Search

Individual elements within a superenhancer can act in a cooperative or temporal manner, but the underlying mechanisms remain obscure. We recently identified anIrf8superenhancer, within which different elements act at distinct stages of type 1 classical dendritic cell (cDC1) development. The +41-kbIrf8enhancer is required for pre-cDC1 specification, while the +32-kbIrf8enhancer acts to support subsequent cDC1 maturation. Here, we found that compound heterozygous Δ32/Δ41 mice, lacking the +32- and +41-kb enhancers on different chromosomes, show normal pre-cDC1 specification but, surprisingly, completely lack mature cDC1 development, suggestingcisdependence of the +32-kb enhancer on the +41-kb enhancer. Transcription of the +32-kbIrf8enhancer-associated long noncoding RNA (lncRNA) Gm39266 is also dependent on the +41-kb enhancer. However, cDC1 development in mice remained intact when Gm39266 transcripts were eliminated by CRISPR/Cas9-mediated deletion of lncRNA promoters and when transcription across the +32-kb enhancer was blocked by premature polyadenylation. We showed that chromatin accessibility and BATF3 binding at the +32-kb enhancer were dependent on a functional +41-kb enhancer located incis. Thus, the +41-kbIrf8enhancer controls the subsequent activation of the +32-kbIrf8enhancer in a manner that is independent of associated lncRNA transcription.

The divergence of the common dendritic cell progenitor

As a cell-based cancer vaccine, dendritic cells (DC), derived from peripheral blood monocytes or bone marrow (BM) treated with GM-CSF (GMDC), were initially thought to induce antitumor immunity by presenting tumor antigens directly to host T cells. Subsequent work revealed that GMDCs do not directly prime tumor-specific T cells, but must transfer their antigens to host DCs. This reduces their advantage over strictly antigen-based strategies proposed as cancer vaccines. Type 1 conventional DCs (cDC1) have been reported to be superior to GMDCs as a cancer vaccine, but whether they act by transferring antigens to host DCs is unknown. To test this, we compared antitumor responses induced by GMDCs and cDC1 in Irf8 +32–/– mice, which lack endogenous cDC1 and cannot reject immunogenic fibrosarcomas. Both GMDCs and cDC1 could cross-present cell-associated antigens to CD8+ T cells in vitro. However, injection of GMDCs into tumors in Irf8 +32–/– mice did not induce antitumor immunity, consistent with their reported dependence on host cDC1. In contrast, injection of cDC1s into tumors in Irf8 +32–/– mice resulted in their migration to tumor-draining lymph nodes, activation of tumor-specific CD8+ T cells, and rejection of the tumors. Tumor rejection did not require the in vitro loading of cDC1 with antigens, indicating that acquisition of antigens in vivo is sufficient to induce antitumor responses. Finally, cDC1 vaccination showed abscopal effects, with rejection of untreated tumors growing concurrently on the opposite flank. These results suggest that cDC1 may be a useful future avenue to explore for antitumor therapy.See related Spotlight by Hubert et al., p. 918

Supplementary Figure from cDC1 Vaccines Drive Tumor Rejection by Direct Presentation Independently of Host cDC1

The events that initiate autoimmune diabetes in nonobese diabetic (NOD) mice remain poorly understood. CD4 + and CD8 + T cells are both required to develop disease, but their relative roles in initiating disease are unclear. To test whether CD4 + T cell infiltration into islets requires damage to β cells induced by autoreactive CD8 + T cells, we inactivated Wdfy4 in nonobese diabetic (NOD) mice (NOD. Wdfy4 −/−- ) using CRISPR/Cas9 targeting to eliminate cross-presentation by type 1 conventional dendritic cells (cDC1s). Similar to C57BL/6 Wdfy4 −/− mice, cDC1 in NOD. Wdfy4 −/− mice are unable to cross-present cell-associated antigens to prime CD8 + T cells, while cDC1 from heterozygous NOD. Wdfy4 +/− mice cross-present normally. Further, NOD. Wdfy4 −/− mice fail to develop diabetes while heterozygous NOD. Wdfy4 +/− mice develop diabetes similarly to wild-type NOD mice. NOD. Wdfy4 −/− mice remain capable of processing and presenting major histocompatibility complex class II (MHC-II)-restricted autoantigens and can activate β cell-specific CD4 + T cells in lymph nodes. However, disease in these mice does not progress beyond peri-islet inflammation. These results indicate that the priming of autoreactive CD8 + T cells in NOD mice requires cross-presentation by cDC1. Further, autoreactive CD8 + T cells appear to be required not only to develop diabetes, but to recruit autoreactive CD4 + T cells into islets of NOD mice, perhaps in response to progressive β cell damage.

The clinical success of immune checkpoint therapy (ICT) has produced explosive growth in tumor immunology research because ICT was discovered through basic studies of immune regulation. Much of the current translational efforts are aimed at enhancing ICT by identifying therapeutic targets that synergize with CTLA4 or PD1/PD-L1 blockade and are solidly developed on the basis of currently accepted principles. Expanding these principles through continuous basic research may help broaden translational efforts. With this mindset, we focused this review on three threads of basic research directly relating to mechanisms underlying ICT. Specifically, this review covers three aspects of dendritic cell (DC) biology connected with antitumor immune responses but are not specifically oriented toward therapeutic use. First, we review recent advances in the development of the cDC1 subset of DCs, identifying important features distinguishing these cells from other types of DCs. Second, we review the antigen-processing pathway called cross-presentation, which was discovered in the mid-1970s and remains an enigma. This pathway serves an essential in vivo function unique to cDC1s and may be both a physiologic bottleneck and therapeutic target. Finally, we review the longstanding field of helper cells and the related area of DC licensing, in which CD4 T cells influence the strength or quality of CD8 T cell responses. Each topic is connected with ICT in some manner but is also a fundamental aspect of cell-mediated immunity directed toward intracellular pathogens.

CD40 signaling in classical type 1 dendritic cells (cDC1s) is required for CD8 T cell-mediated tumor rejection, but the underlying mechanisms are incompletely understood. Here, we identified CD40-induced genes in cDC1s, including Cd70, Tnfsf9, Ptgs2 and Bcl2l1, and examined their contributions to anti-tumor immunity. cDC1-specific inactivation of CD70 and COX-2, and global CD27 inactivation, only partially impaired tumor rejection or tumor-specific CD8 T cell expansion. Loss of 4-1BB, alone or in Cd27(−/−) mice, did not further impair anti-tumor immunity. However, cDC1-specific CD40 inactivation reduced cDC1 mitochondrial transmembrane potential and increased caspase activation in tumor-draining lymph nodes, reducing migratory cDC1 numbers in vivo. Similar impairments occurred during in vitro antigen presentation by Cd40(−/−) cDC1s to CD8(+) T cells, which were reversed by re-expression of Bcl2l1. Thus, CD40 signaling in cDC1s not only induces costimulatory ligands for CD8(+) T cells but also induces Bcl2l1 that sustains cDC1 survival during priming of anti-tumor responses.

