A perspective into the relationships between amphibian (Xenopus laevis) myeloid cell subsets

Macrophage (Mϕ)-lineage cells are integral to the immune defences of all vertebrates, including amphibians. Across vertebrates, Mϕ differentiation and functionality depend on activation of the colony stimulating factor-1 (CSF1) receptor by CSF1 and interluekin-34 (IL34) cytokines. Our findings to date indicate that amphibian (Xenopus laevis) Mϕs differentiated with CSF1 and IL34 are morphologically, transcriptionally and functionally distinct. Notably, mammalian Mϕs share common progenitor population(s) with dendritic cells (DCs), which rely on fms-like tyrosine kinase 3 ligand (FLT3L) for differentiation while X. laevis IL34-Mϕs exhibit many features attributed to mammalian DCs. Presently, we compared X. laevis CSF1- and IL34-Mϕs with FLT3L-derived X. laevis DCs. Our transcriptional and functional analyses indicated that indeed the frog IL34-Mϕs and FLT3L-DCs possessed many commonalities over CSF1-Mϕs, including transcriptional profiles and functional capacities. Compared to X. laevis CSF1-Mϕs, the IL34-Mϕs and FLT3L-DCs possess greater surface major histocompatibility complex (MHC) class I, but not MHC class II expression, were better at eliciting mixed leucocyte responses in vitro and generating in vivo re-exposure immune responses against Mycobacterium marinum. Further analyses of non-mammalian myelopoiesis akin to those described here, will grant unique perspectives into the evolutionarily retained and diverged pathways of Mϕ and DC functional differentiation. This article is part of the theme issue 'Amphibian immunity: stress, disease and ecoimmunology'.

Biology of amphibian granulocytes - From evolutionary pressures to functional consequences

Granulocyte-lineage cells are important innate immune effectors across all vertebrates. Named for conspicuous secretory granules, granulocytes have historically been studied for their antimicrobial roles. Although versions of these cells are found in all vertebrate species examined to date, disparate environmental and physiological pressures acting on distinct vertebrate classes have shaped many of the facets dictating granulocyte biology. Immune pressures further determine granulopoietic constraints, ultimately governing granulocyte functions. For amphibians that inhabit pathogen-rich aquatic environments for some or all their lives, their unique granulocyte biologies satisfy many of their antimicrobial needs. Amphibians also occupy an intermediate position in the evolution of vertebrate immune systems, using combinations of primitive (e.g., subcapsular liver) and more recently evolved (e.g., bone marrow) tissue sites for hematopoiesis and specifically, granulopoiesis. The last decade of research has revealed vertebrate granulocytes in general, and amphibian granulocytes in particular, are more complex than originally assumed. With dynamic leukocyte phenotypes, granulocyte-lineage cells are being acknowledged for their multifaceted roles beyond immunity in other physiological processes. Here we provide an overview of granulopoiesis in amphibians, highlight key differences in these processes compared to higher vertebrates, and identify open questions.

The Roles of Amphibian (Xenopus laevis) Macrophages during Chronic Frog Virus 3 Infections

Infections by Frog Virus 3 (FV3) and other ranavirus genus members are significantly contributing to global amphibian decline. The Xenopus laevis frog is an ideal research platform upon which to study the roles of distinct frog leukocyte populations during FV3 infections. Frog macrophages (MΦs) are integrally involved during FV3 infection, as they facilitate viral dissemination and persistence but also participate in immune defense against this pathogen. In turn, MΦ differentiation and functionality depend on the colony-stimulating factor-1 receptor (CSF-1R), which is ligated by CSF-1 and iterleukin-34 (IL-34) cytokines. Our past work indicated that X. laevis CSF-1 and IL-34 give rise to morphologically and functionally distinct frog MΦ subsets, and that these CSF-1- and IL-34-MΦs respectively confer susceptibility and antiviral resistance to FV3. Because FV3 targets the frog kidneys and establishes chronic infections therein, presently we examined the roles of the frog CSF-1- and IL-34-MΦs in seeding and maintaining these chronic kidney infections. Our findings indicate that the frog CSF-1-MΦs result in more prominent kidney FV3 infections, which develop into greater reservoirs of lingering FV3 marked by infiltrating leukocytes, fibrosis, and overall immunosuppressive states. Moreover, the antiviral effects of IL-34-MΦs are short-lived and are lost as FV3 infections progress.

Amphibian (Xenopus laevis) Tadpoles and Adult Frogs Differ in Their Antiviral Responses to Intestinal Frog Virus 3 Infections

The global amphibian declines are compounded by ranavirus infections such as Frog Virus 3 (FV3), and amphibian tadpoles more frequently succumb to these pathogens than adult animals. Amphibian gastrointestinal tracts represent a major route of ranavirus entry, and viral pathogenesis often leads to hemorrhaging and necrosis within this tissue. Alas, the differences between tadpole and adult amphibian immune responses to intestinal ranavirus infections remain poorly defined. As interferon (IFN) cytokine responses represent a cornerstone of vertebrate antiviral immunity, it is pertinent that the tadpoles and adults of the anuran Xenopus laevis frog mount disparate IFN responses to FV3 infections. Presently, we compared the tadpole and adult X. laevis responses to intestinal FV3 infections. Our results indicate that FV3-challenged tadpoles mount more robust intestinal type I and III IFN responses than adult frogs. These tadpole antiviral responses appear to be mediated by myeloid cells, which are recruited into tadpole intestines in response to FV3 infections. Conversely, myeloid cells bearing similar cytology already reside within the intestines of healthy (uninfected) adult frogs, possibly accounting for some of the anti-FV3 resistance of these animals. Further insight into the differences between tadpole and adult frog responses to ranaviral infections is critical to understanding the facets of susceptibility and resistance to these pathogens.