Comparison of Gamma Interferon-Mediated Antichlamydial Defense Mechanisms in Human and Mouse Cells
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Gamma interferon (IFN-gamma)-induced effector mechanisms have potent antichlamydial activities that are critical to host defense. The most prominent and well-studied effectors are indoleamine dioxygenase (IDO) and nitric oxide (NO) synthase. The relative contributions of these mechanisms as inhibitors of chlamydial in vitro growth have been extensively studied using different host cells, induction mechanisms, and chlamydial strains with conflicting results. Here, we have undertaken a comparative analysis of cytokine- and lipopolysaccharide (LPS)-induced IDO and NO using an extensive assortment of human and murine host cells infected with human and murine chlamydial strains. Following cytokine (IFN-gamma or tumor necrosis factor alpha) and/or LPS treatment, the majority of human cell lines induced IDO but failed to produce NO. Conversely, the majority of mouse cell lines studied produced NO, not IDO. Induction of IDO in human cell lines inhibited growth of L2 and mouse pneumonitis agent, now referred to as Chlamydia muridarum MoPn equally in all but two lines, and inhibition was completely reversible by the addition of tryptophan. IFN-gamma treatment of mouse cell lines resulted in substantially greater reduction of L2 than MoPn growth. However, despite elevated NO production by murine cells, blockage of NO synthesis with the l-arginine analogue N-monomethyl-l-arginine only partially rescued chlamydial growth, suggesting the presence of another IFN-gamma-inducible antichlamydial mechanism unique to murine cells. Moreover, NO generated from the chemical nitric oxide donor sodium nitroprusside showed little direct effect on chlamydial infectivity or growth, indicating a natural resistance to NO. Finally, IFN-gamma-inducible IDO expression in human HeLa cells was inhibited following exogenous NO treatment, resulting in a permissive environment for chlamydial growth. In summary, cytokine- and LPS-inducible effectors produced by human and mouse cells differ and, importantly, these host-specific effector responses result in chlamydial strain-specific antimicrobial activities.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".