Bacterial and viral pathogen-associated molecular patterns induce divergent early transcriptomic landscapes in a bovine macrophage cell line

Felix N Toka,Kiera Dunaway,Felicia Smaltz,Lidia Szulc-Dąbrowska,Jenny Drnevich,Matylda Barbara Mielcarska,Magdalena Bossowska-Nowicka,Matthias Schweizer
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12864-018-5411-5
IF: 4.547
2019-01-08
BMC Genomics
Abstract:Background: Pathogens stimulate immune functions of macrophages. Macrophages are a key sentinel cell regulating the response to pathogenic ligands and orchestrating the direction of the immune response. Our study aimed at investigating the early transcriptomic changes of bovine macrophages (Bomacs) in response to stimulation with CpG DNA or polyI:C, representing bacterial and viral ligands respectively, and performed transcriptomics by RNA sequencing (RNASeq). KEGG, GO and IPA analytical tools were used to reconstruct pathways, networks and to map out molecular and cellular functions of differentially expressed genes (DE) in stimulated cells. Results: A one-way ANOVA analysis of RNASeq data revealed significant differences between the CpG DNA and polyI:C-stimulated Bomac. Of the 13,740 genes mapped to the bovine genome, 2245 had p-value ≤0.05, deemed as DE. At 6 h post stimulation of Bomac, poly(I:C) induced a very different transcriptomic profile from that induced by CpG DNA. Whereas, 347 genes were upregulated and 210 downregulated in response to CpG DNA, poly(I:C) upregulated 761 genes and downregulated 414 genes. The topmost DE genes in poly(I:C)-stimulated cells had thousand-fold changes with highly significant p-values, whereas in CpG DNA stimulated cells had 2-5-fold changes with less stringent p-values. The highest DE genes in both stimulations belonged to the TNF superfamily, TNFSF18 (CpG) and TNFSF10 (poly(I:C)) and in both cases the lowest downregulated gene was CYP1A1. CpG DNA highly induced canonical pathways that are unrelated to immune response in Bomac. CpG DNA influenced expression of genes involved in molecular and cellular functions in free radical scavenging. By contrast, poly(I:C) highly induced exclusively canonical pathways directly related to antiviral immune functions mediated by interferon signalling genes. The transcriptomic profile after poly(I:C)-stimulation was consistent with induction of TLR3 signalling. Conclusion: CpG DNA and poly(I:C) induce different early transcriptional landscapes in Bomac, but each is suited to a specific function of macrophages during interaction with pathogens. Poly(I:C) influenced antiviral response genes, whereas CpG DNA influenced genes important for phagocytic processes. Poly(I:C) was more potent in setting the inflammatory landscape desirable for an efficient immune response against virus infection.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?