{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.0345821325648415, 'fraction_numerical': 0.013448607108549471, 'mean_word_length': 5.144542772861357, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Difference in antigen presentation pathways between cortical and medullary thymic epithelial cells

Antigen presentation by thymic epithelial cells (TEC) to T cells that undergo maturation is one of the major events in the selection of the T cell repertoire. We have already reported that medullary TEC lines (mTEC) established from newborn C57BL/6 (H‐2b) mice are able to present a soluble antigen, ovalbumin (OVA), to OVA‐specific, I‐Ab restricted helper T cell lines but cortical TEC (cTEC) lines are not (Mizuochi, T. et al., J. Exp. Med. 1992. 175: 1601). In this report, to clarify the cause of this difference, we analyzed the biochemical nature as well as the distribution of both major histocompatibility complex (MHC) class II molecules and invariant chains (Ii) in both TEC by immunoprecipitation and laser confocal scanning microscopic analysis, as well as the expression of mRNA encoding H‐2Ma or H‐2Mb. Our results demonstrate that cTEC and mTEC are both able to present peptide antigens to peptide‐specific, I‐Ab‐restricted helper T cell hybridoma and are able to present class II MHC alloantigens to an I‐Ab‐specific T cell line, that mRNA for H‐2Ma and H‐2Mb are expressed in both TEC, that cTEC and mTEC apparently incorporate tetramethylrhodamine isothiocyanate‐labeled OVA in the same manner, and that the SDS‐stable MHC class II molecules, onto which peptides were loaded, are formed in both cTEC and mTEC. However, these molecules were more rapidly degraded in mTEC than in cTEC. In addition, two Ii‐derived polypeptides of approximately 21 kDa and 10 kDa were precipitated by the anti‐class II monoclonal antibody Y3P; 10‐kDa polypeptides were detected in the both TEC, while 21‐kDa polypeptides were detected only in cTEC. Finally, β chains of MHC class II with less sialylated oligosaccharides were precipitated from the cell surface of cTEC. Taken together, these results suggest that there are substantial differences in the antigen‐presenting pathways of cTEC and mTEC, and these difference might be responsible for T cell selection events in the thymus.