The events that initiate autoimmune diabetes in NOD mice remain poorly understood. CD4 and CD8 T cells are both required but whether either cell initiates disease is unclear. To test whether CD4 T cell infiltration into islet required damage to β cells induced by autoreactive CD8 T cells, we selectively inactivated Wdfy4 in NOD mice (NOD.Wdfy4-/-) using CRISPR/Cas9 targeting. Similar to C57BL/6 Wdfy4-/- mice NOD.Wdfy4-/- mice develop type 1 conventional dendritic cells (cDC1) that are unable to cross-present cell-associated antigens required to activate CD8 T cells. By contrast, cDC1 from heterozygous Wdfy4+/- mice can cross-present normally. Heterozygous NOD.Wdfy4+/- mice develop diabetes similar to NOD mice, but NOD.Wdfy4-/- mice neither develop diabetes nor prime autoreactive CD8 T cells in vivo. By contrast, NOD.Wdfy4-/- mice can process and present MHC-II-restricted autoantigens and can activate β cell specific CD4 T cells in lymph nodes, and yet do not develop CD4 T cell infiltration in islets. These results indicate that the priming of autoreactive CD8 T cells in NOD mice requires cross-presentation by cDC1. Further, autoreactive CD8 T cells are required not only to develop diabetes, but to recruit autoreactive CD4 T cells into islets of NOD mice, perhaps in response to progressive β cell damage.

The transcriptional repressor Bcl6 has been reported as required for development of a subset of classical dendritic cell (cDCs) called cDC1, which is responsible for cross-presentation. However, mechanisms and in vivo functional analysis have been lacking. We generated a system for conditional deletion of Bcl6 in mouse cDCs. We confirmed the reported in vitro requirement for Bcl6 in cDC1 development and the general role for Bcl6 in cDC development in competitive settings. However, deletion of Bcl6 did not abrogate the in vivo development of cDC1. Instead, Bcl6 deficiency caused only a selective reduction in CD8α expression by cDC1 without affecting XCR1 or CD24 expression. Normal cDC1 development was confirmed in Bcl6cKO mice by development of XCR1+ Zbtb46-GFP+ cDC1 by rejection of syngeneic tumors and by priming of tumor-specific CD8 T cells. In summary, Bcl6 regulates a subset of cDC1-specific markers and is required in vitro but not in vivo for cDC1 development.

Conventional type 1 dendritic cells (cDC1)1 are thought to perform antigen cross-presentation, which is required to prime CD8+ T cells2,3, whereas cDC2 are specialized for priming CD4+ T cells4,5. CD4+ T cells are also considered to help CD8+ T cell responses through a variety of mechanisms6–11, including a process whereby CD4+ T cells ‘license’ cDC1 for CD8+ T cell priming12. However, this model has not been directly tested in vivo or in the setting of help-dependent tumour rejection. Here we generated an Xcr1Cre mouse strain to evaluate the cellular interactions that mediate tumour rejection in a model requiring CD4+ and CD8+ T cells. As expected, tumour rejection required cDC1 and CD8+ T cell priming required the expression of major histocompatibility class I molecules by cDC1. Unexpectedly, early priming of CD4+ T cells against tumour-derived antigens also required cDC1, and this was not simply because they transport antigens to lymph nodes for processing by cDC2, as selective deletion of major histocompatibility class II molecules in cDC1 also prevented early CD4+ T cell priming. Furthermore, deletion of either major histocompatibility class II or CD40 in cDC1 impaired tumour rejection, consistent with a role for cognate CD4+ T cell interactions and CD40 signalling in cDC1 licensing. Finally, CD40 signalling in cDC1 was critical not only for CD8+ T cell priming, but also for initial CD4+ T cell activation. Thus, in the setting of tumour-derived antigens, cDC1 function as an autonomous platform capable of antigen processing and priming for both CD4+ and CD8+ T cells and of the direct orchestration of their cross-talk that is required for optimal anti-tumour immunity. Conventional type 1 dendritic cells perform antigen processing and priming of CD4+ and CD8+ T cells against tumour antigens, orchestrating their cross-talk to effect anti-tumour immunity.

Conventional dendritic cells (cDCs), cDC1 and cDC2, act both to initiate immunity and maintain self-tolerance. The tryptophan metabolic enzyme indoleamine 2,3-dioxygenase 1 (IDO1) is used by cDCs in maintaining tolerance, but its role in different subsets remains unclear. At homeostasis, only mature CCR7sup+/supcDC1 expressed IDO1 that was dependent on IRF8. Lipopolysaccharide treatment induced maturation and IDO1-dependent tolerogenic activity in isolated immature cDC1, but not isolated cDC2. However, both human and mouse cDC2 could induce IDO1 and acquire tolerogenic function when co-cultured with mature cDC1 through the action of cDC1-derived l-kynurenine. Accordingly, cDC1-specific inactivation of IDO1 in vivo exacerbated disease in experimental autoimmune encephalomyelitis. This study identifies a previously unrecognized metabolic communication in which IDO1-expressing cDC1 cells extend their immunoregulatory capacity to the cDC2 subset through their production of tryptophan metabolite l-kynurenine. This metabolic axis represents a potential therapeutic target in treating autoimmune demyelinating diseases.

CD40 signaling in classical type 1 dendritic cells (cDC1s) is required for CD8 T cell-mediated tumor rejection, but the underlying mechanisms are incompletely understood. Here, we identified CD40-induced genes in cDC1s, including Cd70, Tnfsf9, Ptgs2 and Bcl2l1, and examined their contributions to anti-tumor immunity. cDC1-specific inactivation of CD70 and COX-2, and global CD27 inactivation, only partially impaired tumor rejection or tumor-specific CD8 T cell expansion. Loss of 4-1BB, alone or in Cd27

