- Research article
- Open Access
Transcriptomic analysis of milk somatic cells in mastitis resistant and susceptible sheep upon challenge with Staphylococcus epidermidis and Staphylococcus aureus
- Cécile MD Bonnefont1, 2, 3,
- Mehdi Toufeer2, 3,
- Cécile Caubet2, 3,
- Eliane Foulon2, 3,
- Christian Tasca2, 3,
- Marie-Rose Aurel4,
- Dominique Bergonier2, 3,
- Séverine Boullier2, 3,
- Christèle Robert-Granié1,
- Gilles Foucras†2, 3Email author and
- Rachel Rupp†1
© Bonnefont et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2011
Received: 11 March 2011
Accepted: 28 April 2011
Published: 28 April 2011
The existence of a genetic basis for host responses to bacterial intramammary infections has been widely documented, but the underlying mechanisms and the genes are still largely unknown. Previously, two divergent lines of sheep selected for high/low milk somatic cell scores have been shown to be respectively susceptible and resistant to intramammary infections by Staphylococcus spp. Transcriptional profiling with an 15K ovine-specific microarray of the milk somatic cells of susceptible and resistant sheep infected successively by S. epidermidis and S. aureus was performed in order to enhance our understanding of the molecular and cellular events associated with mastitis resistance.
The bacteriological titre was lower in the resistant than in the susceptible animals in the 48 hours following inoculation, although milk somatic cell concentration was similar. Gene expression was analysed in milk somatic cells, mainly represented by neutrophils, collected 12 hours post-challenge. A high number of differentially expressed genes between the two challenges indicated that more T cells are recruited upon inoculation by S. aureus than S. epidermidis. A total of 52 genes were significantly differentially expressed between the resistant and susceptible animals. Further Gene Ontology analysis indicated that differentially expressed genes were associated with immune and inflammatory responses, leukocyte adhesion, cell migration, and signal transduction. Close biological relationships could be established between most genes using gene network analysis. Furthermore, gene expression suggests that the cell turn-over, as a consequence of apoptosis/granulopoiesis, may be enhanced in the resistant line when compared to the susceptible line.
Gene profiling in resistant and susceptible lines has provided good candidates for mapping the biological pathways and genes underlying genetically determined resistance and susceptibility towards Staphylococcus infections, and opens new fields for further investigation.
Mastitis is defined as an inflammation of the udder, mainly caused by an infection by various bacterial species. Amongst infectious diseases, intramammary infections (IMI) are of major importance in dairy ruminants because of their high frequency and the increased production costs that they incur (loss of milk, treatment, culling). The most prevalent etiological group causing mastitis in sheep is Staphylococcus with 78.9% of positive cultures . Coagulase-Negative Staphylococci (CNS) are particularly frequent and represent 74.8% of all isolates, most of which are S. epidermidis (Se) . CNS are considered to be minor pathogens, causing moderate inflammatory responses and often subclinical infections in dairy ruminants . On the contrary, Coagulase-Positive Staphylococci (CPS), largely represented by S. aureus (Sa), are major pathogens in all dairy species. They are principally associated with both chronic and clinical forms of mastitis [3, 4], some of which can be very severe and in the worst case lead to a high mortality rate.
Although much work has been carried out in dairy ruminants to understand the complex physiological and cellular events that occur in the mammary gland in response to pathogens [3–5], the protective mechanisms are still obscure. Schematically, when pathogens enter the udder lumen via the teat canal, they are detected by both immune and non-immune cells, and this is followed by the release of chemoattractants. As a consequence, neutrophils migrate from the blood flow to the infection site . These cells can phagocyte bacteria and exert bactericidal activities by releasing potent oxidative products . This massive recruitment of neutrophils in the udder incurs a dramatic increase in the milk somatic cell count (SCC) . Accordingly, SCC has been widely advocated as an easy-to-measure tool for predicting mastitis and discriminating between chronically infected and non-infected animals [5, 7]. Recent advances in microarray technology, that nowadays enable the expression analysis of thousands of infection-related genes, have provided novel insights into host response to pathogens. Microarray analysis is a well-adapted technology to investigate the gene regulation mechanisms underlying immunity against pathogens. Previously, gene expression profiles for challenged mammary tissue [8–11], milk cells  and peripheral blood mononuclear cells  have been studied using microarrays.
There is overwhelming evidence that the host's response to IMI is under genetic control, as extensively described in earlier studies [14–18]. Genetic parameters have been established for milk somatic cell scores (SCS) and occurrence of clinical mastitis, thus indicating that five to twenty percent of all variability between individuals is of genetic origin. Additionally, numerous quantitative trait loci (QTL) for udder health traits have been identified [16, 19]. However, up to date, only one of these QTL - the forebrain embryonic zinc finger-like gene -has been fully characterised . Apart from this QTL, the genetic basis of resistance is still largely unknown.
Nevertheless, breeding programmes for mastitis resistance have been implemented throughout the world in dairy cattle [14, 16] and sheep  using indirect predictor traits such as clinical mastitis and SCS. To assess the effect of SCS-based selection for resistance or susceptibility to IMI, two divergent lines of dairy sheep were created on the basis of their parents' breeding values for SCS . Evaluation of the frequency and duration of mastitis in the two lines demonstrated that selection for decreased SCS is associated with a decrease of IMI .
In the present study, we performed transcriptomic analysis of milk somatic cells (MSC), collected from mastitis resistant and susceptible ewes using a generic 15K oligonucleotide chip. MSC were collected after challenge with Se and Sa during the first and second lactations respectively. Our objective was to use this animal-model of divergent-SCS-lines in order to identify some of the genes and molecular mechanisms involved in the genetic basis of the protective host response to staphylococcal IMI.
Clinical examination of the mammary gland, bacteriological analyses and SCC confirmed that all animals were free from udder infections before challenges.
No significant differences were observed for milk SCS between the resistant and susceptible lines, either before or after the two successive challenges.
By contrast, the bacteriological titres were significantly higher in the susceptible line than in the resistant line over the period from 24 to 48 hours upon Sa challenge (μsusceptible = 13.7 ± 1.7, μresistant = 12.2 ± 2.1, p = 0.048). Although it was not significant, the bacteriological titre was also higher at 48 hours upon Se challenge in the susceptible line when compared to the resistant line (μsusceptible = 3.9 ± 4.6, μresistant = 0.86 ± 2.1, p = 0.27). These results suggest that bacterial clearance is more efficient in the resistant than in the susceptible line.
Comparison of the host response to S. aureus and S. epidermidis challenges
Microarray analysis and biological interpretation
Network analysis with IPA produced two networks. In the first network (Additional file 2A), which is characterised by cell-to-cell signalling and interaction and cell-mediated immune response, the T cell receptor signalling pathway (with the genes: cd247, cd3d, cd3e, cd3g, ctla4, itk, ppp3cc, rasgrp1, tra@, zap70) and the major histocompatibility complex - MHC - pathway (with six sub-units: dma, dqa1 (three probes), dqa2 (two probes), dra, drb1 (two probes) and drb3) are highly represented. In a second network, defined by inflammatory disease and response and haematological disease, both the IL1 receptor pathway and the TNF pathway are well represented with il1r1, il1rap and irak4, and traf2-3-5 respectively (Additional file 2B).
