Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Article
  • Published:

The transcription factor XBP1 is selectively required for eosinophil differentiation

Abstract

The transcription factor XBP1 has been linked to the development of highly secretory tissues such as plasma cells and Paneth cells, yet its function in granulocyte maturation has remained unknown. Here we discovered an unexpectedly selective and absolute requirement for XBP1 in eosinophil differentiation without an effect on the survival of basophils or neutrophils. Progenitors of myeloid cells and eosinophils selectively activated the endoribonuclease IRE1α and spliced Xbp1 mRNA without inducing parallel endoplasmic reticulum (ER) stress signaling pathways. Without XBP1, nascent eosinophils exhibited massive defects in the post-translational maturation of key granule proteins required for survival, and these unresolvable structural defects fed back to suppress critical aspects of the transcriptional developmental program. Hence, we present evidence that granulocyte subsets can be distinguished by their differential reliance on secretory-pathway homeostasis.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Rent or buy this article

Prices vary by article type

from$1.95

to$39.95

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Figure 1: XBP1 is required for eosinophil differentiation.
Figure 2: XBP1 is potently activated during eosinophil differentiation in vivo and is required upon commitment to the eosinophil lineage.
Figure 3: XBP1 is a cell-intrinsic requirement for eosinophil development.
Figure 4: Xbp1s can restore eosinophil development in Xbp1-deficient bone marrow cultures, but Xbp1u cannot.
Figure 5: The GMP-differentiation capacity is not affected by Xbp1 deficiency.
Figure 6: Loss of XBP1-mediated protein-quality-control mechanisms interferes with eosinophil transcriptional identity.
Figure 7: Xbp1 deficiency causes defects in granule-protein maturation and secretory-pathway ultrastructure.
Figure 8: Xbp1 deficiency prevents the accumulation of GATA-1 in eosinophils through an indirect mechanism.