As a cell-based cancer vaccine, dendritic cells (DC), derived from peripheral blood monocytes or bone marrow (BM) treated with GM-CSF (GMDC), were initially thought to induce antitumor immunity by presenting tumor antigens directly to host T cells. Subsequent work revealed that GMDCs do not directly prime tumor-specific T cells, but must transfer their antigens to host DCs. This reduces their advantage over strictly antigen-based strategies proposed as cancer vaccines. Type 1 conventional DCs (cDC1) have been reported to be superior to GMDCs as a cancer vaccine, but whether they act by transferring antigens to host DCs is unknown. To test this, we compared antitumor responses induced by GMDCs and cDC1 in Irf8 +32–/– mice, which lack endogenous cDC1 and cannot reject immunogenic fibrosarcomas. Both GMDCs and cDC1 could cross-present cell-associated antigens to CD8+ T cells in vitro. However, injection of GMDCs into tumors in Irf8 +32–/– mice did not induce antitumor immunity, consistent with their reported dependence on host cDC1. In contrast, injection of cDC1s into tumors in Irf8 +32–/– mice resulted in their migration to tumor-draining lymph nodes, activation of tumor-specific CD8+ T cells, and rejection of the tumors. Tumor rejection did not require the in vitro loading of cDC1 with antigens, indicating that acquisition of antigens in vivo is sufficient to induce antitumor responses. Finally, cDC1 vaccination showed abscopal effects, with rejection of untreated tumors growing concurrently on the opposite flank. These results suggest that cDC1 may be a useful future avenue to explore for antitumor therapy. See related Spotlight by Hubert et al., p. 918

Induction of the transcription factor Irf8 in the common dendritic cell progenitor (CDP) is required for classical type 1 dendritic cell (cDC1) fate specification, but the mechanisms controlling this induction are unclear. In the present study Irf8 enhancers were identified via chromatin profiling of dendritic cells and CRISPR/Cas9 genome editing was used to assess their roles in Irf8 regulation. An enhancer 32 kilobases (kb) downstream of the Irf8 transcriptional start site (+32-kb Irf8) that was active in mature cDC1s was required for the development of this lineage, but not for its specification. Instead, a +41-kb Irf8 enhancer, previously thought to be active only in plasmacytoid dendritic cells, was found to also be transiently accessible in cDC1 progenitors, and deleting this enhancer prevented the induction of Irf8 in CDPs and abolished cDC1 specification. Thus, cryptic activation of the +41-kb Irf8 enhancer in dendritic cell progenitors is responsible for cDC1 fate specification. The transcription factor IRF8 is essential for classical type 1 dendritic cell (cDC1) development. Murphy and colleagues investigate in detail the molecular control of cDC1 fate specification by systematically unpicking the IRF8 enhancer regions.

During dendritic cell (DC) development, Myc expression in progenitors is replaced by Mycl in mature DCs, but when and how this transition occurs is unknown. We evaluated DC development using reporters for MYC, MYCL, and cell cycle proteins Geminin and CDT1 in wild-type and various mutant mice. For classical type 1 dendritic cells (cDC1s) and plasmacytoid DCs (pDCs), the transition occurred upon their initial specification from common dendritic cell progenitors (CDPs) or common lymphoid progenitors (CLPs), respectively. This transition required high levels of IRF8 and interaction with PU.1, suggesting the use of EICEs within Mycl enhancers. In pDCs, maximal MYCL induction also required the +41kb Irf8 enhancer that controls pDC IRF8 expression. IRF8 also contributed to repression of MYC. While MYC is expressed only in rapidly dividing DC progenitors, MYCL is most highly expressed in DCs that have exited the cell cycle. Thus, IRF8 levels coordinate the Myc-Mycl transition during DC development.

Efforts to determine the unique functions of the two types of classical dendritic cells, cDC1 and cDC2, are hindered by limited understanding of the divergence of the common dendritic cell progenitor (CDP). Some transcription factors act in commitment of already specified progenitors, such as Batf3 which stabilizes Irf8 autoactivation at the +32 kb Irf8 enhancer, but how other factors control CDP divergence remains unknown. Here, we report the transcriptional mechanism of CDP divergence and describe the first requirements for pre-cDC2 specification. Genetic epistasis analysis suggested that Nfil3 acts upstream of Id2, Batf3, and Zeb2 in cDC1 development but has not revealed its mechanism or targets. Analysis of newly generated NFIL3 reporter mice showed extremely transient NFIL3 expression during cDC1 specification. CUT&RUN and ChIP-seq analysis identified NFIL3 binding in the −165 kb Zeb2 enhancer at sites that also bind CCAAT-enhancer-binding proteins (C/EBPs). Mutation of these NFIL3/C/EBP sites by in vivo CRISPR/Cas9 targeting revealed functional redundancy, with C/EBPs and NFIL3 competing in binding these sites to support or repress Zeb2 expression, respectively. Mutation of these three NFIL3/C/EBP sites eliminated Zeb2 expression in myeloid, but not lymphoid progenitors, producing mice that completely lacked pre-cDC2 specification and mature cDC2 in vivo. These mice failed to make an appropriate TH2 response against H. polygyrus infection, consistent with cDC2 supporting TH2 responses to helminths. Notably, Zeb2 expression is not required to maintain cDC2 identity, but acts only to block cDC1 specification. Thus, the competition between C/EBPs and NFIL3 binding at the −165 kb Zeb2 enhancer determines CDP divergence.

The transcriptional repressor ZEB2 regulates development of many cell fates among somatic, neural and hematopoietic lineages, but the basis for its requirement in these diverse lineages is unclear. Here, we identified a 400 basepair (bp) region located 165 kilobases (kb) upstream of the Zeb2 transcriptional start site (TSS) that binds the E proteins at several E-box motifs and was active in hematopoietic lineages. Germline deletion of this 400bp region (Zeb2(Δ−165) mice) specifically prevented Zeb2 expression in hematopoietic stem cell (HSC) derived lineages. Zeb2(Δ−165) mice lacked development of plasmacytoid dendritic cells (pDCs), monocytes, and B cells. All macrophages in Zeb2(Δ−165) mice were exclusively of embryonic origin. Using single-cell chromatin profiling, we identified a second Zeb2 enhancer located at +164-kb that was selectively active in embryonically derived lineages, but not hematopoietic stem cells (HSCs) derived ones. Thus, Zeb2 expression in adult, but not embryonic, hematopoiesis is selectively controlled by the −165kb Zeb2 enhancer.

