4.8 Article

Immune cells use active tugging forces to distinguish affinity and accelerate evolution

Publisher

NATL ACAD SCIENCES
DOI: 10.1073/pnas.2213067120

Keywords

immune response; physical dynamics of cells; adaptive evolution; antigen recognition

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Cells can use mechanical work to drive their own evolution, similar to the adaptive immune system. Immune B cells extract antigens from other cells' surfaces using cytoskeletal forces. This force usage can accelerate adaptation but may also cause cell population extinction, resulting in an optimal range of pulling strength. The extraction of environmental signals through active force can make biological systems more evolvable at a moderate energy cost.
Cells are known to exert forces to sense their physical surroundings for guidance of motion and fate decisions. Here, we propose that cells might do mechanical work to drive their own evolution, taking inspiration from the adaptive immune system. Growing evidence indicates that immune B cells-capable of rapid Darwinian evolution-use cytoskeletal forces to actively extract antigens from other cells' surfaces. To elucidate the evolutionary significance of force usage, we develop a theory of tug-of-war antigen extraction that maps receptor binding characteristics to clonal reproductive fitness, revealing physical determinants of selection strength. This framework unifies mechanosensing and affinity-discrimination capabilities of evolving cells: Pulling against stiff antigen tethers enhances discrimination stringency at the expense of absolute extraction. As a consequence, active force usage can accelerate adaptation but may also cause extinction of cell populations, resulting in an optimal range of pulling strength that matches molecular rupture forces observed in cells. Our work suggests that nonequilibrium, physical extraction of environmental signals can make biological systems more evolvable at a moderate energy cost.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available