Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2020 Aug 1.
Published in final edited form as: J Immunol. 2019 Jun 26;203(3):686–695. doi: 10.4049/jimmunol.1801540

Figure 3.

Figure 3.

Foxn1ΔB/ΔB mice have mild mTEC defects but no apparent defect in T cell populations or cell numbers. Absolute numbers of total TEC (A) and cTEC and mTEC (B). (C) Representative flow plots of CD45-EpCAM+Ly51-UEA-1+ gated mTECs showing MHCIIhiCD80+ mTEChi vs MHCIIloCD80- mTEClo and calculations of overall cell numbers. (D) EpCAM+CD45- cTEC (Ly51+UEA-1-) and mTEC (Ly51-UEA-1-) were sorted and Foxn1 expression was measured by qRT-PCR. (E) Immunofluorescence analysis of thymic sections from indicated mice for β5t (green), Aire (magenta), and UEA-1 (blue). Scale bars indicate 100 μm. (F) Flow cytometry analysis of Aire expression in mTEChi (EpCAM+CD45-UEA-1+Ly51-MHCIIhiCD80+). (G) Lin-TCRβ-CD4-CD8- gated representative flow cytometry plots and overall cell numbers for ETPs (KithiCD25-), DN2 (KithiCD25+), DN3 (Kit-CD25+), and DN4 (Kit-CD25-). (H) Lin- gated thymocytes showing CD4 and CD8 profiles and overall cell numbers for each population. (I) Flow cytometry of thymocytes showing CD5 expression on DAPI- DP, TCRβhi SP4 and TCRβhi SP8 cells (J) Flow cytometry analysis and quantification of Tregs (CD4+CD8-TCRβ+CD25+FoxP3+) in the thymus. All bar plots show mean ± SEM for n = 4–7 mice (6–8 weeks old) per genotype. ANOVA was performed to determine statistical significance. *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01.