Fluorescence microscopy observation:
A general overview of the circumstances that happened to all treated groups in three-time points was shown in figure 1 and it was tried to depict the significant changes in figure 2. In NS group (Neu + SGH), although some changes were observable in each three time points compared to the negative control, chromatin extrusion as a sign of NETosis, was not very evident (Fig 1 and 2-d). But, in NL (Neu + L.major) and NLS (Neu + L.major + SGH) groups, two hours after exposure, the confrontation between neutrophils and promastigotes was one by one and a promastigote was arrested with a neutrophil (Fig 1 and Fig 2-a). Furthermore, at 4 and 6 hours later, this interaction increased and an accumulation of neutrophils and parasites was observed (Fig 1 and 2-b and 2-c). This event was less in NL group and much more significant in NLS group (Fig 1).
Fig 1: General overview of fluorescence microscopy using AO/EB staining to evaluate NETs formation.
NS group showed less changes as NETosis compared to NL and NLS groups, however, the changes in NS distinguished it from negative control. In two other groups, particularly NLS, the interaction between neutrophils, parasites and SGH increased over time. (Original photo, magnification 400X)
Fig 2: Fluorescence microscopy-based assessment of NETs formation.
a, b, c) Neutrophil's interaction with promastigotes and SGH in NLS group respectively in 2, 4, 6 h post exposure d) Neutrophil intracellular changes in NS group 6 hours post exposure (Original magnification 400X)
Optical microscopy observations:
Along with the AO/EB staining method, the smears were prepared and stained by Giemsa; the general overview is shown in figure 3 which allows comparison between different groups, and the considerable changes was demonstrated in figure 4. It almost resembles the outcomes of the fluorescence microscopy technique. A small percentage of cells in NS group developed NETs, and apparently it was not much different from the negative control (Fig 3 and 4-a) But, in NL and especially NLS group, the interaction of neutrophils and promastigotes gradually increased over time and more neutrophils contributed to trapping the parasites during NETosis (Fig 3 and 4-b, 4-c) (Table 3)
Fig 3: A comparative, general view of Giemsa staining among different groups (Images are captured with a 100× magnification lens)
In NLS group, typical NETosis was observable and well-defined one was showed in Fig 4-d.
Fig 4: Giemsa staining of NETosis in NS, NL and NLS groups. a) In NS group, no sign of NETosis was evident aafter 4 hours post exposure in the most neutrophils, b & c) NETs formation 6 hours after exposure in NL group and in NLS, respectively. d) representative image of NETosis in NLS group 4 hours after treatment.
Table 3: The percentage of neutrophils under NETosis in NS, NL and NLS groups after different exposure times
Groups After exposure
|
NS
|
NL
|
NLS
|
2 hours
|
8.8 %
|
15.8 %
|
17.5 %
|
4 hours
|
13.8 %
|
18.3 %
|
31.4 %
|
6 hours
|
17.6 %
|
26.1 %
|
38.8 %
|
Scanning electron microscopy
In SEM, similar to the staining methods, NETs formation was typical in NLS group and widespread NETs with trapped promastigotes were observed frequently (Fig 5). It should be mentioned that, NETs distribution was not observed in NL and NS groups as it was in NLS.
Fig 5: Scanning electron microscopy of different stages of NETosis in NLS group (4 h post exposure)
A) Initial stage of NETosis in confrontation of neutrophil with parasite and SGH, B & C) progression of NETs formation and clear extrusion of chromatin, D) final stage of NETs, arrows indicate promastigotes
Expression level of NE, MPO and MMP9 genes:
The expression of three different genes (NE, MPO and MMP9) was evaluated in all treated groups as well as in the control groups at 2, 4, and 6 hours post-exposure. As expected, the expression of these genes increased over time in the positive control (Neu + PMA) (Fig 6-A, 7-A, 8-A). The trend of the expression level of NE, MPO and MMP9 was similar in all treated groups except in two, gene expression trend increased at 2, and 4 hours after exposure and then decreased at 6 hours post-exposure (Fig 6-B, 6-C and Fig 7-B, 7-C and Fig 8-B, 8-C, 8-D). In two exceptional groups that belong to NLS (Neu + L.major + SGH) the trend of MPO and NE expression was different. In these groups there was an increasing trend at 2 hours, then a decrease at 4 hours, and an elevation again at 6 h post exposure (Fig 6-D, Fig 7-D).
Fig 6) Comparative of Neutrophil Elastase (NE) gene expression between different groups in three time points A) Increasing level of NE gene expression in positive control group at 2, 4 and 6 hours post exposure, B &C) Increasing level of NE gene expression at 2 and 4 and decreasing at 6 hours post exposure in NS & NL groups respectively D) Elevating of NE gene expression at 2h then decreasing at 4h and increasing again at 6 hours post exposure in NLS group, (p < 0.05 = *, p < 0.01 = **, p < 0.001 = ***, p < 0.0001 = ****)
Fig 7) Comparative of Myeloperoxidase (MPO) gene expression between different groups in three time points A) Increasing level of MPO gene expression in positive control group at 2, 4 and 6 hours post exposure, B &C) Increasing level of MPO gene expression at 2h and 4h and decreasing at 6 hours post exposure in NS & NL groups respectively D) Elevating of MPO gene expression at 2h then decreasing at 4h and increasing again at 6 hours post exposure in NLS group, (p < 0.05 = *, p < 0.01 = **, p < 0.001 = ***, p < 0.0001 = ****)
Fig 8: Comparative of Matrix Metalloproteinase 9 (MMP9) gene expression between different groups in three time points
A Increasing level of MMP9 gene expression in positive control group at 2, 4 and 6 hours post exposure, B, C & D) Increasing level of MMP9 gene expression at 2h and 4h and decreasing at 6 hours post exposure in NS, NL & NLS groups respectively, (p < 0.05 = *, p < 0.01 = **, p < 0.001 = ***, p < 0.0001 = ****)