Toxoplasma gondii is a widespread parasite of animals that causes zoonotic infections in humans. Although healthy individuals generally control the infection with only moderate symptoms, it causes serious illness in newborns and those with compromised immune systems such as HIV-infected AIDS patients. Because rodents are natural hosts for T. gondii, laboratory mice provide an excellent model for studying immune responses. Here, we used a combination of an attenuated mutant strain of the parasite that effectively vaccinates mice, with a defect in a transcriptional factor that impairs a critical subset of dendritic cells, to studying the immune response to infection. The findings reveal that in BALB/c mice, CD4 memory T cells play a dominant role in producing IFN-γ needed to control chronic infection. Hence, BALB/c mice may provide a more appropriate model for declining immunity seen in HIV-AIDS patients where loss of CD4 cells is associated with emergence of opportunistic infections., Immunity to Toxoplasma gondii at early stages of infection in C57BL/6 mice depends on gamma interferon (IFN-γ) production by NK cells, while at later stages it is primarily mediated by CD8 T cells. We decided to explore the requirement for CD4 T cells during T. gondii infection in Batf3−/− mice, which lack CD8α+ dendritic cells (DCs) that are necessary for cross-presentation of cell-associated antigens to CD8 T cells. We show that in this immunodeficient background on a BALB/c background, CD4 T cells become important effector cells and are able to protect Batf3−/− mice from infection with the avirulent strain RHΔku80Δrop5. Independently of the initial NK cell activation, CD4 T cells in wild-type and Batf3−/− mice were the major source of IFN-γ. Importantly, memory CD4 T cells were sufficient to provide protective immunity following transfer into Batf3−/− mice and secondary challenge with the virulent RHΔku80 strain. Collectively, these results show that under situations where CD8 cell responses are impaired, CD4 T cells provide an important alternative immune response to T. gondii. IMPORTANCE Toxoplasma gondii is a widespread parasite of animals that causes zoonotic infections in humans. Although healthy individuals generally control the infection with only moderate symptoms, it causes serious illness in newborns and those with compromised immune systems such as HIV-infected AIDS patients. Because rodents are natural hosts for T. gondii, laboratory mice provide an excellent model for studying immune responses. Here, we used a combination of an attenuated mutant strain of the parasite that effectively vaccinates mice, with a defect in a transcriptional factor that impairs a critical subset of dendritic cells, to studying the immune response to infection. The findings reveal that in BALB/c mice, CD4 memory T cells play a dominant role in producing IFN-γ needed to control chronic infection. Hence, BALB/c mice may provide a more appropriate model for declining immunity seen in HIV-AIDS patients where loss of CD4 cells is associated with emergence of opportunistic infections.

The BATF3-dependent cDC1 lineage of conventional dendritic cells (cDC) is required for rejection of immunogenic sarcomas and for rejection of progressive sarcomas during checkpoint blockade therapy. One unique function of the cDC1 lineage is the efficient cross-presentation of tumor-derived neoantigens to CD8+ T cells, but it is not clear that this is the only unique function of cDC1 required for tumor rejection. We previously showed that BATF3 functions during cDC1 lineage commitment to maintain IRF8 expression in the specified cDC1 progenitor. However, since cDC1 progenitors do not develop into mature cDC1s in Batf3−/− mice, it is still unclear whether BATF3 has additional functions in mature cDC1 cells. A transgenic Irf8-Venus reporter allele increases IRF8 protein concentration sufficiently to allow autonomous cDC1 development in spleens of Batf3−/− mice. These restored Batf3−/− cDC1s are transcriptionally similar to control wild-type cDC1s but have reduced expression of a restricted set of cDC1-specific genes. Restored Batf3−/− cDC1s are able to cross-present cell-associated antigens both in vitro and in vivo. However, Batf3−/− cDC1 exhibit altered characteristics in vivo and are unable to mediate tumor rejection. These results show that BATF3, in addition to regulating Irf8 expression to stabilize cDC1 lineage commitment, also controls expression of a small set of genes required for cDC1-mediated tumor rejection. These BATF3-regulated genes may be useful targets in immunotherapies aimed at promoting tumor rejection.

Adding to the cross-presentation family Immune responses to viral or tumor antigens are typically initiated by the process of cross-presentation. Cross-presentation is believed to be the major way that innate immune cells, such as the classical dendritic cell 1 (cDC1) subset, activate and prime immunological T cells. Theisen et al. used CRISPR-based screening to identify regulators of cross-presentation by cDC1s (see the Perspective by Barbet and Blander). One such regulator that was identified, WDFY4 (WD repeat- and FYVE domain–containing protein 4), was required for cross-presentation of cell- and bacterial-associated antigens. WDFY4 played a critical role in cDC1-mediated viral and tumor immunity yet did not seem necessary for major histocompatibility complex class II presentation or for cross-presentation by monocyte-derived DCs. Science , this issue p. 694 ; see also p. 641

Significance High-affinity antibody responses involve selection of B cells in the germinal center (GC) by cognate interactions with T follicular helper (TFH) cells, which in turn must first be activated by classical dendritic cells (cDCs). We observe that Notch2-dependent cDC2s are required in vivo for induction of TFH cells, GC B cells, and specific antibody production in response to sheep red blood cell (SRBC) immunization. Notch2 signaling impacted a broad transcriptional program in cDC2s both at homeostasis and after SRBC immunization, although we have not identified a target gene that mediates TFH differentiation. Thus, Notch2 is a transcription factor that acts in cDCs and is selectively required for support of the GC reaction., CD4+ T follicular helper (TFH) cells support germinal center (GC) reactions promoting humoral immunity. Dendritic cell (DC) diversification into genetically distinct subsets allows for specialization in promoting responses against several types of pathogens. Whether any classical DC (cDC) subset is required for humoral immunity is unknown, however. We tested several genetic models that selectively ablate distinct DC subsets in mice for their impact on splenic GC reactions. We identified a requirement for Notch2-dependent cDC2s, but not Batf3-dependent cDC1s or Klf4-dependent cDC2s, in promoting TFH and GC B cell formation in response to sheep red blood cells and inactivated Listeria monocytogenes. This effect was mediated independent of Il2ra and several Notch2-dependent genes expressed in cDC2s, including Stat4 and Havcr2. Notch2 signaling during cDC2 development also substantially reduced the efficiency of cDC2s for presentation of MHC class II-restricted antigens, limiting the strength of CD4 T cell activation. Together, these results demonstrate a nonredundant role for the Notch2-dependent cDC2 subset in supporting humoral immune responses.

Ciita was discovered for its role in regulating transcription of major histocompatibility complex class II (MHCII) genes. Subsequently, CIITA was predicted to control many other genes based on reporter and ChIP-seq analysis but few such predictions have been verified in vivo using Ciita-/- mice. Testing these predictions for classical dendritic cells (cDCs) has been particularly difficult, since Ciita-/- mice lack MHCII expression required to identify cDCs. However, recent identification of the cDC-specific transcription factor Zbtb46 allows the identification of cDCs independently of MHCII expression. We crossed Zbtb46gfp mice onto the Ciita-/- background and found that all cDC lineages developed in vivo in the absence of Ciita. We then compared the complete transcriptional profile of wild-type and Ciita-/- cDCs to define the physiological footprint of CIITA for both immature and activated cDCs. We find that CIITA exerts a highly restricted control over only the MHCII, H2-DO and H2-DM genes, in DC1 and DC2 cDC subsets, but not over other proposed targets, including Ii. These findings emphasize the caveats needed in interpreting transcription factor binding sites identified by in-vitro reporter analysis, or by ChIP-seq, which may not necessarily indicate their functional activity in vivo.

