The chemokine receptors ACKR2 and CCR2 reciprocally regulate lymphatic vessel density
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Macrophages regulate lymphatic vasculature development; however, the molecular mechanisms regulating their recruitment to developing, and adult, lymphatic vascular sites are not known. Here, we report that resting mice deficient for the inflammatory chemokine-scavenging receptor, ACKR2, display increased lymphatic vessel density in a range of tissues under resting and regenerating conditions. This appears not to alter dendritic cell migration to draining lymph nodes but is associated with enhanced fluid drainage from peripheral tissues and thus with a hypotensive phenotype. Examination of embryonic skin revealed that this lymphatic vessel density phenotype is developmentally established. Further studies indicated that macrophages and the inflammatory CC-chemokine CCL2, which is scavenged by ACKR2, are associated with this phenotype. Accordingly, mice deficient for the CCL2 signalling receptor, CCR2, displayed a reciprocal phenotype of reduced lymphatic vessel density. Further examination revealed that proximity of pro-lymphangiogenic macrophages to developing lymphatic vessel surfaces is increased in ACKR2-deficient mice and reduced in CCR2-deficient mice. Therefore, these receptors regulate vessel density by reciprocally modulating pro-lymphangiogenic macrophage recruitment, and proximity, to developing, resting and regenerating lymphatic vessels.
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 | 0.001 | 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 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".