Real-time qPCR validation of the differentially-expressed genes between Sa and Se challenges
RT-qPCR results for the differentially expressed genes between S. aureus and S. epidermidis challenges
91.46 ± 70.08***
1.46 ± 1.79
0.12 ± 0.11***
2.09 ± 2.35
0.05 ± 0.04***
1.40 ± 1.84
6.69 ± 6.80**
1.35 ± 0.83
4.64 ± 4.75**
1.00 ± 1.07
12.41 ± 12.12
2.98 ± 2.52
Comparison of gene expression profiles between mastitis resistant and susceptible lines
List of the differentially expressed genes between the resistant and susceptible lines
crystallin, lambda 1
tumor protein p53
non-classical MHC class I antigen
solute carrier family 40 member 1-like iron-regulated transporter
eukaryotic translation initiation factor 4E binding protein 1
phosphatidic acid phosphatase type 2 domain containing 1B
solute carrier family 46, member 3
similar to cationic amino acid transporter 5;
retinoic acid receptor, alpha
coiled-coil domain containing 125
lysine (K)-specific demethylase 4B
sulfotransferase family, cytosolic, 1A, phenol-preferring, member 1
polymeric immunoglobulin receptor
actinin, alpha 4
Family with sequence similarity 100, member B
PCI domain containing 2
GABA(A) receptor-associated protein like 1
similar to atrophin-1 like protein
procollagen-lysine 1, 2-oxoglutarate 5-dioxygenase 1
serine incorporator 3
tubulin, alpha 1a
pituitary tumor-transforming 1 interacting protein
vesicle-associated membrane protein 5
basement membrane-induced gene
peptidylprolyl isomerase cyclophilin-like 3
low molecular mass ubiquinone-binding protein (9.5 kD)
differentially expressed in FDCP 8 homolog
GIY-YIG domain containing
zinc finger protein 259
armadillo repeat containing 1
peptidylprolyl isomerase G cyclophilin G
polymerase (RNA) II (DNA directed) polypeptide D
cytochrome P450, family 51, subfamily A, polypeptide 1
STT3, subunit of the oligosaccharyltransferase complex, homolog A
deoxynucleotidyltransferase, terminal, interacting protein 2
translocase of inner mitochondrial membrane 8 homolog A
ubiquitin specific peptidase 10
FYN oncogene related to SRC
3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl-Coenzyme A synthase 1 (soluble)
integrin, alpha 2
hook homolog 1 (Drosophila)
mucin 12, cell surface associated
FYN oncogene related to SRC
GTP binding protein 4
microtubule-associated protein, RP/EB family, member 1
transmembrane protein 87B
To gain further insight into the biological signification of the differences between the resistant and susceptible lines, information from the separate analyses in S a an Se was added to the main list. The three probe lists were pooled together (Additional file3), resulting in a super-list of 335 annotated genes (380 probes). In this list, further named as the "pooled list", 209 and 169 genes were expressed at a higher level in the resistant and the susceptible animals, respectively.
Real-time qPCR validation of the differentially-expressed genes between resistant and susceptible lines
RT-qPCR of the differentially expressed genes between resistant and susceptible lines
26.50 ± 29.98**
4.65 ± 5.68
40.39 ± 37.92**
6.20 ± 6.66
12.61 ± 8.71*
3.10 ± 4.57
4.53 ± 3.51**
1.16 ± 0.72
1.34 ± 0.82**
0.76 ± 0.37
0.95 ± 0.58*
0.51 ± 0.31
1.72 ± 0.90*
1.02 ± 0.20
5.07 ± 8.07*
1.29 ± 1.10
0.59 ± 0.47*
1.21 ± 0.92
0.73 ± 0.14*
1.19 ± 0.86
0.43 ± 0.39
0.81 ± 0.92
0.25 ± 0.13
0.26 ± 0.19
0.61 ± 0.50*
1.36 ± 1.05
1.54 ± 0.80
1.27 ± 0.75
1.93 ± 0.75
1.49 ± 1.01
1.14 ± 0.67
1.05 ± 0.33
0.87 ± 0.57
1.16 ± 0.76
0.33 ± 0.31**
1.86 ± 2.30
0.42 ± 0.31**
1.49 ± 1.49
0.58 ± 0.39*
1.28 ± 0.94
0.55 ± 0.36*
1.35 ± 1.02
2.04 ± 2.17
1.09 ± 0.47
3.63 ± 2.71**
1.52 ± 0.98
4.07 ± 3.23
1.66 ± 0.81
3.19 ± 2.28*
1.38 ± 1.18
0.82 ± 0.28**
1.06 ± 0.31
0.96 ± 0.27
1.08 ± 0.33
0.67 ± 0.22**
1.04 ± 0.32
1.56 ± 1.31**
0.82 ± 0.50
0.96 ± 0.73
0.54 ± 0.37
2.16 ± 1.55**
1.10 ± 0.48
Clustering of the differentially expressed genes between the resistant and susceptible lines
GO and pathway analysis of the differentially expressed genes between resistant and susceptible lines
Additional biological information was obtained using the Database for Annotation, Visualization and Integrated Discovery (DAVID v6.7) with human ortholog gene names - HUGO nomenclature (n = 306 out of 335 genes recognized by DAVID). First, Gene Ontology (GO) analysis of the biological process terms was performed. The up-regulated genes in the resistant line showed a significant enrichment of leukocyte adhesion and activation, cell death regulation, intracellular signalling cascades and negative regulation of macromolecule metabolic processes and catalytic activities (Additional file 4). On the contrary, the down-regulated genes showed a significant enrichment in positive regulation of inflammatory response (p = 0.029) (Additional file 4). Both up and down-regulated genes showed an over-representation of genes involved in the regulation of transcription and RNA maturation and in cell motion (Additional file 4).
Two BIOCARTA pathways were well-represented: apoptotic signalling in response to DNA damage (p = 0.029, with akt1, eif2s1, cycs, tp53), and adhesion and diapedesis of granulocytes (p = 0.087, with csf3, selp, selplg). Four KEGG pathways were also identified: lysosome (p = 0.010, with tcirg1, sgsh, cd68, smpd1, ctsd, ctsa, ctsb, fuca1), adipocytokine signalling pathway (p = 0.012, with akt1, cd36, mapk8, acsl4, acsl3, acsl5), hematopoietic cell lineage (p = 0.032, with csf3, cd36, itga5, cd59, itga2, csf1r) and focal adhesion (p = 0.054, with akt1, lama3, ccnd3, actn4, itga5, fyn, itgb6, itga2, mapk8).
