Defining the complementarities between antibodies and haptens to refine our understanding and aid the prediction of a successful binding interaction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Low molecular weight haptens (<1000 Da) cannot be recognized by the immune system unless conjugated to larger carrier molecules. Antibodies to these exceptionally small antigens can still be generated with exquisite sensitivity. A detailed understanding at the molecular level of this incredible ability of antibodies to recognize haptens, is still limited compared to other antigen classes. METHODS: Different hapten targets with a broad range of structural flexibility and polarity were conjugated to carrier proteins, and utilized in sheep immunization. Three antibody libraries were constructed and used as potential pools to isolate specific antibodies to each target. The isolated antibodies were analysed in term of CDR length, canonical structure, and binding site shape and electrostatic potential. RESULTS: The simple, chemically naïve structure of squalane (SQA) was recognized with micromolar sensitivity. An increase in structural rigidity of the hydrophobic and cyclic coprostane (COP) did not improve this binding sensitivity beyond the micromolar range, whilst the polar etioporphyrin (POR) was detected with nanomolar sensitivity. Homoserine lactone (HSL) molecules, which combine molecular flexibility and polarity, generated super-sensitive (picomolar) interactions. To better understand this range of antibody-hapten interactions, analyses were extended to examine the binding loop canonical structures and CDR lengths of a series of anti-hapten clones. Analyses of the pre and post- selection (panning of the phage displayed libraries) sequences revealed more conserved sites (123) within the post-selection sequences, when compared to their pre-selection counterparts (28). The strong selection pressure, generated by panning against these haptens resulted in the isolation of antibodies with significant sequence conservation in the FW regions, and suitable binding site cavities, representing only a relatively small subset of the available full repertoire sequence and structural diversity. As part of this process, the important influence of CDR H2 on antigen binding was observed through its direct interaction with individual antigens and indirect impact on the orientation and the pocket shape, when combined with CDRs H3 and L3. The binding pockets also displayed electrostatic surfaces that were complementary to the hydrophobic nature of COP, SQA, and POR, and the negatively charged HSL. CONCLUSIONS: The best binding antibodies have shown improved capacity to recognize these haptens by establishing complementary binding pockets in terms of size, shape, and electrostatic potential.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".