PSMB9, encoded in the major histocompatibility complex class II region, is another gene inducible by both Type I and II IFNs and is a constituent of the immunoproteosome [37–39]. This gene facilitates a link between the innate and adaptive immune response since

site directed mutagenesis studies have revealed a role for PSMB9 in antigen processing and presentation [40]. PSMB9 was the only ISG that was expressed at significantly Navitoclax supplier higher levels in DBA/2 mice at both day 10 (Additional file 1: Figure S3A) and 14 (Figure 7), which suggests that the protein product of this gene may play a key role in resistance to C. immitis infection. IRGM1 is particularly noteworthy since it belongs to a family of immunity-related GTPases selleck inhibitor whose other members, IRGM2 and IRGM3 (or IGTP), were also expressed to a greater extent in resistant DBA/2 compared to susceptible C57BL/6 mice (Figure 2). IRGM1-deficient mice are more susceptible to infection with Mycobacterium tuberculosis, M. avium, Listeria monocytogenes and Salmonella enterica serovar Typhimurium, as assessed by both mouse survival and bacterial loads in tissues, whereas IRGM3-deficient mice exhibit normal resistance [41, 42]. In contrast, both IRGM1 and 3 are required

for IFN-γ modulated control of Toxoplasma gondii in murine macrophages [43]. It appears that IRGM1 is critical for normal motility of activated macrophages in mouse models suggesting a pivotal role for this protein in the innate response to infection in vivo[44]. The relevance of the IRGM family to human coccidioidomycosis is unclear because the single gene in this family in humans, IRGM, is considerably truncated and is not regulated Cyclin-dependent kinase 3 by IFN-γ [41]. However, IRGM does play a role in human innate immunity since it is necessary for the execution of the autophagic pathway in macrophages and the control of intracellular Mycobacteria[45]. Greater expression of IFNG and IL17A were detected in DBA/2 mice at day 15 post-infection using

the Mouse Common Cytokines Gene Array (Additional file 1: Figure S2). It was therefore surprising that microarray analysis did not detect differential expression of these cytokines between mice strains at days 14 and 16 (Figures 2 and 3), but RT-qPCR analysis was able to do so (Figure 7 and Additional file 1: Figure S3). It is unclear why microarray analysis was unable to detect the expression of these cytokines especially since IFNG expression had been detected using the same array platform (MGU74Av2) in lung tissue from C57BL/6 mice exposed to lipopolysaccharide (LPS) [46]. This array platform was designed using the C57BL/6 genome and thus it is possible that these cytokines were not detected because they were not expressed to high levels in C57BL/6 by C.