Gene network analysis of the differentially expressed genes between resistant and susceptible lines
Communal transcription factor analysis
To enhance the understanding of the genetic basis of the DE genes, the potential transcription factors that can regulate these genes were investigated by looking for transcription factor-binding sites (TFBPS) that were over-represented in the promoter sequences of the DE genes. Using 260 genes recognised in InnateDB, significant enrichment was demonstrated for 11 transcription factors with a p < 0.05 (CEBPB, PAX5, E4F1, CREB1, ETV7, HIF-1, SMAD1, FOXO4, NRF-2, NRF1 and NFIC), and nine other transcription factors with p < 0.10 (AP-1, ETS1, 120-kDa CRE-binding protein, FOXO1A, NKX2-5, ATF, ATF3, XBP1 and PBX1). Furthermore, the transcription factors AHR, which showed lower expression levels in the resistant animals, and CEBPA, which showed higher expression levels, could bind the promoters of thirty-three and seven genes, respectively, that were more expressed in the susceptible line (p = 0.07 and p < 0.1, respectively). TP53, which showed higher expression levels in the resistant animals, could bind fourteen up-regulated genes (p = 0.16).
Gene expression of milk somatic cells
In the present study, we compared the gene expression in MSC upon mammary challenge. Up to date, only a small number of studies have analysed the transcriptome of MSC, by comparing infected and non-infected glands [16, 17]. MSC populations, however, are highly modified after infection: whereas mononuclear cells are preponderant in healthy glands , neutrophils represent the main cell type in infected glands [4, 13, 24]. Because of the profound modifications within the MSC population, the comparison of MSC gene expression before and after challenge should be interpreted with caution as they are the result of mixed molecular and cellular effects. Hence, our study focused on the transcriptomic differences within homogeneous cell populations between the lines upon challenge. It is well known that the development of S. aureus in any tissue implies host cell apoptosis [25, 26], and so RNA breakdown occurs. To circumvent the difficulty, cisternal lavage was performed after emptying the mammary gland to gather recently emigrated and living MSC. This protocol enabled us to recover a higher proportion of living cells and obtain good quality RNA, despite the short half-life of milk neutrophils.
Physiological mechanisms that are mobilised during the early response are considered as determinant for the outcome of IMI. Therefore, we selected an early time point (12 hours) for cell collection, during the first wave of cell recruitment, just before the bacteria titres diverge, and the side effects, on the mammary tissue due to bacteria growth, appear. In addition at 12 hours post inoculation, the milk cell population was much more homogeneous than at later time points, i.e. 95% of the cells were neutrophils. Therefore, despite the small number of animals used and the fact that only one time point was considered, we identified lists of significant and biological relevant differentially expressed genes in MSC. The results gave some insight into the differential response of the host to IMI according to the mastitis causing pathogen and its genetic background.
Differences between S. epidermidis and S. aureus challenges
Although genetically Sa and Se are closely related , the host cell viability after Sa challenge was lower than after Se challenge and the proportion of T-cells was higher. This is correlated with the striking differences in the gene expression profiles of infected MSC at twelve hours post-inoculation. Indeed, 5,573 genes were differentially expressed in MSC infected either by Sa or Se. The greatest absolute fold changes (aFC) were achieved when Sa was compared to Se - 91% of the genes with an aFC > 10 were over-expressed after Sa challenge. A high number of DE genes underlined T cell recruitment after Sa challenge. Indeed, two major genes that are up-regulated after Sa challenge are involved in T-cell responses: the chemokine (C-X-C motif) ligand 10 (cxcl10)  and the cytotoxic T lymphocyte-associated protein 4 gene (ctla4). The up-regulation of ctla4 in MSC of cows with chronic Sa mastitis has already been reported . In addition, the components of the chemokine signalling and cell adhesion molecule pathways were over-represented after Sa challenge. These pathways play important roles in blood neutrophil arrest and diapedesis across the endothelium . Furthermore, cytokine-cytokine receptor interactions are also noticeable and cytokines are known to tightly regulate neutrophil functions during inflammatory response . Thus, pro-inflammatory cytokines lead to the activation of the mitogen-activated protein kinase pathway (MAPK) in neutrophils and promote leukocyte recruitment to inflammation sites. Furthermore, S. aureus exerted an oxidative priming and a pro-apoptotic effect on neutrophils, contrary to S. epidermidis strains . S. aureus cytotoxicity mainly depends on proteases, hyaluronidases, lipases and nucleases that facilitate tissue destruction, membrane-damaging toxins that cause cytolytic effects in host cells, and superantigens that contribute to the symptoms of septic shock . Moreover, three sub-units of the major histocomptibility complex (MHC) class II (DQA1, DQA2 and DRB1) were up-regulated after Sa challenge suggesting recruitment of antigen-presenting cells or activation of T cells. The higher proportion of lymphocytes after Sa challenge might be partly responsible for the large variations of gene expression observed between Sa and Se challenges.
Altogether, the gene expression profiles of MSC upon challenge with two distinct pathogens differed widely in relation with the severity of the mastitis, bacterial counts and milk SCC [7, 22]. Furthermore, it should be noted that all the differences of MSC gene expression infected either by Sa or Se might not be caused by the Staphylococcus species. Actually, other factors may explain these differences since the animals were infected twice, and a memory response could have developed consequently to the first challenge. However, this is improbable due to the recurrence of infections frequently reported in apparently susceptible animals and the poor effect of vaccination with living bacteria on the occurrence and severity of subsequent infections. The animals' physiological conditions (age, effect of previous infection, etc.) at the second lactation could also influence the pattern of response. So partial confusion with other effects not related to the bacterial strain cannot be totally excluded.
Transcriptome differences associated with mastitis resistance or susceptibility
To our knowledge, this is the first report of a high-throughput gene expression profiling of MSC from animals genetically selected for their resistance to mastitis. Although, Griesbeck-Hilch et al. have already compared the expression of a few genes in mammary epithelial cells (MEC) of mastitis resistant and susceptible cows selected on the basis of the breeding values for SCS or genetic markers. The genetic lines used in this study were created from a one-generation selection of Lacaune dairy ewes based on their parents' breeding values for SCS. The divergence achieved was high, i.e. 3 genetic standard deviations , and was confirmed over successive cohorts raised in the same flock between 2005 and 2009 (RR, unpublished data). The selection criterion used is the SCC, it is based on few repeated measures (usually 3 to 4 times per lactation) and is able to discriminate chronically infected animals from non-infected animals. SCC-based selection, therefore, does not give any information about the underlying mechanisms selected, but previously published results have shown that such selection improves resistance to IMI .
In the present study, whereas milk SCC were not significantly different between the lines in the early course of Staphylococcus challenges, bacteria titres were lower in the resistant line than in the susceptible line. The difference between lines increased from 12 to 48 hours upon challenge. Accordingly, differentially expressed genes in milk cells at twelve hours post-inoculation might provide useful information about the early mechanisms underlying the genetic control of mastitis in the resistant line, that portend differences of the mastitis issue that were later observed.