Similar content being viewed by others

Accession codes

Primary accessions

Gene Expression Omnibus

Referenced accessions

Gene Expression Omnibus

References

  1. Calfon, M. et al. IRE1 couples endoplasmic reticulum load to secretory capacity by processing the XBP-1 mRNA. Nature 415, 92–96 (2002).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Harding, H.P., Zhang, Y. & Ron, D. Protein translation and folding are coupled by an endoplasmic-reticulum-resident kinase. Nature 397, 271–274 (1999).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Lu, P.D., Harding, H.P. & Ron, D. Translation reinitiation at alternative open reading frames regulates gene expression in an integrated stress response. J. Cell Biol. 167, 27–33 (2004).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Lee, A.H., Iwakoshi, N.N. & Glimcher, L.H. XBP-1 regulates a subset of endoplasmic reticulum resident chaperone genes in the unfolded protein response. Mol. Cell. Biol. 23, 7448–7459 (2003).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Shoulders, M.D. et al. Stress-independent activation of XBP1s and/or ATF6 reveals three functionally diverse ER proteostasis environments. Cell Rep. 3, 1279–1292 (2013).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  6. Reimold, A.M. et al. Plasma cell differentiation requires the transcription factor XBP-1. Nature 412, 300–307 (2001).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Kaser, A. et al. XBP1 links ER stress to intestinal inflammation and confers genetic risk for human inflammatory bowel disease. Cell 134, 743–756 (2008).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. Lee, A.H., Chu, G.C., Iwakoshi, N.N. & Glimcher, L.H. XBP-1 is required for biogenesis of cellular secretory machinery of exocrine glands. EMBO J. 24, 4368–4380 (2005).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. Iwakoshi, N.N., Pypaert, M. & Glimcher, L.H. The transcription factor XBP-1 is essential for the development and survival of dendritic cells. J. Exp. Med. 204, 2267–2275 (2007).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  10. Amulic, B., Cazalet, C., Hayes, G.L., Metzler, K.D. & Zychlinsky, A. Neutrophil function: from mechanisms to disease. Annu. Rev. Immunol. 30, 459–489 (2012).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Furuta, G.T., Atkins, F.D., Lee, N.A. & Lee, J.J. Changing roles of eosinophils in health and disease. Ann. Allergy Asthma Immunol. 113, 3–8 (2014).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  12. Karasuyama, H., Mukai, K., Obata, K., Tsujimura, Y. & Wada, T. Nonredundant roles of basophils in immunity. Annu. Rev. Immunol. 29, 45–69 (2011).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Wu, D. et al. Eosinophils sustain adipose alternatively activated macrophages associated with glucose homeostasis. Science 332, 243–247 (2011).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Qiu, Y. et al. Eosinophils and type 2 cytokine signaling in macrophages orchestrate development of functional beige fat. Cell 157, 1292–1308 (2014).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. Heredia, J.E. et al. Type 2 innate signals stimulate fibro/adipogenic progenitors to facilitate muscle regeneration. Cell 153, 376–388 (2013).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. Simson, L. et al. Regulation of carcinogenesis by IL-5 and CCL11: a potential role for eosinophils in tumor immune surveillance. J. Immunol. 178, 4222–4229 (2007).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Chu, V.T. et al. Eosinophils are required for the maintenance of plasma cells in the bone marrow. Nat. Immunol. 12, 151–159 (2011).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Bainton, D.F. & Farquhar, M.G. Segregation and packaging of granule enzymes in eosinophilic leukocytes. J. Cell Biol. 45, 54–73 (1970).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  19. Iwasaki, H. et al. Identification of eosinophil lineage-committed progenitors in the murine bone marrow. J. Exp. Med. 201, 1891–1897 (2005).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. Voehringer, D., van Rooijen, N. & Locksley, R.M. Eosinophils develop in distinct stages and are recruited to peripheral sites by alternatively activated macrophages. J. Leukoc. Biol. 81, 1434–1444 (2007).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Martinon, F., Chen, X., Lee, A.H. & Glimcher, L.H. TLR activation of the transcription factor XBP1 regulates innate immune responses in macrophages. Nat. Immunol. 11, 411–418 (2010).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  22. Ma, Y., Shimizu, Y., Mann, M.J., Jin, Y. & Hendershot, L.M. Plasma cell differentiation initiates a limited ER stress response by specifically suppressing the PERK-dependent branch of the unfolded protein response. Cell Stress Chaperones 15, 281–293 (2010).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Doyle, A.D. et al. Homologous recombination into the eosinophil peroxidase locus generates a strain of mice expressing Cre recombinase exclusively in eosinophils. J. Leukoc. Biol. 94, 17–24 (2013).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  24. de Bruin, A.M. et al. Eosinophil differentiation in the bone marrow is inhibited by T cell-derived IFN-γ. Blood 116, 2559–2569 (2010).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Dyer, K.D. et al. Functionally competent eosinophils differentiated ex vivo in high purity from normal mouse bone marrow. J. Immunol. 181, 4004–4009 (2008).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Cross, B.C. et al. The molecular basis for selective inhibition of unconventional mRNA splicing by an IRE1-binding small molecule. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 109, E869–E878 (2012).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  27. Tominaga, A. et al. Transgenic mice expressing a B cell growth and differentiation factor gene (interleukin 5) develop eosinophilia and autoantibody production. J. Exp. Med. 173, 429–437 (1991).