Modulation of Inducible Nitric Oxide Synthase Expression by the Attaching and Effacing Bacterial Pathogen <i>Citrobacter rodentium</i> in Infected Mice
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Citrobacter rodentium belongs to the attaching and effacing family of enteric bacterial pathogens that includes both enteropathogenic and enterohemorrhagic Escherichia coli. These bacteria infect their hosts by colonizing the intestinal mucosal surface and intimately attaching to underlying epithelial cells. The abilities of these pathogens to exploit the cytoskeleton and signaling pathways of host cells are well documented, but their interactions with the host's antimicrobial defenses, such as inducible nitric oxide synthase (iNOS), are poorly understood. To address this issue, we infected mice with C. rodentium and found that iNOS mRNA expression in the colon significantly increased during infection. Immunostaining identified epithelial cells as the major source for immunoreactive iNOS. Finding that nitric oxide (NO) donors were bacteriostatic for C. rodentium in vitro, we examined whether iNOS expression contributed to host defense by infecting iNOS-deficient mice. Loss of iNOS expression caused a small but significant delay in bacterial clearance without affecting tissue pathology. Finally, immunofluorescence staining was used to determine if iNOS expression was localized to infected cells by staining for the C. rodentium virulence factor, translocated intimin receptor (Tir), as well as iNOS. Interestingly, while more than 85% of uninfected epithelial cells expressed iNOS, fewer than 15% of infected (Tir-positive) cells expressed detectable iNOS. These results demonstrate that both iNOS and intestinal epithelial cells play an active role in host defense during C. rodentium infection. However, the selective expression of iNOS by uninfected but not infected cells suggests that this pathogen has developed mechanisms to locally limit its exposure to host-derived NO.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".