Abstract

Variability in the developing antibody repertoire is focused on the third complementarity determining region of the H chain (CDR-H3), which lies at the center of the antigen binding site where it often plays a decisive role in antigen binding. The power of VDJ recombination and N nucleotide addition has led to the common conception that the sequence of CDR-H3 is unrestricted in its variability and random in its composition. Under this view, the immune response is solely controlled by somatic positive and negative clonal selection mechanisms that act on individual B cells to promote production of protective antibodies and prevent the production of self-reactive antibodies. This concept of a repertoire of random antigen binding sites is inconsistent with the observation that diversity (DH) gene segment sequence content by reading frame (RF) is evolutionarily conserved, creating biases in the prevalence and distribution of individual amino acids in CDR-H3. For example, arginine, which is often found in the CDR-H3 of dsDNA binding autoantibodies, is under-represented in the commonly used DH RFs rearranged by deletion, but is a frequent component of rarely used inverted RF1 (iRF1), which is rearranged by inversion. To determine the effect of altering this germline bias in DH gene segment sequence on autoantibody production, we generated mice that by genetic manipulation are forced to utilize an iRF1 sequence encoding two arginines. Over a one year period we collected serial serum samples from these unimmunized, specific pathogen-free mice and found that more than one-fifth of them contained elevated levels of dsDNA-binding IgG, but not IgM; whereas mice with a wild type DH sequence did not. Thus, germline bias against the use of arginine enriched DH sequence helps to reduce the likelihood of producing self-reactive antibodies.

Highlights

  • Lymphocyte antigen receptors can be positioned on an innate versus adaptive axis that reflects the presumed contributions of natural versus somatic selection. the innate receptor repertoire is viewed as limited, restricted by germline sequence, and dependent on natural selection for its recognition of more highly conserved ligands [1]

  • Challenges to this widely-held view derive from increasingly robust compilations of sequences that permit assessment of the actual range of diversity of antibody repertoires [6,7,8,9,10]. These studies have revealed specific biases in the amino acid composition of antigen binding site repertoires. These biases are most striking for CDR-H3, which is the direct product of VDJ rearrangement and N addition and constitutes the most diverse portion of the initial antibody repertoire [6,11]

  • To assess the relative contribution of N addition versus DH sequence to CDR-H3 loop arginine content, we combined for analysis our previously published sequences from immature bone marrow B cells (Hardy Fraction E) of WT, homozygous ΔDDFL, homozygous ΔD-iD, and TdT-deficient BALB/c mice [18,34] with new sequences from TdT-deficient ΔD-DFL and ΔD-iD mice (S1 and S2 Tables)

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Lymphocyte antigen receptors can be positioned on an innate versus adaptive axis that reflects the presumed contributions of natural versus somatic selection. the innate receptor repertoire is viewed as limited, restricted by germline sequence, and dependent on natural selection for its recognition of more highly conserved ligands [1]. The large and presumed unrestricted immunoglobulin repertoire is viewed as being randomly generated by VDJ recombination and N addition, and somatically selected, permitting recognition of a limitless array of antigens [2,3,4] These views have created a theoretical framework for the study of self/non-self discrimination where the innate system responds to the physical or chemical properties of conserved ligands [3]; whereas the adaptive system is focused on discriminating between diverse antigens on a case-by-case basis [3,5]. Because CDR-H3 lies at the center of the antigen binding site, its sequence and structure often has a major effect on the binding characteristics of the individual antibody

Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.