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Acosta-Alvear, D. et al. XBP1 controls diverse cell type- and condition-specific transcriptional regulatory networks. Mol. Cell 27, 53–66 (2007).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Uhm, T.G., Kim, B.S. & Chung, I.Y. Eosinophil development, regulation of eosinophil-specific genes, and role of eosinophils in the pathogenesis of asthma. Allergy Asthma Immunol. Res. 4, 68–79 (2012).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Satoh, T. et al. Critical role of Trib1 in differentiation of tissue-resident M2-like macrophages. Nature 495, 524–528 (2013).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Iwasaki, H. et al. The order of expression of transcription factors directs hierarchical specification of hematopoietic lineages. Genes Dev. 20, 3010–3021 (2006).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  32. Fulkerson, P.C., Schollaert, K.L., Bouffi, C. & Rothenberg, M.E. IL-5 triggers a cooperative cytokine network that promotes eosinophil precursor maturation. J. Immunol. 193, 4043–4052 (2014).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Han, J. et al. ER-stress-induced transcriptional regulation increases protein synthesis leading to cell death. Nat. Cell Biol. 15, 481–490 (2013).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  34. Fujiwara, T. et al. Discovering hematopoietic mechanisms through genome-wide analysis of GATA factor chromatin occupancy. Mol. Cell 36, 667–681 (2009).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  35. Tothova, Z. et al. FoxOs are critical mediators of hematopoietic stem cell resistance to physiologic oxidative stress. Cell 128, 325–339 (2007).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Todd, D.J. et al. XBP1 governs late events in plasma cell differentiation and is not required for antigen-specific memory B cell development. J. Exp. Med. 206, 2151–2159 (2009).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  37. Acharya, K.R. & Ackerman, S.J. Eosinophil granule proteins: form and function. J. Biol. Chem. 289, 17406–17415 (2014).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  38. Kroegel, C., Costabel, U. & Matthys, H. Mechanism of membrane damage mediated by eosinophil major basic protein. Lancet 1, 1380–1381 (1987).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Barker, R.L., Gleich, G.J. & Pease, L.R. Acidic precursor revealed in human eosinophil granule major basic protein cDNA. J. Exp. Med. 168, 1493–1498 (1988).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Soragni, A. et al. Toxicity of eosinophil MBP is repressed by intracellular crystallization and promoted by extracellular aggregation. Mol. Cell 57, 1011–1021 (2015).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  41. Grouls, V. & Helpap, B. Selective staining of eosinophils and their immature precursors in tissue sections and autoradiographs with Congo red. Stain Technol. 56, 323–325 (1981).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Brown, S.D. & Moore, M.W. The International Mouse Phenotyping Consortium: past and future perspectives on mouse phenotyping. Mammalian Genome 23, 632–640 (2012).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  43. Doyle, A.D. et al. Expression of the secondary granule proteins major basic protein 1 (MBP-1) and eosinophil peroxidase (EPX) is required for eosinophilopoiesis in mice. Blood 122, 781–790 (2013).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  44. Schwanhäusser, B. et al. Global quantification of mammalian gene expression control. Nature 473, 337–342 (2011).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Iwakoshi, N.N. et al. Plasma cell differentiation and the unfolded protein response intersect at the transcription factor XBP-1. Nat. Immunol. 4, 321–329 (2003).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Iwawaki, T., Akai, R., Yamanaka, S. & Kohno, K. Function of IRE1 alpha in the placenta is essential for placental development and embryonic viability. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 106, 16657–16662 (2009).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  47. Wang, H.B., Ghiran, I., Matthaei, K. & Weller, P.F. Airway eosinophils: allergic inflammation recruited professional antigen-presenting cells. J. Immunol. 179, 7585–7592 (2007).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Jurczak, M.J. et al. Dissociation of inositol-requiring enzyme (IRE1α)-mediated c-Jun N-terminal kinase activation from hepatic insulin resistance in conditional X-box-binding protein-1 (XBP1) knock-out mice. J. Biol. Chem. 287, 2558–2567 (2012).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Anders, S., Pyl, P.T. & Huber, W. HTSeq-a Python framework to work with high-throughput sequencing data. Bioinformatics 31, 166–169 (2015).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Anders, S. & Huber, W. Differential expression analysis for sequence count data. Genome Biol. 11, R106 (2010).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank L. Cohen-Gould for assistance with electron microscopy; J. McCormick for assistance with cell sorting; the Starr Foundation Tri-Institutional Stem Cell Derivation Laboratory and Flow Cytometry and Microscopy Core facility for technical assistance, the Weill Cornell Epigenomics Core facility for library preparation and RNA sequencing; J. Cubillos-Ruiz and C. Tan for technical assistance; A. Espinosa, S. Hai and members of the Glimcher laboratory for suggestions and critical reading of this manuscript; A. Doyle for conversations; J.J. Lee and N.A. Lee (Mayo Clinic) for eoCRE mice, antibody to PRG2 and antibody to EPX; C. Gerard (Children's Hospital Medical, Boston) for Il5-transgenic BALB/c mice; and T. Iwawaki (Gunma University) for Ern1f/f mice. Supported by the US National Institutes of Health (R01DK082448 to L.H.G., R01HL095699 to L.A.S. and R37AI020241 to P.F.W.).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

