Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
CD4(+) T cells are critical for the control of virus infections, T cell memory, and immune surveillance. We studied the differentiation and function of murine γ-herpesvirus 68 (MHV-68)-specific CD4(+) T cells using gp150-specific TCR-transgenic mice. This allowed a more detailed study of the characteristics of the CD4(+) T cell response than did previously available approaches for this virus. Most gp150-specific CD4(+) T cells expressed T-bet and produced IFN-γ, indicating that MHV-68 infection triggered differentiation of CD4(+) T cells largely into the Th1 subset, whereas some became follicular Th cells and Foxp3(+) regulatory T cells. These CD4(+) T cells were protective against MHV-68 infection in the absence of CD8(+) T cells and B cells, and protection depended on IFN-γ secretion. Marked heterogeneity was observed in the CD4(+) T cells, based on lymphocyte Ag 6C (Ly6C) expression. Ly6C expression positively correlated with IFN-γ, TNF-α, and granzyme B production; T-bet and KLRG1 expression; proliferation; and CD4(+) T cell-mediated cytotoxicity. Ly6C expression inversely correlated with survival, CCR7 expression, and secondary expansion potential. Ly6C(+) and Ly6C(-) gp150-specific CD4(+) T cells were able to interconvert in a bidirectional manner upon secondary Ag exposure in vivo. These results indicate that Ly6C expression is closely associated with antiviral activity in effector CD4(+) T cells but is inversely correlated with memory potential. Interconversion between Ly6C(+) and Ly6C(-) cells may maintain a balance between the two Ag-specific CD4(+) T cell populations during MHV-68 infection. These findings have significant implications for Ly6C as a surface marker to distinguish functionally distinct CD4(+) T cells during persistent virus infection.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Hu et al. (2015) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: