Back

Cognate T-cell labeling by conventional and unconventional antigen-presenting cells in vivo using a modular SrtA-based toolkit

Samson, G. P. B.; Farsakoglu, Y.; Lenaerts, A.; Horvath, E.; Finke, D.; Turchinovich, G.

2026-09-23 immunology
10.64898/2026.09.17.752294 bioRxiv
Show abstract

While different antigen-presenting cell (APC) populations can drive divergent T-cell fates even when presenting identical antigens (Ags), our ability to trace these specific in vivo interaction histories remains constrained by a lack of compatible molecular tools. Here, we describe an enhanced Labeling Immune Partnerships by SorTagging Intercellular Contacts (LIPSTIC) platform utilizing the immunologically inert human CD58/CD2 receptor-ligand pair (SrtA-hCD58/G5-hCD2). This system provides a modular alternative to previous LIPSTIC animal models and enables the detection and recovery of T cells following Ag-dependent interactions with distinct APC populations in vitro and in vivo. We applied this approach to interrogate the role of type 3 innate lymphoid cells (ILC3s), an unconventional ROR{gamma}t Ag-presenting population whose role in shaping Ag-specific T cells in vivo remain poorly defined. Modified LIPSTIC successfully recorded cognate interactions between ILC3s and naive CD4 T cells in the spleen and enabled direct comparison with CD4+ T cells activated by conventional dendritic cells (cDCs). Although interactions with ILC3s resulted in lower frequency of in vivo-labeled T cells than cDC2s, CD4+ T cells showed comparable cell division and expression of activation markers irrespectively of an APC type. Together, these findings establish SrtA-hCD58/G5-hCD2 as a versatile LIPSTIC receptor-ligand pair for tracking cell-cell interactions in vivo and provide a robust tool for studying how APC identity influences Ag-specific T-cell responses.

Matching journals

The top 8 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.