S.E.B. and L.H.G. designed and analyzed the experiments; S.E.B. conducted experiments and wrote the manuscript; R.L. performed high-resolution immunofluorescence microscopy imaging. S.A. contributed to the design of certain experiments; A.-H.L. provided reagents; and L.A.S., P.F.W. and L.H.G., supervised the research and edited the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Laurie H Glimcher.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

L.H.G. is on the board of directors of and holds equity in Bristol Myers Squibb Pharmaceutical Company.

Integrated supplementary information

Supplementary Figure 1 Xbp1 deficiency does not alter hematopoietic cellularity.

Absolute number of leukocytes obtained from bone marrow (BM, 2 tibias and 2 femurs per mouse) of Xbp1f/f and Xbp1Vav1 mice (n = 3 per genotype). Each symbol represents an individual mouse; small horizontal lines indicate the mean (± s.e.m.). NS, not significant (P > 0.05, Student’s t-test). Data are representative of at least three independent experiments with at least three mice per genotype per experiment.

Source data

Supplementary Figure 2 Xbp1 deficiency minimally influences most leukocyte subsets.

(a) Flow cytometry of splenic CD3+ T cells and B220+ B cells in Xbp1f/f and Xbp1Vav1 mice. Numbers adjacent to outlined areas indicate percent CD3+B220 T cells (top left) or CD3B220+ B cells (bottom right). (b,c) Frequency of T cells (b) and B cells (c) in spleens of Xbp1f/f and Xbp1Vav1 mice (n = 3 per genotype). (d) Flow cytometry of splenic FcɛRI+ basophils in Xbp1f/f and Xbp1Vav1 mice. Numbers adjacent to outlined areas indicate percent SSClowFcɛRI+ basophils gated on non-B and non-T cells. (e) Splenic basophil frequency in Xbp1f/f and Xbp1Vav1 mice (n = 3 per genotype). (f) Flow cytometry of splenic CD11b+Ly6G+ neutrophils in Xbp1f/f and Xbp1Vav1 mice. Numbers adjacent to outlined areas indicate percent CD11b+Ly6G+ neutrophils. (g) Splenic neutrophil frequency in Xbp1f/f and Xbp1Vav1 mice (n = 3 per genotype). (h) Flow cytometry of splenic CD11b+F4/80+ macrophages in Xbp1f/f and Xbp1Vav1 mice. Numbers adjacent to outlined areas indicate percent CD11b+F4/80+ macrophages. (i) Splenic macrophage frequency in Xbp1f/f and Xbp1Vav1 mice (n = 3 per genotype). (j) Flow cytometry of splenic CD11c+ dendritic cells (DCs) in Xbp1f/f and Xbp1Vav1 mice. Numbers adjacent to outlined areas indicate percent B220CD11c+ macrophages. (k) Splenic DC frequency in Xbp1f/f and Xbp1Vav1 mice (n = 3 per genotype). Each symbol (b,c,e,g,i,k) represents an individual mouse; small horizontal lines indicate the mean (± s.e.m.). NS, not significant (P > 0.05); *P < 0.05 (Student’s t-test). Data are representative of at least three independent experiments with at least three mice per group in each.

Source data

Supplementary Figure 3 The Vav1-Cre transgene does not affect eosinophil differentiation.

Flow cytometry of CCR3+Siglec-F+ eosinophils from the blood of Xbp1f/f, Xbp1WT/WT Vav1-Cre+, and Xbp1Vav1 mice (n = 2 mice per group). Numbers adjacent to outlined areas indicate percent CCR3+Siglec-F+ eosinophils. Data are representative of at least 2 independent experiments with at least two mice per group in each.

