4.5 Article

Diversification of innate immune genes: lessons from the purple sea urchin

期刊

DISEASE MODELS & MECHANISMS
卷 3, 期 5-6, 页码 274-279

出版社

COMPANY BIOLOGISTS LTD
DOI: 10.1242/dmm.004697

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Science Foundation [MCB-0077970, MCB-0424235, MCB-0744999]
  2. Div Of Molecular and Cellular Bioscience
  3. Direct For Biological Sciences [0744999] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Pathogen diversification can alter infection virulence, which in turn drives the evolution of host immune diversification, resulting in countermeasures for survival in this arms race. Somatic recombination of the immunoglobulin gene family members is a very effective mechanism to diversify antibodies and T-cell receptors that function in the adaptive immune system. Although mechanisms to diversify innate immune genes are not clearly understood, a seemingly unlikely source for insight into innate immune diversification may be derived from the purple sea urchin, which has recently had its genome sequenced and annotated. Although there are many differences, some characteristics of the sea urchin make for a useful tool to understand the human immune system. The sea urchin is phylogenetically related to humans although, as a group, sea urchins are evolutionarily much older than mammals. Humans require both adaptive and innate immune responses to survive immune challenges, whereas sea urchins only require innate immune functions. Genes that function in immunity tend to be members of families, and the sea urchin has several innate immune gene families. One of these is the Sp185/333 gene family with about 50 clustered members that encode a diverse array of putative immune response proteins. Understanding gene diversification in the Sp185/333 family in the sea urchin may illuminate new mechanisms of diversification that could apply to gene families that function in innate immunity in humans, such as the killer immunoglobulin-like receptor genes.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据