3) were virtually identical to those of the second experiment

(data not shown). The TNFα response of WT, TLR4 KO, and MyD88 KO splenocytes stimulated with V. vulnificus cells or E. coli lipopolysaccharide was significantly different (P=0.0001). TNFα was readily detected in the supernatants from WT  mouse splenocytes stimulated with V. vulnificus cells or E. coli lipopolysaccharide (P=0.0001), but was below the assay detection limit in supernatants from WT, TLR4 KO, and MyD88 KO mouse splenocytes incubated C646 datasheet with medium only (MED). Vibrio vulnificus-induced TNFα production was predominantly MyD88 dependent because MyD88 KO mouse splenocytes produced a very low level of TNFα compared with WT mouse splenocytes (P=0.0001). Furthermore,

V. vulnificus-induced TNFα production was largely TLR4-mediated. Although TLR4 KO mouse splenocytes produced a low level of TNFα compared with WT mouse splenocytes (P=0.0001), the TNFα level was significant compared with MyD88 KO mouse splenocytes (P=0.0001). These results suggest that TLRs, other than TLR4, play only a limited role in the TNFα response of TLR4 KO mouse splenocytes stimulated with V. vulnificus. This finding is in contrast to that for TLR4 KO mouse blood in which a substantial, although significantly reduced, amount of TNFα was produced following V. vulnificus stimulation. Variations in TLR expression patterns and functional levels between splenocytes and white blood cells likely account drug discovery for the qualitative differences in TNFα production. However, if a differential TLR4 signaling response to V. vulnificus occurs in check details vivo, the contribution of TLR4 to the inflammatory response could vary depending on the site of infection (Gerold et al., 2007). To examine the in vivo role of MyD88 and TLR4 in the host defense to V. vulnificus infection, WT, MyD88 KO, and TLR4 KO

mice were infected by intraperitoneal injection of V. vulnificus ATCC 27562 cells and the survival of the mice was monitored for 48 h postinfection. Results are presented in Table 1. At a dose of 9 × 106V. vulnificus CFU, WT and MyD88 KO mice were not significantly different in their susceptibility to mortality with only two of 12 WT  mice and one of 10 MyD88 KO mice surviving upto 48 h. However, at a dose of 9 × 105V. vulnificus CFU, all (8 of WT mice survived upto 48 h postinfection, whereas only one of 11 MyD88 KO mice survived (P=0.0001; Fisher’s exact test). The significantly increased susceptibility of MyD88 KO mice compared with WT mice at the lower V. vulnificus dose demonstrates that MyD88 plays a key role in host resistance to V. vulnificus infection. In contrast to MyD88 KO mice, the resistance of TLR4 KO mice to lethal infection with 9 × 105V. vulnificus CFU was identical to that of WT  mice (Table 1). However, TLR4 KO mice were significantly more resistant than WT  mice (P=0.0045) or MyD88 KO mice (P=0.0012) to lethal infection with 9 × 106V. vulnificus CFU.