to zymosan does not necessarily mimic the TLR2 dependence observed in vitro, and that complement plays a dominant role in early, but not late, zymosan-mediated peritonitis.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".