Supplementary Figure 4 Cre expressed from the Vav1-Cre transgene results in efficient deletion of Xbp1 in basophils, neutrophils and GMPs.

(a,b,c) Quantitative PCR analysis of the floxed Xbp1 exon 2 in bone marrow basophils (a), neutrophils (b), and GMPs (c) sorted from Xbp1f/f and Xbp1Vav1 mice (n = 3 mice per genotype). Results were normalized to those of Actb and are presented relative to those of Xbp1f/f cells. *P < 0.05 and **P < 0.01 (Student’s t-test). Data are from one experiment (a,b; mean and s.e.m.) or are representative of more than three experiments with three mice per genotype (c; mean and s.e.m.).

Source data

Supplementary Figure 5 Inhibition of IRE1α does not affect the survival of mature eosinophils.

(a) Flow cytometry of annexin-V and propidium iodide (PI) staining of Siglec-F+SSChi bone marrow cells after 24 h in vitro incubation with vehicle dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO) or 20 μM of the IRE1α inhibitor 4μ8C. Numbers adjacent to outlined areas indicate percent PI+Annexin-V+ late apoptotic eosinophils (top right), PIAnnexin-V+ early apoptotic eosinophils (bottom right), or PIAnnexin-V live eosinophils. (b) Frequency of eosinophils (eos) of total bone marrow cells after 24 h in vitro incubation with DMSO or 20 μM 4μ8C (n = 3 cultures per condition). (c) Percent viability of eosinophils from bone marrow cultures after 24 h in vitro incubation with DMSO or 20 μM 4μ8C (n = 3 cultures per condition). Each symbol (b,c) represents an individual mouse; small horizontal lines indicate the mean (± s.e.m.). NS, not significant (P > 0.05, Student’s t-test). Data are representative of two independent experiments with three independent biological replicates per condition.

Source data

Supplementary Figure 6 Overexpression of GATA-2 in GMPs drives commitment to the eosinophil lineage.

(a) Microscopy of GMPs transduced with GFP control (GFP-RV, ‘Control’) or GATA-2 expressing (GATA-2-RV, ‘GATA-2 TD’) retroviruses after indicated timepoints in culture. Scale bars, 5 μm. (b) Quantitative PCR analysis of Prg2 and Epx in GMPs transduced as in a after 96 h in culture; results were normalized to those of Actb (n = 4 cultures per virus). (c) Microscopy of GATA-2-transduced Xbp1f/f GMPs and GATA-2-transduced Xbp1Vav1 GMPs after 96 h in culture. Scale bars, 5 μm. ***P < 0.0001 (Student’s t-test). Data are representative of two independent experiments with at least three independent biological replicates per condition (ac; mean and s.e.m. in b).

Source data

Supplementary information

Supplementary Text and Figures

Supplementary Figures 1–6 (PDF 2634 kb)

Supplementary Table 1

Full DESeq transcriptome statistical analysis results comparing Xbp1f/f and Xbp1Vav1 GMPs (XLSX 1895 kb)

Supplementary Table 2

Enriched gene ontology categories and predicted upstream transcriptional regulators from IPA analyses comparing freshly sorted Xbp1f/f GMPs to Xbp1Vav1 GMPs or GATA2-transduced Xbp1f/f GMPs to GATA2-transduced Xbp1Vav1 GMPs 48 hours after infection (XLSX 64 kb)

Supplementary Table 3

Full DESeq transcriptome statistical analysis results comparing GATA2-transduced Xbp1f/f and Xbp1Vav1 GMPs 48 hours after infection. (XLSX 2186 kb)

Supplementary Table 4

Table of RT-qPCR primers used in this study (XLSX 54 kb)

Source data

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Bettigole, S., Lis, R., Adoro, S. et al. The transcription factor XBP1 is selectively required for eosinophil differentiation. Nat Immunol 16, 829–837 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1038/ni.3225

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/ni.3225

This article is cited by

Search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing