Structural aspects of molecular recognition in the immune system. Part I: Acquired immunity (IUPAC Technical Report)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Humoral immunity allows the body to mount a defense against pathogens and foreign substances, and to respond with memory to subsequent exposures. The molecular participants may also recognize self-structures, leading to attack on the body and autoimmune disease. The main players in humoral immunity are antibody-producing B lymphocytes, and several classes of T lymphocytes. This review deals with the molecular details of recognition of antigens by soluble antibodies, and of substances presented to receptors on the surfaces of T cells (TCRs). The prototype antibody consists of a dimer of dimers, two heavy (H) chains and two light (L) chains, with antigen recognition capacity lying in variable “head” regions of an H-L pair. Most crystallographic studies are done with this substructure, called a F ab fragment, bound in a soluble antigen complex. Homologous to this arrangement, the prototype TCR consists of two chains (α and β) that complex not soluble antigen, but usually a short peptide or other small molecule presented by proteins of the major histocompatibility complex. In each case a general background on the historical development of understanding the molecular recognition interface is given, followed by a number of examples of crystal structures from the recent literature that have allowed us to refine our understanding of the complex recognition process. Variations on the prototypical structures are also considered. The spectrum of recognition strategies involves interplay of lock-and-key with flexibility, varying degrees of entropic and enthalpic contributions, surface shaping by entrapped water molecules, and combinations of stabilizing hydrogen bonding, electrostatic interactions, salt bridging, and van der Waals forces. Preeminent in the recent literature are details of antibody binding to influenza A and human immunodeficiency viral antigens. Both viral antigens and attempts to understand autoimmunity are prominent in the recent TCR literature.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".