Cytokines and chemokines
Some soluble factors such as chemokines form gradients from the blood towards infected sites and can enhance neutrophil attraction and migration. In our study, we found no expression differences for major chemokines such as il-1β, tumour necrosis factor alpha (tnfα), il-6 and il-8 (also named cxcl8, one of the main chemoattractants for neutrophils ), contrary to Griesbeck-Zilch in MEC of mastitis resistant cows selected on QTL alleles . However, integrin beta 6 (itgb6), serum amyloid A 2 (saa2), a marker of acute inflammation [32, 33], S100 calcium binding protein A2 (s100a2), a member of the S100 family that is highly correlated with somatic cell count , and the chemokine C-C motif ligand 5 (ccl5, also named rantes) that triggers adhesion and transmigration of blood monocytes to/through endothelial cells were expressed at higher levels in susceptible animals. On the contrary, the expression of calpain 3 (capn3) was higher in resistant animals. This protein was shown to play a role in resting neutrophils and to operate as a negative regulator of protrusion and migration . In the present study, although pro-inflammatory molecules have been widely shown to play an important role in neutrophil recruitment and IMI outcome [7, 14, 28], their expression patterns at 12 hours post-challenge were contrasted in resistant and susceptible lines and not correlated to differences in milk cell concentrations.
Furthermore, a group of genes related to cell adhesion and movement, including ST3 beta-galactoside alpha-2,3-sialyltransferase 4 (st3gal4), but also activated leukocyte cell adhesion molecule (alcam), integrin alpha 5 (itga5), selectin platelet (selp) and its ligand (selplg), were over-expressed in the resistant line. st3gal4 is involved in the synthesis of selectin ligand . The selectins are fundamental for the attachment of neutrophils to the endothelial cell surface [4, 36] before diapedesis. These results suggest that neutrophil diapedesis might be more efficient in the resistant line.
The genes cd36 and tlr2 that were expressed at a higher level in resistant animals and that are central in the network analysis collaborate together in the Toll-like receptor (TLR) signalling pathway . TLR2 is dedicated to Gram-positive bacteria recognition  and it may enhance the activation of neutrophil phagocytosis . Griesbeck-Hilch et al. also found that tlr2 was up-regulated in mastitis resistant cows selected on markers for one QTL. The TLR2 signalling pathway may activate a cascade of intracellular events that may initiate the transcription of pro-inflammatory cytokine genes through the ERK/MAPK signalling pathway with consistent up-regulation of eif4ebp1 and itga5 in the resistant animals. This pathway is involved in oxidative stress which has been shown to contribute to the variability of susceptibility to IMI in cattle . Altogether, the modification of TLR2 and MAPK signalling pathways might be responsible for a higher uptake of bacteria by phagocytes, and therefore might contribute to the more efficient clearance of the infection in the resistant line.
A noteworthy fact is that considerable differences between lines were related to transcriptional activity within MSC. The activator protein 1 (AP-1) transcription factor is considered as an immediate-early response gene and is thought to be involved in a wide range of transcriptional regulatory processes linked to cellular proliferation and differentiation. RARα, TP53, and AHR were also transcription factors of interest.
RARα, the alpha receptor of retinoic acid, a compound derived from vitamin A metabolism, is a nuclear receptor. It can affect several aspects of innate immunity by enhancing the function of neutrophils, macrophages and natural killer cells . It has also been shown to play a role in helping the development of T helper cells, B-cells and, thus antibody-mediated response , and more recently in modulating antigen-presenting cells . Retinoic acid metabolism has been shown to play a part in IMI outcome, and dietary vitamin A supplementation has been reported to have a protective effect against experimental S. aureus mastitis in mice . Moreover, we found that the aryl hydrocarbon receptor (ahr) was under-expressed, which is consistent with several studies that have demonstrated its interaction with RA-signalling pathways . The involvement of AHR in the control of inflammatory responsiveness has been reported previously . To our knowledge the role of TP53 in the response to bacterial infection has yet to be studied whereas it has been shown elsewhere to be associated with mastitis infected quarters . tp53 was the gene that displayed the second highest ratio between lines and was over-expressed in the resistant line; it was highly associated with resistant animals in PCA and was represented as a hub in IPA networks since it interacts with numerous other DE genes. tp53 can be regulated by S100A2 proteins  and JNK , and in vitro it was shown to regulate TNFα and other cytokines . TP53 has been largely studied in the cancer context for its role in cell cycle arrest, apoptosis, DNA repair and production of antioxidants . Furthermore, TP53 has already been shown to play a pivotal role in determining cellular response to stress via NFκB  and TNFα ; it may also enhance transcription of the complement regulator CD59 . These observations suggest an important role of TP53 during bacterial infections.
Granulopoiesis, cell proliferation, apoptosis
In addition, particular cell functions such as granulopoiesis, cell proliferation and apoptosis seemed to explain some of the differences between the lines. Strong increases in neutrophil efflux from the bone marrow are followed by intense granulopoiesis and efflux of band cells that will later be recruited at the infection site: these cells may show higher transcriptional activity than mature neutrophils. Gene expression analysis demonstrated that the transcription factors CCAAT/enhancer binding protein (C/EBP), alpha (CEBPA) and RARα were up-regulated in the resistant line. CEBPA is crucial for the differentiation of granulocytes  and RARα has been shown to be directly involved in some aspects of the immune response by enhancing granulopoiesis [53, 54]. Collins et al. (60) showed that RARα can enhance granulocytic differentiation through a molecular pathway that is independent of CEBPA  suggesting that two different pathways stimulating granulopoiesis were up-regulated in the resistant line.
Furthermore, a number of genes differentially expressed between the sheep lines was related to cell proliferation and apoptosis, e.g. mapre1, znf259, gzmh cryl1 and tp53. These genes exhibited amongst the highest expression differences between lines. The genes encoding tp53, and the lambda-crystallin protein (cryl1) were expressed up to five times more in the resistant line. Recently, Cheng et al. (61) evidenced association between the expression of CRYL1 and inhibition of cellular proliferation and cell growth . This is in agreement with the decreased expression of both microtubule associated protein RP/EB family member 1 (mapre1) and zinc finger protein (znf259) in resistant sheep. Indeed, ZNF259 (homologous to ZPR1) has previously been shown to accumulate in the nucleus of proliferating cells  and MAPRE1 has been associated during mitosis, with the centrosomes and spindle microtubules. Apoptosis is a critical process necessary to limit or terminate inflammation [6, 58] and has previously been shown to be of importance in the response to S. aureus by Lutzow et al.. The gene expression of tp53 has been shown to increase in neutrophils during apoptosis . These results suggest that cell proliferation is limited and apoptosis increased in resistant sheep as compared to susceptible sheep. Altogether data support the hypothesis that, as a consequence of apoptosis/granulopoiesis, the cell turn-over may be enhanced in the resistant line when compared to the susceptible line.
Collectively, these findings highlight leukocyte adhesion and cell migration, pathogen recognition through the TLR2 signalling pathway, and cell turn-over with the balance between apoptosis and granulopoiesis as possible mechanisms to explain a higher susceptibility or resistance to intramammary infection. Nevertheless they probably give only a partial view as other cell types and compartments may be involved (epithelial cells, dendritic cells, lymphocytes, etc). Also, other conditions (bacteria strain, time point) might have provided some different results. However, these results advocate the use of our differentially expressed gene list as a benchmark to more detailed genetic studies, including genome co-localisation of resistance to mastitis using QTL analysis as reviewed previously [19, 22–25] and polymorphism studies.
