Fig 1: Impaired production Of CD104+CCL21+ mTEClow In LTßRTEC mice.a mTEClow from Foxn1Cre and LTßRTEC mice, analysed for surface expression of CD104 and intracellular expression of CCL21. Bar graphs show cell percentages and absolute cell numbers in Foxn1Cre (n = 6 biologically independent samples, closed symbols) and LTßRTEC mice (n = 6 biologically independent samples, open symbols), over three independent experiments. Significant P values using two-tailed unpaired t test are as follows: no. of cells P = 0.0009. b MFI levels of intracellular CCL21 expression in pre-gated CD104+CCL21+ mTEClow from Foxn1Cre (closed symbols) and LTßRTEC (open symbols) mice, n = 6 biologically independent samples, over three independent experiments. c Levels of Ccl21 mRNA in FACS sorted CD104+ mTEClow from Foxn1Cre (closed symbols) and LTßRTEC mice (open symbols), data representative of three biological sorts. d Alymphoid 2dGuo-treated FTOC cultured for 4 days in the presence or absence of agonistic anti-LTßR (2 µg/ml) were pooled and analysed by flow cytometry for the expression of CCL21 and CD104. Freshly isolated adult WT mTEClow were stained alongside for comparison. Significant P values using two-tailed unpaired t test are as follows: % cells P = 0.0003, no. of cells P = 0.0102. Six FTOC cultured lobes were pooled per data point, n = 3 biologically independent samples, over three independent experiments. All data are represented as mean ± SEM. *P < 0.05 and ***P < 0.001. Source data are provided as a Source Data file.
Fig 2: The adult mTEClow compartment is phenotypically diverse.a EpCAM1+Ly51-UEA1+ total mTECs from digested adult C57/BL6 (WT) thymus were subdivided into mTEClow and mTEChi on the basis of MHCII and CD80 expression. Cell surface (CD104) and intracellular (DCLK1 and CCL21) expression within total mTEClow is shown, which identifies three mTEClow subsets: CD104+CCL21+ cells (blue), CD104-CCL21-DCLK1+ thymic tuft cells (magenta) and CD104-CCL21-DCLK1- ‘triple-negative’ cells (green). b qPCR analysis showing mRNA levels of the tuft cell signature genes Pou2f3, Dclk1 and Trpm5 in CD104+ and CD104- mTEClow subsets that were FACS sorted from WT adult thymus, data are representative of three biological sorts. c Confocal microscopy of frozen tissue sections of adult CCL21tdTOM thymus stained with antibodies to DCLK1 (cyan), representative of n = 3 independent biological samples. Counterstaining with DAPI is in blue, CCL21tdTOM is in magenta and scale bars denote 20 µm. d Analysis of the ontogenetic frequency of mTEClow subsets identified in a, WT mice of 1 day, 1 week, 2 week, 4 week and 8 week were analysed, CD104+CCL21+ cells: 1 day n = 10, 1 week n = 10, 2 week n = 7, 4 week n = 7, 8 week n = 6, tuft cells: 1 day n = 9, 1 week n = 9, 2 week n = 6, 4 week n = 7, 8 week n = 10, triple-negative cells: 1 day n = 6, 1 week n = 6, 2 week n = 6, 4 week n = 6, 8 week n = 7, over three independent experiments per age. All data are represented as mean ± SEM. Source data are provided as a Source Data file.
Fig 3: K19+ TEC appear prior to RANK and CCL21 stages of mTEC development.a Representative FACS plots showing expression of K19 and RANKVenus by mTECneg (MHCII-CD80-), mTECint (MHCIIintCD80int) and mTEChi (MHCIIhiCD80hi) at E15.5, and corresponding quantitation, n = 7, from 3 independent experiments. b Representative FACS plots showing expression of K19 and CCL21tdTom by mTECneg (MHCII-CD80-), mTECint (MHCIIintCD80int) and mTEChi (MHCIIhiCD80hi) at E15.5, and corresponding quantitation, n = 12, from 3 independent experiments. Data analysed using a Student’s t test. The data are shown as mean ± SEM.
Fig 4: K19 identifies embryonic multipotent mTEC progenitors (mmTECp).a K19Cre was induced in Krt19CreERTtdTom embryos at E15.5 via the administration of tamoxifen to pregnant mice, and fate-mapped thymi were harvested at PNd0 (n = 14, from 3 independent experiments). Fate-mapped cells were detected within EpCAM1+ cells by flow cytometry and quantitated. b Representative FACS plots and quantitation of K19-tdTom fate-mapped cells within EpCAM1+UEA1+ and EpCAM1+Ly51+ TEC. c Expression of Ly51 and UEA1 by total EpCAM1+ cells, K19-tdTom- EpCAM1+ cells (non-fate-mapped) and K19-tdTom+EpCAM1+ cells (fate-mapped). d Bar charts show proportions of Ly51+UEA1- and Ly51-UEA1+ cells, and mTEC:cTEC ratio within non-fate-mapped and fate-mapped TEC. e Bar chart shows fold change in Ly51+UEA1- and Ly51-UEA1+ cells within non-fate-mapped and fate-mapped TEC. f Immunofluorescence of PNd0 thymi following K19-fate-mapping at E15.5. K19-tdTom (red) and K5 (turquoise). ‘C’, and ‘M’ indicate cortex and medullary areas respectively. Scale bar denotes 20 μm. Image representative of 4 thymi. g Expression of MHCII by EpCAM1+Ly51+ fate-mapped (FM) or non-fate-mapped (Non-FM) TEC. h Representative FACS plots illustrating the phenotype of fate-mapped mTEC subsets. mTEChi (MHCIIhiCD80hi, n = 14), mTEClo (MHCIIloCD80lo, n = 14), Aire+ (MHCIIhiCD80hiAire+, n = 14), CCL21+ (n = 6), tuft cells (MHCIIloCD80loDCLK1+, n = 8), and corresponding quantitation. i, j Immunofluorescence of PNd0 thymi where K19Cre was induced at E15.5. Scale bar denotes 10 μm. Image representative of 4 thymi, from 3 independent experiments. K19-tdTom (red), EpCAM1 (blue), f Aire (turquoise), g DCLK1 (turquoise). Data analysed using a Student’s t test. The data are shown as mean ± SEM.
Supplier Page from LSBio for CCL21 / SLC Antibody