Conventional type 1 dendritic cells (cDC1)

Development and function of conventional dendritic cell (cDC) subsets, cDC1 and cDC2, depend on transcription factors (TFs) IRF8 and IRF4, respectively. Since IRF8 and IRF4 can each interact with TF BATF3 at AP1-IRF composite elements (AICEs) and with TF PU.1 at Ets-IRF composite elements (EICEs), it is unclear how these factors exert divergent actions. Here, we determined the basis for distinct effects of IRF8 and IRF4 in cDC development. Genes expressed commonly by cDC1 and cDC2 used EICE-dependent enhancers that were redundantly activated by low amounts of either IRF4 or IRF8. By contrast, cDC1-specific genes relied on AICE-dependent enhancers, which required high IRF concentrations, but were activated by either IRF4 or IRF8. IRF8 was specifically required only by a minority of cDC1-specific genes, such as Xcr1, which could distinguish between IRF8 and IRF4 DNA-binding domains. Thus, these results explain how BATF3-dependent Irf8 autoactivation underlies emergence of the cDC1-specific transcriptional program.

Dendritic cells (DCs) and monocytes develop from a series of bone-marrow–resident progenitors in which lineage potential is regulated by distinct transcription factors. Zeb2 is an E-box–binding protein associated with epithelial–mesenchymal transition and is widely expressed among hematopoietic lineages. Previously, we observed that Zeb2 expression is differentially regulated in progenitors committed to classical DC (cDC) subsets in vivo. Using systems for inducible gene deletion, we uncover a requirement for Zeb2 in the development of Ly-6Chi monocytes but not neutrophils, and we show a corresponding requirement for Zeb2 in expression of the M-CSF receptor in the bone marrow. In addition, we confirm a requirement for Zeb2 in development of plasmacytoid DCs but find that Zeb2 is not required for cDC2 development. Instead, Zeb2 may act to repress cDC1 progenitor specification in the context of inflammatory signals.

RAB43 is a vesicular transport protein unique to CD8α+ DCs that is localized to the Golgi. Kretzer et al. show that RAB43 is necessary for optimal cross-presentation of cell-associated antigens by CD8α+ DCs in vitro and in vivo but that it is dispensable for cross-presentation by in vitro monocyte-derived DCs., In this study, to examine cross-presentation by classical dendritic cells (DCs; cDCs), we evaluated the role of RAB43, a protein found to be selectively expressed by Batf3-dependent CD8α+ and CD103+ compared with other DC subsets and immune lineages. Using a specific monoclonal antibody, we localized RAB43 expression to the Golgi apparatus and LAMP1− cytoplasmic vesicles. Mice with germline or conditional deletion of Rab43 are viable and fertile and have normal development of cDCs but show a defect for in vivo and in vitro cross-presentation of cell-associated antigen. This defect is specific to cDCs, as Rab43-deficient monocyte-derived DCs showed no defect in cross-presentation of cell-associated antigen. These results suggest that RAB43 provides a specialized activity used in cross-presentation selectively by CD8α+ DCs but not other antigen-presenting cells.

The dendritic cells (DCs) of the immune system function in innate and adaptive responses by directing activity of various effector cells rather than serving as effectors themselves. DCs and closely related myeloid lineages share expression of many surface receptors, presenting a challenge in distinguishing their unique in vivo functions. Recent work has taken advantage of unique transcriptional programs to identify and manipulate murine DCs in vivo. This work has assigned several nonredundant in vivo functions to distinct DC lineages, consisting of plasmacytoid DCs and several subsets of classical DCs that promote different immune effector modules in response to pathogens. In parallel, a correspondence between human and murine DC subsets has emerged, underlying structural similarities for the DC lineages between these species. Recent work has begun to unravel the transcriptional circuitry that controls the development and diversification of DCs from common progenitors in the bone marrow.

Zeb2 is an E-box binding transcriptional repressor that were first discovered to be important for epithelial to mesenchymal transition. We recently discovered a genetic circuit involving Zeb2, Nfil3, Id2 that governs dendritic cell (DC) specification in the multipotent common dendritic cell progenitor (CDP). Nfil3 expression is required for the transition from a Zeb2hiand Id2lo stage into a Zeb2lo and Id2hi stage, which has exclusively cDC1 potential. This circuit blocks E protein activity to exclude pDC potential within the progenitor. However how E proteins regulate pDC development is still unclear. Here, we identified an enhancer element 165kb downstream of Zeb2 transcriptional starting site that can be bound by E proteins. Deletion of this enhancer completely abrogates pDC development. Interestingly, the activity of this enhancer is also required for monocytes and B cell development, while tissue resident macrophages used a different enhancer. A circuit involving Zeb2, Id2 and E proteins, where E proteins binding at this cis-element supports Zeb2 expression, is essential for lineage specification at multiple bifurcation point in the hematopoietic tree.

CD4 T cells are thought to help promote anti-tumour responses by ‘licensing’ antigen presenting cells (APCs) that activate CD8 T cells. Conventional type 1 dendritic cells (cDC1s) are responsible for cross-presentation of tumour-derived antigens to CD8 T cells. Prevailing models presume that the cDC1 is licensed by CD4 T cells that are themselves activated by a distinct cDC subset, the cDC2. The recent finding that neoantigens presented by major histocompatibility complex (MHC) class II molecules can promote rejection of tumours that lack MHC class II (MHC-II) surface expression is consistent with an indirect action of CD4 T cells, such as cDC1 licensing. However, no study has directly identified the APC that primes the CD4 T cells responsible for licensing or clearly identified the target of CD4 licensing in vivo. Here, we generated cDC1-specific Cre expressing mouse strain to inactivate or induce expression of MHC-I, MHC-II, or CD40 specifically within the cDC1 lineage. Using a tumour model that relies on CD8 T cells and CD4 T cells for rejection, we discovered that priming of CD4 T cells against tumour-derived antigens, in contrast to soluble antigens, relied overwhelmingly on the cDC1 and not the cDC2. cDC1 do not simply transport antigen to lymph nodes for processing by cDC2, since lack of MHC-II expression on cDC1 prevented CD4 T cell priming. We also found that CD40 signaling not only affects licensing of cDC1 for CD8 T cell priming, but is also critical for the activation of CD4 T cells. Thus, in the setting of tumour-derived antigens, cDC1 function as an autonomous platform capable of priming both CD4 and CD8 T cells and orchestrating their cross-talk required for optimal anti-tumour immunity.