Resistance to mastitis is the consequence of a fine-tuning of immune and inflammatory processes in a complex network of cell and gene interactions. Our study has highlighted some of the possible mechanisms, such as pathogen recognition and neutrophil extravasation leading to improved immune responses against Staphylococcus species and consequently, lower susceptibility to infection. The list of the differentially expressed genes between the resistant and susceptible animals provides relevant information for the identification of candidates for the genetic basis underlying resistance to mastitis. It paves the way for further genetic and mechanistic studies.
Animals, experimental challenges and sample collection
To provide enhanced insight into the genetic mechanisms involved in SCS-based selection, two groups of six Lacaune ewes were challenged twice with Staphylococcus bacteria. Briefly, primiparous ewes were issued from divergent selection based on extreme breeding values for the somatic cell score (SCS) . On a general basis, the Low SCS ewes are characterised by lower mastitis susceptibility than the High SCS ewes . Staphylococcus genus was chosen since it is the most prevalent etiological group in dairy sheep  and in SCS lines as previously shown . Se and Sa bacteria used for inoculation were isolated from ovine chronic mastitis.
After the first lambing, the ewes were inoculated with 103 cfu of Se in a healthy half udder. To clear the infection, local and systemic treatments with antibiotics were applied at the end of the survey. One year later, the same ewes had been mated again, and shortly after the second lambing, they were inoculated with 103 cfu of Sa in the opposite half udder.
Milking was performed by hand twice a day. Milk samples were collected for milk somatic cell count (SCC) every 12-hours from 48 h before to 48 h after the inoculation. SCC was determined using a Fossomatic counter. The score of SCC (SCS) was calculated with the following formula: SCS = 3 + log2 (SCC/100,000) . Samples collected aseptically after inoculation were used for bacteriology counts (except the 12 hours post Sa inoculation).
Bacteriological analyses were performed at the Veterinary School of Toulouse (UMR 1225 laboratory) by conventional techniques according to International Dairy Federation (1981) guidelines, with a few additions that have already been described in Rupp et al.. The bacteriology titre was calculated by a log-10 transformation of the data.
Twelve hours after challenge, mammary glands were emptied and teat ends were disinfected with 70% alcohol. Then, MSC were recovered by cisternal lavage with 100 ml of a saline solution. After centrifugation, cell pellets were resuspended in TRIzol reagent and stored at -80°C until further processed. In parallel, cells were immediately processed for flow cytometry analysis. After incubation with propidium iodide (1 μg/ml final concentration). Data were collected on at least 20,000 events on a FACSCalibur (BD Biosciences) and analysed with FlowJo software.
Statistical analyses of SCS and bacteriological titres were performed with ANOVA applied to mixed models (SAS® v.9.1), and with a non-parametric Wilcoxon test for viability and milk cell population.
Experiments were performed according to French (Agreement number N°31-2010-67) and European rules, and following the regulations of the Animal Ethics Committee for INRA (France).
RNA extraction, amplification and labelling
Total RNA was extracted from the 24 cell samples - six ewes from two lines for two challenges - using a typical phenol/chloroform extraction method with Trizol reagent (Invitrogen). Extracted RNA was further purified on Qiagen RNeasy columns (Mini kit, Qiagen). RNA quality was assessed using an Agilent 2100 BioAnalyzer and the RIN (RNA Integrity Number) index was above 7 for all samples.
Hybridisation, scanning and raw data storage
For each of the 24 samples, 200 ng of RNA was converted into double-stranded cDNA using the Amino Allyl Message Amp II aRNA amplification procedure (Ambion kit). cDNA was then labelled with Cy3 and Cy5 to obtain 48 dyed samples. Samples were hybridised in a two-colour dye-switch experimental design (GenoToul, France, http://biopuce.insa-toulouse.fr/Maquette/en/) on 22 microarrays of the ovine oligonucleotide 019921 Agilent slide (Agilent Technology).
Chips were hybridised with labelled cDNA at 65°C for 17 hrs and then washed according to the Agilent Technologies protocol. Intensity values were recorded with a 4000B Axon scanner. Two channel images were imported into the Agilent Technology Feature Extraction software for feature spot finding and alignment, and data were normalised with a Loess procedure.
Annotation of the ovine microarray
A total of 15,008 different probes are present on the Agilent ovine slide, but only 1,656 genes were annotated by Agilent (version available in January 2010). Moreover, 8,847 genes were identified as Human ortholog Gene Nomenclature Committee (HGNC) by SIGENAE (http://www.sigenae.org/ sheep oligo annotation version 5 of 2009/11/10) . More information about unannotated probes was obtained through the Basic Local Alignment Search Tool programme on the NCBI website (http://blast.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/Blast.cgi) and the ENSEMBL website (http://www.ensembl.org/index.html). After this annotation phase, only a few focus probes remained unannotated.
Processing data and statistical analysis of microarray data
The Feature Extraction result files (.txt) were imported into GeneSpring® GX 11 as single-channel values. Gene expression was analysed probe by probe using an intensity-based model - i.e. working on the intensity of spots and not on the ratio between conditions. This way of analysing two-colour-microarray data was shown to enhance the reproducibility of results and the sensitivity of the detection of DE genes . Data were filtered according to spot intensity, saturation and uniformity. Genes were flagged individually for each of the four conditions: low SCS Sa, low SCS Se, high SCS Sa and high SCS Se. Only probes that were positively flagged in all samples for at least one condition were conserved for further analysis in order to keep only genes that were very representative of one condition (n = 9,098). Then data were normalised across arrays with the GeneSpring® "scale to median" procedure.
Initially, a two-way ANOVA was performed for each probe to identify DE genes between the two Staphylococcus challenges (Sa and Se) and between the two divergent sheep lines (Low SCS and High SCS). The interaction between the Challenge and the Line effects was tested but was not significant; therefore, it was removed from the statistical model. The p-values of the tests were corrected with a 5% false discovery rate (FDR) with Benjamini-Hochberg  and genes with an absolute fold-change (aFC) superior to 1.5 were considered as differentially expressed. For the Line effect, FC represents the ratio between Low and High SCS; for the Challenge effects, it symbolises the ratio between Sa and Se. The experiment was deposited in GEO at the identifier number GSE24925 (BioArray Software Environment - version SIGENAE).
As 5,573 genes were differentially expressed for the Challenge effect, a second analysis was performed considering only samples infected by one Staphylococcus strain to focus on genetic differences between the lines. The whole raw data set was divided into two subsets: MSC from Sa and Se infections respectively. Data filtering and normalisation were performed as previously for the ANOVA model and 7,452 and 8,561 probes were retained for statistical analysis of the Se and Sa challenges, respectively. Then, an unpaired Mann Whitney test was performed probe by probe. Considering a 5% FDR no probe was identified as significantly differentially expressed between the lines probably because of the weak number of animals (six in each line). However to further explore the differences of mastitis susceptibility, the p-value threshold of statistics was relaxed. The p-value was rounded to two decimal places, then, the genes with a p-value ≤ 0.01 and an aFC greater than 1.5 were considered as differentially expressed.
Expression profiles for DE genes were classified using the hierarchical clustering algorithm in GeneSpring® based on Pearson-centred gene distances to visualise the differences between the two conditions. They were also represented in principal component analysis (PCA) with the centred data in R (v. 2.9.0) to identify the most important genes to explain mastitis resistance or susceptibility.
