The Journal of Experimental Medicine
Aegean Conferences: 2009 Conferences
  Home | Help | Feedback | Subscriptions | Archive | Search | Table of Contents
Published online 14 February 2005 doi:10.1084/jem.20040876
Rockefeller University Press, 0022-1007 $8.00
JEM, Volume 201, Number 4, 579-590
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF, 1036K)
Right arrow PPT slides of all figures
Right arrow Supplemental Material Index
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new content in the JEM
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via CrossRef
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Bouneaud, C.
Right arrow Articles by Pannetier, C.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Bouneaud, C.
Right arrow Articles by Pannetier, C.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?

ARTICLE

 Lineage relationships, homeostasis, and recall capacities of central– and effector–memory CD8 T cells in vivo

Cécile Bouneaud, Zacarias Garcia, Philippe Kourilsky, and Christophe Pannetier

Unité d'Immunité anti-virale, Biothérapie et Vaccins, Institut National de la Santé et de la Recherche Medicale U.277, Institut Pasteur, 75724 Paris, Cedex 15, France

CORRESPONDENCE Christophe Pannetier: pannetie{at}pasteur.fr

The lineage relationships of central–memory T cells (TCM) cells and effector–memory T cells (TEM), as well as their homeostasis and recall capacities, are still controversial. We investigated these issues in a murine model using two complementary approaches: T cell receptor repertoire analysis and adoptive transfer experiments of purified H-Y–specific TCM and TEM populations. Repertoire studies showed that approximately two thirds of TCM and TEM clones derived from a common naive precursor, whereas the other third was distinct. Both approaches highlighted that TCM and TEM had drastically distinct behaviors in vivo, both in the absence of antigen or upon restimulation. TCM clones were stable in the absence of restimulation and mounted a potent and sustained recall response upon secondary challenge, giving rise to both TCM and TEM, although only a fraction of TCM generated TEM. In contrast, TEM persisted for only a short time in the absence of antigen and, although a fraction of them were able to express CD62L, they were unable to mount a proliferative response upon secondary challenge in this model.

Abbreviations used: TCM, central–memory T cells; TEM, effector–memory T cells.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:



  Home | Help | Feedback | Subscriptions | Archive | Search
TABLE OF CONTENTS