Early work defined the common dendritic cell progenitor, or CDP, as a clonogenic population that gives rise to pDCs, cDC1s, and cDC2s. It was recently shown that pDC and cDC1 specification can occur within the CDP. Defining phenotypic and transcriptional heterogeneity within the CDP can thus be used to refine our understanding of the gene regulatory network that controls DC development. Using scRNA-Seq and in vivo reporter analysis, we identified populations with mutually exclusive expression of Myc and Mycl. We found that Myc-expressing cells develop into all DC subsets when cultured in Flt3L. Alternatively, Mycl-expressing cells develop into cDC1s and pDCs, but not cDC2s. Therefore, we asked whether Mycl expressing CDPs represent a clonogenic, bipotent progenitor of cDC1s and pDCs. Consistent with work that showed sustained expression of Mycl in differentiated populations of pDCs and cDC1s, we were able to exclude pDC and cDC1-specified populations on the basis of subset-specific marker expression. However, a population of Mycl-expressing CDPs that did not express subset specific markers remained. When purified and cultured in vitro, this rare population gives rise to both pDCs and cDC1s. These results indicate that Mycl expression marks a putative, common progenitor of pDCs and cDC1s that excludes cDC2 potential. These results are consistent with recent work that demonstrated a shared dependence of pDC and cDC1 specification on a distal enhancer of Irf8. Along these lines, we find that the transition from MYC to MYCL dominance in pDCs is disrupted in Irf8−/− mice. We have thus identified Myc and Mycl as targets of the gene regulatory network that controls DC development.

Classical type 1 dendritic cells (cDC1s) are required for antiviral and antitumor immunity, which necessitates an understanding of their development. Development of the cDC1 progenitor requires an E-protein-dependent enhancer located 41 kilobases downstream of the transcription start site of the transcription factor Irf8 (+41-kb Irf8 enhancer), but its maturation instead requires the Batf3-dependent +32-kb Irf8 enhancer. To understand this switch, we performed single-cell RNA sequencing of the common dendritic cell progenitor (CDP) and identified a cluster of cells that expressed transcription factors that influence cDC1 development, such as Nfil3, Id2 and Zeb2. Genetic epistasis among these factors revealed that Nfil3 expression is required for the transition from Zeb2hi and Id2lo CDPs to Zeb2lo and Id2hi CDPs, which represent the earliest committed cDC1 progenitors. This genetic circuit blocks E-protein activity to exclude plasmacytoid dendritic cell potential and explains the switch in Irf8 enhancer usage during cDC1 development. Classical type 1 dendritic cells (cDC1s) are essential for activation of antiviral and anticancer T cell responses. Murphy and colleagues describe a genetic circuit that involves the transcription factors Nfil3, Id2 and Zeb2. This circuit imposes a molecular switch that allows cDC1 specification and development.

The receptor Flt3 and its ligand Flt3L are both critical for dendritic cell (DC) development, but DC deficiency is more severe in Flt3l−/− mice than in Flt3−/− mice. This has led to speculation that Flt3L binds to another receptor that also supports DC development. However, we found that Flt3L administration does not generate DCs in Flt3−/− mice, arguing against a second receptor. Instead, Flt3−/− DC progenitors matured in response to macrophage colony–stimulating factor (M-CSF) or stem cell factor, and deletion of Csf1r in Flt3−/− mice further reduced DC development, indicating that these cytokines could compensate for Flt3. Surprisingly, Flt3−/− DC progenitors displayed enhanced M-CSF signaling, suggesting that loss of Flt3 increased responsiveness to other cytokines. In agreement, deletion of Flt3 in Flt3l−/− mice paradoxically rescued their severe DC deficiency. Thus, multiple cytokines can support DC development, and the discrepancy between Flt3−/− and Flt3l−/− mice results from the increased sensitivity of Flt3−/− progenitors to these cytokines.

Durai et al. demonstrate that the less severe DC deficiency in Flt3–/– mice compared to Flt3l–/– mice is due to the enhanced sensitivity of Flt3–/– progenitors to compensatory cytokines that support DC development., The receptor Flt3 and its ligand Flt3L are both critical for dendritic cell (DC) development, but DC deficiency is more severe in Flt3l−/− mice than in Flt3−/− mice. This has led to speculation that Flt3L binds to another receptor that also supports DC development. However, we found that Flt3L administration does not generate DCs in Flt3−/− mice, arguing against a second receptor. Instead, Flt3−/− DC progenitors matured in response to macrophage colony–stimulating factor (M-CSF) or stem cell factor, and deletion of Csf1r in Flt3−/− mice further reduced DC development, indicating that these cytokines could compensate for Flt3. Surprisingly, Flt3−/− DC progenitors displayed enhanced M-CSF signaling, suggesting that loss of Flt3 increased responsiveness to other cytokines. In agreement, deletion of Flt3 in Flt3l−/− mice paradoxically rescued their severe DC deficiency. Thus, multiple cytokines can support DC development, and the discrepancy between Flt3−/− and Flt3l−/− mice results from the increased sensitivity of Flt3−/− progenitors to these cytokines.

RelB is an NF-κB family transcription factor activated in the noncanonical pathway downstream of NF-κB-inducing kinase (NIK) and TNF receptor family members including lymphotoxin-β receptor (LTβR) and CD40. Early analysis suggested that RelB is required for classical dendritic cell (cDC) development based on a severe reduction of cDCs in Relb-/- mice associated with profound myeloid expansion and perturbations in B and T cells. Subsequent analysis of radiation chimeras generated from wild-type and Relb-/- bone marrow showed that RelB exerts cell-extrinsic actions on some lineages, but it has remained unclear whether the impact of RelB on cDC development is cell-intrinsic or -extrinsic. Here, we reevaluated the role of RelB in cDC and myeloid development using a series of radiation chimeras. We found that there was no cell-intrinsic requirement for RelB for development of most cDC subsets, except for the Notch2- and LTβR-dependent subset of splenic CD4+ cDC2s. These results identify a relatively restricted role of RelB in DC development. Moreover, the myeloid expansion in Relb-/- mice resulted from hematopoietic-extrinsic actions of RelB. This result suggests that there is an unrecognized but critical role for RelB within the nonhematopoietic niche that controls normal myelopoiesis.

Cross-presentation allows for the presentation of exogenous viral and tumor antigens to CD8+ T cells by XCR1+ classical dendritic cells (cDC1s). Previously, the role of cross-presentation in cytotoxic T cell responses in vivo was unclear due to the lack of mouse models specifically deficient in cross-presentation. We developed a CRISPR-Cas9 screen to find novel regulators of cross-presentation and found that the protein WDFY4 is essential for cross-presentation of cell-associated antigens but not for direct presentation or presentation on MHCII. WDFY4-deficient mice had normal cDC1 development and were able to survive infections with Toxoplasma gondii through production of IL-12. However, WDFY4-deficient mice failed to prime CD8+ T cells to viral antigens and were completely unable to control immunogenic tumors. WDFY4 interacts with proteins related to vesicular formation and trafficking such as clathrin and HSP90ab1 and localizes near the cell surface, suggesting its involvement in vesicular targeting after antigen uptake during cross-presentation.

