We also examined gene expression

by peripheral blood monocytes from injured animals to assess the expression state of monocytes prior to their infiltration into the brain and differentiation into macrophages. As a control, peripheral blood monocytes from uninjured animals were also analyzed. It was not technically feasible to perform arrays on brain macrophages from sham animals, because there were insufficient cells to generate adequate amounts of RNA. Pairwise analyses of differentially expressed genes showed that Arg1+ and Arg1− brain macrophages PCI-32765 datasheet differed in the expression of 1360 genes, and both populations showed even greater differences from TBI monocytes (11 799 genes differed between Arg1+ macrophages and TBI monocytes; 9932 genes differed between Arg1− macrophages) (Fig. 4A). TBI monocytes CHIR-99021 order displayed few differences compared with normal monocytes

(15 genes) (Fig. 4A). Principal component analysis (PCA), an analytical technique that uses dimensionality reduction to identify dominant patterns within highly multivariate data, was performed. PCA confirmed that distinctions separating macrophages from monocytes were the largest source of variance in the dataset (principal component (PC) 1), and that the monocyte populations had fewer differences that were not represented in either of the top two PCs (Fig. 4B). PCA also confirmed that Arg1+ and Arg1− brain macrophages represented two distinct populations, representing the second most significant PC (PC2) (Fig. 4B). Although robust Arg1 expression is often used as IMP dehydrogenase a marker for alternative activation of macrophages, we observed that Arg1+ and Arg1− brain macrophages after TBI did not represent clear M2 and M1 macrophages, respectively, but instead each subset expressed markers of both

M1 and M2 cells. Comparison of gene expression between Arg1+ and Arg1− macrophages confirmed that the former expressed much higher levels of Arg1 (eightfold) as well as higher levels of Mrc1 (2.4-fold), which encodes the mannose receptor/CD206 [17] (Fig. 5). Increased expression of these two genes is a feature of M2 cells. The expression of other genes, however, indicated that Arg1+ macrophages were not identical to M2 cells. For example, Arg1+ macrophages preferentially expressed Nos2 (2.1-fold), an M1-associated gene [17] (Fig. 5). Similarly, although Arg1− macrophages had increased expression of Il1b (IL-1β) (2.4-fold), they also preferentially expressed signature M2 markers, notably Retnla (resistin-like α) (2.1-fold) and Clec10a (C-type lectin domain family 10, member A)/CD301 (2.9-fold) [17, 37] (Fig. 5).