Biological interpretations of the differentially expressed genes
Three software programmes were used to interpret the lists of focus genes obtained from statistical analysis: Ingenuity Pathway Analysis (IPA), Database for Annotation, Visualization and Integrated Discovery (DAVID v6.7) [64, 65] and Innate Data Base (InnateDB) .
IPA software (version 7.5, http://www.ingenuity.com/) was used to generate biological networks from a list of selected genes and to document the functions of these genes and the canonical pathways in which they are involved.
Gene Ontology analysis was performed using DAVID (http://david.abcc.ncifcrf.gov/) and led to the establishment of relationships between genes with similar biological functions. Transcription factors that potentially regulate several focus genes were identified with InnateDB (http://www.innatedb.com).
cDNA was generated from 300 ng of clean total RNA from all samples using the Superscript III First Strand Synthesis System Kit (Invitrogen) following the manufacturer's instructions with random hexamer primers and a RNaseH treatment step.
Reverse transcription quantitative polymerase chain reaction (RT-qPCR)
The expression of some differentially expressed genes was verified by qPCR. Primer pairs were designed using Primer3  based on the relevant ovine sequences and verified using Primer Express® software. Their specificity was checked with BLAST (http://blast.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/Blast.cgi). Primers were synthesised commercially by Eurogentec. For genes for which no ovine sequence was available, a comparative gene alignment of bovine, human, rat and mouse sequences was made and primers were then designed on the most conserved regions between the species. Absence of primer dimers was verified using melting curve analysis and the efficiency of the amplification was measured before use. The couples of primers used in qPCR experiments are listed in Additional file 5. qPCR reactions were performed on a 7300 Real-Time PCR System (Applied Biosystems). To validate genes differentially expressed between resistant and susceptible animals, qPCRs were performed either on both Sa and Se samples or only on Sa samples. All assays were carried out in duplicate and each reaction contained 5 μl of diluted cDNA (1:50) with 2.5 μl (0.5 μm) of each forward and reverse primer along with 12.5 μl of Power Syber Green PCR Master Mix (Applied Biosystems).
Specific amplification of each target was confirmed by melting curve analysis. Measured Ct values were exported from SDS software to Excel for data analysis. RT-qPCR technical replicates of samples were averaged. The stability of 7 housekeeping genes, previously cited in the literature, was checked in the 24 samples and data was analysed using GeNorm software . The four most stable genes (rp19, hprt, sdh and gapdh) were selected for normalisation of RT-qPCR. Fold changes were calculated by the delta delta Ct method normalised to the four housekeeping genes  with R (version 2.9.0). Statistical analysis was performed using an exact non parametric Wilcoxon test with SAS (version 9.1).
Acknowledgements and funding
This work was financed by the European Network of Excellence EADGENE, ANR Génanimal and APIS-GENE. The authors would like to thank all the staff of the INRA experimental facility at La Fage (UE321) for breeding the sheep lines. Authors acknowledge the technical support provided by Lidwine Trouilh for microarray experiment in Genomic platform GenoToul Toulouse-Midi-Pyrénées, and by Gaëlle Rauffet and Philippe Bardou from the Sigenae team for annotating the Agilent ovine slide and depositing microarray data in GEO, respectively.
- Ariznabarreta A, Gonzalo C, San Primitivo F: Microbiological quality and somatic cell count of ewe milk with special reference to staphylococci. J Dairy Sci. 2002, 85: 1370-1375. 10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(02)74203-3.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Gonzalez-Rodriguez MC, Gonzalo C, San Primitivo F, Carmenes P: Relationship between somatic cell count and intramammary infection of the half udder in dairy ewes. J Dairy Sci. 1995, 78: 2753-2759. 10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(95)76906-5.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Sordillo LM: Factors affecting mammary gland immunity and mastitis susceptibility. Livest Prod Sci. 2005, 98: 89-99. 10.1016/j.livprodsci.2005.10.017.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Paape MJ, Mehrzad J, Zhao X, Detilleux J, Burvenich C: Defense of the bovine mammary gland by polymorphonuclear neutrophil leukocytes. J Mammary Gland Biol. 2002, 7: 109-121. 10.1023/A:1020343717817.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Kehrli ME, Shuster DE: Factors affecting milk somatic-cells and their role in health of the bovine mammary gland. J Dairy Sci. 1994, 77: 619-627. 10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(94)76992-7.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Paape MJ, Bannerman DD, Zhao X, Lee JW: The bovine neutrophil: structure and function in blood and milk. Vet Res. 2003, 34: 597-627.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Bergonier D, Berthelot X: New advances in epizootiology and control of ewe mastitis. Livest Prod Sci. 2003, 79: 1-16. 10.1016/S0301-6226(02)00145-8.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Gunther J, Koczan D, Yang W, Nurnberg G, Repsilber D, Schuberth HJ, Park Z, Maqbool N, Molenaar A, Seyfert HM: Assessment of the immune capacity of mammary epithelial cells: comparison with mammary tissue after challenge with Escherichia coli. Veterinary Research. 2009, 40:Google Scholar
- Pareek R, Wellnitz O, Van Dorp R, Burton J, Kerr D: Immunorelevant gene expression in LPS-challenged bovine mammary epithelial cells. J Appl Genet. 2005, 46: 171-177.PubMedGoogle Scholar
- Strandberg Lutzow YC, Donaldson L, Gray CP, Vuocolo T, Pearson RD, Reverter A, Byrne KA, Sheehy PA, Windon R, Tellam RL: Identification of immune genes and proteins involved in the response of bovine mammary tissue to Staphylococcus aureus infection. BMC Vet Res. 2008, 4:Google Scholar
- Swanson KM, Stelwagen K, Dobson J, Henderson HV, Davis SR, Farr VC, Singh K: Transcriptome profiling of Streptococcus uberis-induced mastitis reveals fundamental differences between immune gene expression in the mammary gland and in a primary cell culture model. J Dairy Sci. 2009, 92:Google Scholar
- Pisoni G, Moroni P, Genini S, Stella A, Boettcher PJ, Cremonesi P, Scaccabarozzi L, Giuffra E, Castiglioni B: Differentially expressed genes associated with Staphylococcus aureus mastitis in dairy goats. Vet Immunol Immunop. 2010, 135: 208-217. 10.1016/j.vetimm.2009.11.016.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Tao WJ, Mallard B: Differentially expressed genes associated with Staphylococcus aureus mastitis of Canadian Holstein cows. Vet Immunol Immunop. 2007, 120: 201-211. 10.1016/j.vetimm.2007.06.019.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Heringstad B, Klemetsdal G, Ruane J: Selection for mastitis in dairy cattle: a review with focus on the situation of the Nordic countries. Livest Prod Sci. 2000, 64: 95-106. 10.1016/S0301-6226(99)00128-1.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Mrode R, Swanson G: Genetic and statistical properties of somatic cell count and its suitability as an indirect means of reducing the incidence of mastitis in dairy cattle. Anim Breed Abstr. 1996, 64: 847-857.Google Scholar