Dendritic cells (DCs) are required to prime T cells during an immune response. The dogma in the field is that Batf3-dependent DCs (DC1s) prime CD8 T cells and IRF4-dependent DCs (DC2s) prime CD4 T cells. However, recent studies have shown that DC1s are required for induction of Th1 immune responses and to prime autroreactive CD4 T cells in the NOD mouse model of diabetes. Therefore, this segregation of priming theory is flawed. To further study the contribution of DC1s to CD4 T cell priming, we generated an XCR1-cre mouse and crossed it to the MHC class II floxed mouse to generate MHC class II deficient DC1s. We found that the form of antigen directs the priming of T cells. DC2s are superior at presenting soluble antigen as evidenced by normal CD4 and CD8 OVA specific T cell responses in mice lacking DC1s. However, DC1s are superior at presenting cell-associated antigen as evidenced by a lack of OVA specific CD4 and CD8 T cell priming in mice lacking DC1s. Furthermore, CD4 priming during tumor immune responses is absent when DC1s lack MHC class II. Our findings show that the DC subsets differ in the form of antigen that they present. DC1s present cell-associated material; whereas DC2s present soluble antigen.

Defense against attaching-and-effacing bacteria requires the sequential generation of interleukin 23 (IL-23) and IL-22 to induce protective mucosal responses. Although CD4(+) and NKp46(+) innate lymphoid cells (ILCs) are the critical source of IL-22 during infection, the precise source of IL-23 is unclear. We used genetic techniques to deplete mice of specific subsets of classical dendritic cells (cDCs) and analyzed immunity to the attaching-and-effacing pathogen Citrobacter rodentium. We found that the signaling receptor Notch2 controlled the terminal stage of cDC differentiation. Notch2-dependent intestinal CD11b(+) cDCs were an obligate source of IL-23 required for survival after infection with C. rodentium, but CD103(+) cDCs dependent on the transcription factor Batf3 were not. Our results demonstrate a nonredundant function for CD11b(+) cDCs in the response to pathogens in vivo.

In the past decade, mechanisms underlying allergic contact dermatitis have been intensively investigated by using contact hypersensitivity (CHS) models in mice. However, the regulatory mechanisms, which could be applicable for the treatment of allergic contact dermatitis, are still largely unknown. To determine the roles of B and T lymphocyte attenuator (BTLA), a CD28 family coinhibitory receptor, in hapten-induced CHS, BTLA-deficient (BTLA(-/-)) mice and littermate wild-type (WT) mice were subjected to DNFB-induced CHS, severe combined immunodeficient (SCID) mice were injected with CD4(+) T cells, and CD8(+) T cells from either WT mice or BTLA(-/-) mice were subjected to CHS. BTLA(-/-) mice showed enhanced DNFB-induced CHS and proliferation and IFN-γ production of CD8(+) T cells as compared with WT mice. SCID mice injected with WT CD4(+) T cells and BTLA(-/-) CD8(+) T cells exhibited more severe CHS as compared with those injected with WT CD4(+) T cells and WT CD8(+) T cells. On the other hand, SCID mice injected with BTLA(-/-) CD4(+) T cells and WT CD8(+) T cells exhibited similar CHS to those injected with WT CD4(+) T cells and WT CD8(+) T cells. Finally, to evaluate the therapeutic potential of an agonistic agent for BTLA on CHS, the effects of an agonistic anti-BTLA antibody (6A6) on CHS were examined. In vivo injection of 6A6 suppressed DNFB-induced CHS and IFN-γ production of CD8(+) T cells. Taken together, these results suggest that stimulation of BTLA with agonistic agents has therapeutic potential in CHS.

Variable strengths of T cell receptor (TCR) signaling can produce divergent outcomes, but the mechanism remains obscure. The abundance of the transcription factor IRF4 increases with TCR signal strength, but how this would induce distinct types of responses is unclear. We compared TH2 gene expression with BATF/IRF4 enhancer occupancy at varying strengths of TCR stimulation. BATF/IRF4-dependent genes clustered into distinct TCR-sensitivities. Enhancers exhibited a spectrum of occupancy by BATF/IRF4 ternary complex that correlated with TCR-sensitivity of gene expression. DNA sequences immediately flanking the previously defined AICE motif controlled the affinity for BATF/IRF4 for direct binding to DNA. ChIP-exo analysis allowed identification of a novel high-affinity AICE2 motif at a human SNP of CTLA4 associated with resistance to autoimmunity. Thus, the affinity of different enhancers for the BATF-IRF4 complex may underlie divergent signaling outcomes in response to various strengths of TCR signaling.

Using Mafb-driven Cre, Murphy et al. establish a new tool to discriminate macrophages from other myeloid cells in vivo., Current systems for conditional gene deletion within mouse macrophage lineages are limited by ectopic activity or low efficiency. In this study, we generated a Mafb-driven Cre strain to determine whether any dendritic cells (DCs) identified by Zbtb46-GFP expression originate from a Mafb-expressing population. Lineage tracing distinguished macrophages from classical DCs, neutrophils, and B cells in all organs examined. At steady state, Langerhans cells (LCs) were lineage traced but also expressed Zbtb46-GFP, a phenotype not observed in any other population. After exposure to house dust mite antigen, Zbtb46-negative CD64+ inflammatory cells infiltrating the lung were substantially lineage traced, but Zbtb46-positive CD64− cells were not. These results provide new evidence for the unique identity of LCs and challenge the notion that some inflammatory cells are a population of monocyte-derived DCs.

Helping T Helper Transcription Members of the interferon response family of transcription factors (IRFs) are specifically expressed in immune cells and are known to regulate their differentiation. IRF4 and IRF8 regulate gene expression by binding to other transcription factors, which results in their recruitment to composite motifs in the genome. Although the specific mechanism of how this regulation works in some immune cells is understood, how it occurs in T cells is not clear because the transcription factors that normally partner with IRFs are absent. Using genomic analysis, Glasmacher et al. (p. 975 , published online 13 September; see the Perspective by Martinez and Rao ) now identify IRF4–AP-1 composite elements in T helper 17 (T H 17) cells and show that IRF4 and the AP-1 factor Batf cooperatively assemble on a large array of genes required for T H 17 cell differentiation and function. Assembly of such heterodimers was also observed in T H 2 cells, B cells, and dendritic cells, which suggests the general importance of this motif in immune cell differentiation.

