Prdm1 facilitates the intercellular communication between liver group 1 ILCs and macrophages. (A and B) UMAP visualization of monocyte-derived macrophages (MDMs) and Kupffer cells (KCs) cluster (A) between Prdm1+/+ and Prdm1ΔNcr1 (B). (C) Proportions of total macrophages in liver immune cells (left), and proportions of MDMs and KCs among total macrophages in different genotypes (510 cells in Prdm1+/+, and 624 cells in Prdm1ΔNcr1). (D) Representative flow cytometric plots (left) and cumulative data (right) of the percentage and absolute numbers of liver total macrophages (CD45+Ly6G-CD11b+F4/80+), MDMs (CX3CR1-), and KCs (CX3CR1+) between Prdm1+/+ and Prdm1ΔNcr1 (n=7). (E) Representative flow cytometric plots (left) and cumulative data (right) of the percentage and absolute numbers of Ly6C- and Ly6C+ cells in MDMs. (F and G) Circle plots (F) and summary data (G) illustrating the interaction numbers and strength of significant enriched ligand–receptor pairs among cluster of liver cNK cells, ILC1s, and macrophages from Prdm1+/+ (left) and Prdm1ΔNcr1 (right) cells. The thickness of the line indicates the number of enrich pairs, and the arrow reflects the direction of the interaction. (H) Heatmap of overall signaling pattern recognized from ligand-receptor pairs, which contained the sum of signaling from the sender and target cells. (I) Bar graphs showing the information flow in selected active signaling patterns between Prdm1+/+ and Prdm1ΔNcr1 cells. Relative information flow was calculated as the sum of the communication probability in given signaling patterns. (J) Chord plot of the CXCL signaling interaction network among cluster of liver cNK cells, ILC1s, and macrophages between Prdm1+/+ and Prdm1ΔNcr1 cells. Data are presented as the mean±SEM and were analyzed by 2-tailed, paired t-test. Differences were evaluated between littermates. Each circle and square on graphs represents an individual mouse; P, P-value; *, P<0.05; **, P<0.01, ns, not significant.