- Rupp R, Boichard D: Genetics of resistance to mastitis in dairy cattle. Vet Res. 2003, 34: 671-688. 10.1051/vetres:2003020.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Shook GE: Selection for disease resistance. J Dairy Sci. 1989, 72: 1349-1362. 10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(89)79242-0.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Detilleux JC: Genetic factors affecting susceptibility of dairy cows to udder pathogens. Vet Immunol Immunop. 2002, 88: 103-110. 10.1016/S0165-2427(02)00138-1.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Ogorevc J, Kunej T, Razpet A, Dovc P: Database of cattle candidate genes and genetic markers for milk production and mastitis. Anim Genet. 2009, 40: 832-851. 10.1111/j.1365-2052.2009.01921.x.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
- Sugimoto M, Fujikawa A, Womack JE, Sugimoto Y: Evidence that bovine forebrain embryonic zinc finger-like gene influences immune response associated with mastitis resistance. P Natl Acad Sci USA. 2006, 103: 6454-6459. 10.1073/pnas.0601015103.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Rupp R, Boichard D, Barbat A, Astruc JM, Lagriffoul G, Barillet F: Selection for mastitis resistance in french dairy sheep. 7th world congress on genetics applied to livestock production; Montpellier. 2002, 119-122.Google Scholar
- Rupp R, Bergonier D, Dion S, Hygonenq MC, Aurel MR, Robert-Granié C, Foucras G: Response to somatic cell count-based selection for mastitis resistance in a divergent selection experiment sheep. J Dairy Sci. 2009, 92: 1203-1219. 10.3168/jds.2008-1435.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Sarikaya H, Schlamberger G, Meyer HHD, Bruckmaier RM: Leukocyte populations and mRNA expression of inflammatory factors in quarter milk fractions at different somatic cell score levels in dairy cows. J Dairy Sci. 2006, 89: 2479-2486. 10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(06)72322-0.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Riollet C, Rainard P, Poutrel B: Cell Subpopulations and Cytokine Expression in Cow Milk in Response to Chronic Staphylococcus aureus Infection. J Dairy Sci. 2001, 84: 1077-1084. 10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(01)74568-7.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Nilsdotter-Augustinsson A, Wilsson A, Larsson J, Stendahl O, Ohman L, Lundqvist-Gustafsson H: Staphylococcus aureus, but not Staphylococcus epidermidis, modulates the oxidative response and induces apoptosis in human neutrophils. Apmis. 2004, 112: 109-118. 10.1111/j.1600-0463.2004.apm1120205.x.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Piepers S, Opsomer G, Meyer E, Demeyere K, Barkema HW, de Kruif A, De Vliegher S: Heifer and quarter characteristics associated with periparturient blood and milk neutrophil apoptosis in healthy heifers and in heifers with subclinical mastitis. J Dairy Sci. 2009, 92: 4330-4339. 10.3168/jds.2009-2029.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Takeuchi F, Watanabe S, Baba T, Yuzawa H, Ito T, Morimoto Y, Kuroda M, Cui L, Takahashi M, Ankai A, et al: Whole-genome sequencing of Staphylococcus haemolyticus uncovers the extreme plasticity of its genome and the evolution of human-colonizing Staphylococcal species. J Bacteriol. 2005, 187: 7292-7308. 10.1128/JB.187.21.7292-7308.2005.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
- Dufour JH, Dziejman M, Liu MT, Leung JH, Lane TE, Luster AD: IFN-gamma-inducible protein 10 (IP-10; CXCL10)-deficient mice reveal a role for IP-10 in effector T cell generation and trafficking. Journal of Immunology. 2002, 168: 3195-3204.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Holland DB, Bojar RA, Farrar MD, Holland KT: Differential innate immune responses of a living skin equivalent model colonized by Staphylococcus epidermidis or Staphylococcus aureus. Fems Microbiology Letters. 2009, 290: 149-155.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Foster TJ: Immune evasion by Staphylococci. Nat Rev Microbiol. 2005, 3: 948-958. 10.1038/nrmicro1289.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Griesbeck-Zilch B, Osman M, Kuhn C, Schwerin M, Bruckmaier RH, Pfaffl MW, Hammerle-Fickinger A, Meyer HHD, Wellnitz O: Analysis of key molecules of the innate immune system in mammary epithelial cells isolated from marker-assisted and conventionally selected cattle. J Dairy Sci. 2009, 92: 4621-4633. 10.3168/jds.2008-1954.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Grönlund U, Hultén C, Eckersall PD, Hogarth C, Persson Waller K: Haptoglobin and serum amyloid A in milk and serum during acute and chronic experimentally induced Staphylococcus aureus mastitis. J Dairy Res. 2003, 70: 379-386. 10.1017/S0022029903006484.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Uhlar CM, Whitehead AS: Serum amyloid A, the major vertebrate acute-phase reactant. Eur J Biochem. 1999, 265: 501-523. 10.1046/j.1432-1327.1999.00657.x.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Lokuta MA, Nuzzi PA, Huttenlocher A: Calpain regulates neutrophil chemotaxis. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2003, 100: 4006-4011. 10.1073/pnas.0636533100.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
- Ellies LG, Sperandio M, Underhill GH, Yousif J, Smith M, Priatel JJ, Kansas GS, Ley K, Marth JD: Sialyltransferase specificity in selectin ligand formation. Blood. 2002, 100: 3618-3625. 10.1182/blood-2002-04-1007.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Duperray A, Mantovani A, Introna M, Dejana E: Endothelial-cell regulation of leukocyte infiltration inflammatory tissues. Mediat Inflamm. 1995, 4: 322-330. 10.1155/S0962935195000524.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Stuart LM, Deng J, Silver JM, Takahashi K, Tseng AA, Hennessy EJ, Ezekowitz RAB, Moore KJ: Response to Staphylococcus aureus requires CD36-mediated phagocytosis triggered by the COOH-terminal cytoplasmic domain. J Cell Biol. 2005, 170: 477-485. 10.1083/jcb.200501113.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
- Takeuchi O, Hoshino K, Kawai T, Sanjo H, Takada H, Ogawa T, Takeda K, Akira S: Differential roles of TLR2 and TLR4 in recognition of Gram-Negative and Gram-Positive bacterial cell wall components. Immunity. 1999, 11: 443-451. 10.1016/S1074-7613(00)80119-3.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Baranova IN, Kurlander R, Bocharov AV, Vishnyakova TG, Chen Z, Remaley AT, Csako G, Patterson AP, Eggerman TL: Role of human CD36 in bacterial recognition, phagocytosis, and pathogen-induced JNK-mediated signaling. J Immunol. 2008, 181: 7147-7156.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