Interferon regulatory factor 4 (IRF4) is an IRF family transcription factor with critical roles in lymphoid development and in regulating the immune response. IRF4 binds DNA weakly owing to a carboxy-terminal auto-inhibitory domain, but cooperative binding with factors such as PU.1 or SPIB in B cells increases binding affinity, allowing IRF4 to regulate genes containing ETS-IRF composite elements (EICEs; 5'-GGAAnnGAAA-3'). Here we show that in mouse CD4(+) T cells, where PU.1/SPIB expression is low, and in B cells, where PU.1 is well expressed, IRF4 unexpectedly can cooperate with activator protein-1 (AP1) complexes to bind to AP1-IRF4 composite (5'-TGAnTCA/GAAA-3') motifs that we denote as AP1-IRF composite elements (AICEs). Moreover, BATF-JUN family protein complexes cooperate with IRF4 in binding to AICEs in pre-activated CD4(+) T cells stimulated with IL-21 and in T(H)17 differentiated cells. Importantly, BATF binding was diminished in Irf4(-/-) T cells and IRF4 binding was diminished in Batf(-/-) T cells, consistent with functional cooperation between these factors. Moreover, we show that AP1 and IRF complexes cooperatively promote transcription of the Il10 gene, which is expressed in T(H)17 cells and potently regulated by IL-21. These findings reveal that IRF4 can signal via complexes containing ETS or AP1 motifs depending on the cellular context, thus indicating new approaches for modulating IRF4-dependent transcription.

Myeloid ecotropic viral integration site 1 (Meis1) forms a heterodimer with Pbx1 that augments Hox-dependent gene expression and is associated with leukemogenesis and HSC self-renewal. Here we identified 2 independent actions of Meis1 in hematopoietic development: one regulating cellular proliferation and the other involved in megakaryocyte lineage development. First, we found that endogenous Mesp1 indirectly induces Meis1 and Meis2 in endothelial cells derived from embryonic stem cells. Overexpression of Meis1 and Meis2 greatly enhanced the formation of hematopoietic colonies from embryonic stem cells, with the exception of erythroid colonies, by maintaining hematopoietic progenitor cells in a state of proliferation. Second, overexpression of Meis1 repressed the development of early erythroid progenitors, acting in vivo at the megakaryocyte-erythroid progenitor stage to skew development away from erythroid generation and toward megakaryocyte development. This previously unrecognized action of Meis1 may explain the embryonic lethality observed in Meis1−/− mice that arises from failure of lymphatic-venous separation and can result as a consequence of defective platelet generation. These results show that Meis1 exerts 2 independent functions, with its role in proliferation of hematopoietic progenitors acting earlier in development from its influence on the fate choice at the megakaryocyte-erythroid progenitor between megakaryocytic and erythroid development.

The zinc finger transcription factor Zbtb46 specifically marks cDCs and their committed precursors and, when overexpressed in BM progenitors, promotes cDC development at the expense of granulocytes., Distinguishing dendritic cells (DCs) from other cells of the mononuclear phagocyte system is complicated by the shared expression of cell surface markers such as CD11c. In this study, we identified Zbtb46 (BTBD4) as a transcription factor selectively expressed by classical DCs (cDCs) and their committed progenitors but not by plasmacytoid DCs (pDCs), monocytes, macrophages, or other lymphoid or myeloid lineages. Using homologous recombination, we replaced the first coding exon of Zbtb46 with GFP to inactivate the locus while allowing detection of Zbtb46 expression. GFP expression in Zbtb46gfp/+ mice recapitulated the cDC-specific expression of the native locus, being restricted to cDC precursors (pre-cDCs) and lymphoid organ– and tissue-resident cDCs. GFP+ pre-cDCs had restricted developmental potential, generating cDCs but not pDCs, monocytes, or macrophages. Outside the immune system, Zbtb46 was expressed in committed erythroid progenitors and endothelial cell populations. Zbtb46 overexpression in bone marrow progenitor cells inhibited granulocyte potential and promoted cDC development, and although cDCs developed in Zbtb46gfp/gfp (Zbtb46 deficient) mice, they maintained expression of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor and leukemia inhibitory factor receptors, which are normally down-regulated in cDCs. Thus, Zbtb46 may help enforce cDC identity by restricting responsiveness to non-DC growth factors and may serve as a useful marker to identify rare cDC progenitors and distinguish between cDCs and other mononuclear phagocyte lineages.

Summary CD8α + dendritic cells (DCs) prime cytotoxic T lymphocytes during viral infections and produce interleukin-12 in response to pathogens. Although the loss of CD8α + DCs in Batf3 −/− mice increases their susceptibility to several pathogens, we observed that Batf3 −/− mice exhibited enhanced resistance to the intracellular bacterium Listeria monocytogenes . In wild-type mice, Listeria organisms, initially located in the splenic marginal zone, migrated to the periarteriolar lymphoid sheath (PALS) where they grew exponentially and induced widespread lymphocyte apoptosis. In Batf3 −/− mice, however, Listeria organisms remain trapped in the marginal zone, failed to traffic into the PALS, and were rapidly cleared by phagocytes. In addition, Batf3 −/− mice, which lacked the normal population of hepatic CD103 + peripheral DCs, also showed protection from liver infection. These results suggest that Batf3 -dependent CD8α + and CD103 + DCs provide initial cellular entry points within the reticuloendothelial system by which Listeria establishes productive infection.

The reprogramming of somatic cells to inducible pluripotent stem cells requires a mesenchymal-to-epithelial transition. While differentiating ESCs can undergo the reverse process or epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition (EMT), little is known about the role of EMT in ESC differentiation and fate commitment. Here, we show that Snail homolog 1 (Snail) is expressed during ESC differentiation and is capable of inducing EMT on day 2 of ESC differentiation. Induction of EMT by Snail promotes mesoderm commitment while repressing markers of the primitive ectoderm and epiblast. Snail's impact on differentiation can be partly explained through its regulation of a number of ESC-associated microRNAs, including the microRNA-200 (miR-200) family. The miR-200 family is normally expressed in ESCs but is downregulated in a Wnt-dependent manner during EMT. Maintenance of miR-200 expression stalls differentiating ESCs at the epiblast-like stem cell (EpiSC) stage. Consistent with a role for activin in maintaining the EpiSC state, we find that inhibition of activin signaling decreases miR-200 expression and allows EMT to proceed with a bias toward neuroectoderm commitment. Furthermore, miR-200 requires activin to efficiently maintain cells at the epiblast stage. Together, these findings demonstrate that Snail and miR-200 act in opposition to regulate EMT and exit from the EpiSC stage toward induction of germ layer fates. By modulating expression levels of Snail, activin, and miR-200, we are able to control the order in which cells undergo EMT and transition out of the EpiSC state.