+ Site Statistics
+ Search Articles
+ Subscribe to Site Feeds
Most Shared
PDF Full Text
+ PDF Full Text
Request PDF Full Text
+ Follow Us
Follow on Facebook
Follow on Twitter
Follow on LinkedIn
+ Translate
+ Recently Requested

Haplotype exclusion and receptor editing: irreconcilable differences?

Haplotype exclusion and receptor editing: irreconcilable differences?

Seminars in Immunology 14(3): 191-8; Discussion 222-4

Features of antibody genes and their regulation hinder two properties thought to be critical for clonal selection: haplotype exclusion and receptor diversity. These properties include: (1) the retention of multiple independent L-chain isotypes, which compounds the problem of allelic exclusion with one of isotype exclusion; (2) the process of receptor editing, in which recombination continues in cells already expressing antigen receptors; and (3) non-random associations and quasi-ordered rearrangements of the elements that generate light chain genes, which promote editing at the expense of allelic exclusion and receptor diversification. In contrast, heavy chain gene structure seems to promote haplotype exclusion and receptor diversity. It appears that requirements of receptor selection, such as the need for receptor editing as an immune tolerance mechanism and positive selection as a quality control checkpoint for receptor functionality, impose independent selections that shape the organization and regulation of the antibody genes. Despite these features, B cell development still achieves a significant level of phenotypic haplotype exclusion, suggesting that there is indeed significant selection for antibody monospecificity that is accommodated along with receptor editing. Thus, the immune system achieves both receptor selection and clonal selection, despite their partly antagonistic mechanisms.

(PDF emailed within 0-6 h: $19.90)

Accession: 046211995

Download citation: RISBibTeXText

PMID: 12160646

DOI: 10.1016/s1044-5323(02)00042-8

Related references

Models for antigen receptor gene rearrangement. I. Biased receptor editing in B cells: implications for allelic exclusion. Journal of Immunology 163(4): 1793-1798, 1999

Marked differences of haplotype tagging SNP distribution, linkage, and haplotype profile of IL23 receptor gene in Roma and Hungarian population samples. Cytokine 65(2): 148-152, 2014

Irreconcilable differences. Science 285(5433): 16, 1999

Irreconcilable differences?. Critical Care Medicine 31(4): 1289-1290, 2003

Not so irreconcilable differences?. Science 248(4953): 301-301, 1990

H2A.Z and DNA methylation: irreconcilable differences. Trends in Biochemical Sciences 34(4): 158-161, 2009

Partner from hell. When the differences are irreconcilable. Emergency Medical Services 35(5): 26-26, 2006

Alternative and rational therapies Irreconcilable differences. Wiener Klinische Wochenschrift 114(23-24): 958-962, 30 Dezember, 2002

Irreconcilable differences and political reality in these dark ages. Behavior Analyst 14(1): 29-33, 1991

Cost and quality under managed care: irreconcilable differences?. American Journal of Managed Care 6(3): 305-312, 2000

Irreconcilable differences: health professionals' constructions of adolescence and motherhood. Social Science & Medicine 64(1): 112-124, 2006

Regional differences in the extent of RNA editing of the glutamate receptor subunits GluR2 and GluR6 in rat brain. Journal of Neuroscience Methods 56(1): 21-29, 1995

Ensuring quality communication when irreconcilable differences occur within the practice setting. Canadian Veterinary Journal 55(2): 185-186, 2014

Irreconcilable differences? Ethnic intermarriage and divorce in the Netherlands, 1995-2008. Social Science Research 41(5): 1126-1137, 2012