- Stephensen CB: Vitamin A, infection, and immune function. Annu Rev Nutr. 2001, 21: 167-192. 10.1146/annurev.nutr.21.1.167.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Duriancik DM, Lackey DE, Hoag KA: Vitamin A as a regulator of antigen presenting cells. J Nutr. 2010, 140: 1395-1399. 10.3945/jn.110.124461.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Chew BP, Luedecke LO, Holpuch DM: Effect of dietary vitamin A on resistance to experimental Staphylococcus mastitis in mice. J Dairy Sci. 1984, 67: 2566-2570. 10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(84)81614-8.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Murphy KA, Quadro L, White LA: The intersection between the aryl hydrocarbon receptor (AHR)- and retinoic acid-signaling pathways. Vitamin A. 2007, 75: 33-67.Google Scholar
- De Souza VR, Cabrera WK, Galvan A, Ribeiro OG, De Franco M, Vorraro F, Starobinas N, Massa S, Dragani TA, Ibañez OM: Aryl hydrocarbon receptor polymorphism modulates DMBA-induced inflammation and carcinogenesis in phenotypically selected mice. Int J Cancer. 2009, 124: 1478-1482. 10.1002/ijc.24066.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Schwerin M, Czernek-Schafer D, Goldammer T, Kata S, Womack J, Pareek R, Pareek C, Walawski K, Brunner R: Application of disease-associated differentially expressed genes - Mining for functional candidate genes for mastitis resistance in cattle. Genet Sel Evol. 2003, 35: S19-S34. 10.1186/1297-9686-35-S1-S19.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
- Mueller A, Schafer BW, Ferrari S, Weibel M, Makek M, Höchli M, Heizmann CW: The calcium-binding protein S100A2 interacts with p53 and modulates its transcriptional activity. J Biol Chem. 2005, 280: 29186-29193. 10.1074/jbc.M505000200.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Das M, Jiang F, Sluss HK, Zhang C, Shokat KM, Flavell RA, Davis RJ: Suppression of p53-dependent senescence by the JNK signal transduction pathway. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2007, 104: 15759-15764. 10.1073/pnas.0707782104.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
- Tang X, Molina M, Amar S: p53 short peptide (p53pep164) regulates lipopolysaccharide-induced tumor necrosis factor-alfa factor/cytokine expression. Cancer Res. 2007, 67: 1308-1316. 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-06-1600.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Dave B, Eason RR, Geng Y, Su Y, Badger TM, Simmen RCM: Tp53-associated growth arrest and DNA damage repair gene expression is attenuated in mammary epithelial cells of rats fed whey proteins. J Nutr. 2006, 136: 1156-1160.PubMedGoogle Scholar
- Huang WC, Ju TK, Hung MC, Chen CC: Phosphorylation of CBP by IKKalpha promotes cell growth by switching the binding preference of CBP from p53 to NFkB. Mol Cell. 2007, 26: 75-87. 10.1016/j.molcel.2007.02.019.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
- Sampaziotis F, Kokotas S, Gorgoulis VG: P53 possibly upregulates the expression of CD58 (LFA-3) and CD59 (MIRL). Med Hypotheses. 2002, 58: 136-140. 10.1054/mehy.2001.1476.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Keeshan K, Santilli G, Corradini F, Perrotti D, Calabretta B: Transcription activation function of C/EBP alpha is required for induction of granulocytic differentiation. Blood. 2003, 102: 1267-1275. 10.1182/blood-2003-02-0477.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Kastner P, Lawrence HJ, Waltzinger C, Ghyselinck NB, Chambon P, Chan S: Positive and negative regulation of granulopoiesis by endogenous RAR alpha. Blood. 2001, 97: 1314-1320. 10.1182/blood.V97.5.1314.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Labrecque J, Allan D, Chambon P, Iscove NN, Lohnes D, Hoang T: Impaired granulocytic differentiation in vitro in hematopoietic cells lacking retinoic acid receptors alpha 1 and gamma. Blood. 1998, 92: 607-615.PubMedGoogle Scholar
- Collins SJ, Ulmer J, Purton LE, Darlington G: Multipotent hematopoietic cell lines derived from C/EBP-alpha-/- knockout mice display granulocyte macrophage-colony-stimulating factor, granulocyte-colony-stimulating factor, and retinoic acid-induced granulocytic differentiation. Blood. 2001, 98: 2382-2388. 10.1182/blood.V98.8.2382.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Cheng IKC, Ching AKK, Chan TC, Chan AWH, Wong CK, Choy KW, Kwan M, Lai PBS, Wong N: Reduced CRYL1 expression in hepatocellular carcinoma confers cell growth advantages and correlates with adverse patient prognosis. J Pathol. 2010, 220: 348-360.PubMedGoogle Scholar
- Galcheva-Gargova Z, Gangwani L, Konstantinov KN, Mikrut M, Theroux SJ, Enoch T, Davis RJ: The cytoplasmic zinc finger protein ZPR1 accumulates in the nucleolus of proliferating cells. Mol Biol Cell. 1998, 9: 2963-2971.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
- Kobayashi SD, Braughton KR, Whitney AR, Voyich JM, Schwan TG, Musser JM, DeLeo FR: Bacterial pathogens modulate an apoptosis differentiation program in human neutrophils. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2003, 100: 10948-10953. 10.1073/pnas.1833375100.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
- Barba-Barajas M, Hernandez-Flores G, Lerma-Diaz JM, Ortiz-Lazareno PC, Dominguez-Rodriguez JR, Barba-Barajas L, de Celis R, Jave-Suarez LF, Aguilar-Lemarroy AC, Guevara-Barraza MG, Bravo-Cuellar A: Gossypol induced apoptosis of polymorphonuclear leukocytes and monocytes: Involvement of mitochondrial pathway and reactive oxygen species. Immunopharm Immunot. 2009, 31: 320-330. 10.1080/08923970902718049.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Ali AKA, Shook GE: An optimum transformation for somatic-cell concentration in milk. Journal of Dairy Science. 1980, 63: 487-490. 10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(80)82959-6.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Casel P, Moreews F, Lagarrigue S, Klopp C: sigReannot: an oligo-set re-annotation pipeline based on similarities with the Ensembl transcripts and Unigene clusters. BMC Proc. 2009, 3: S3-View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
- Bossers K, Ylstra B, Brakenhoff RH, Smeets SJ, Verhaagen J, van de Wiel MA: Intensity-based analysis of dual-color gene expression data as an alternative to ratio-based analysis to enhance reproducibility. Bmc Genomics. 2010, 11:Google Scholar
- Pawitan Y, Michiels S, Koscielny S, Gusnanto A, Ploner A: False discovery rate, sensitivity and sample size for microarray studies. Bioinformatics. 2005, 21: 3017-3024. 10.1093/bioinformatics/bti448.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Huang DW, Sherman BT, Lempicki RA: Systematic and integrative analysis of large gene lists using DAVID bioinformatics resources. Nature Protocols. 2009, 4: 44-57.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Huang DW, Sherman BT, Lempicki RA: Bioinformatics enrichment tools: paths toward the comprehensive functional analysis of large gene lists. Nucleic Acids Research. 2009, 37: 1-13. 10.1093/nar/gkn923.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Rozen S, Skaletsky H: Primer3 on the www for general users and for biologist programmers. Method Mol Biol. 2000, 132: 365-386.Google Scholar
- Vandesompele J, De Preter K, Pattyn F, Poppe B, Van Roy N, De Paepe A, Speleman F: Accurate normalization of real-time quantitative RT-PCR data by geometric averaging of multiple internal control genes. Genome Biol. 2002, 3: research0034.0031-research0034.0011.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.