Rejection patterns in botryllid ascidian immunity: the first tier of allorecognition
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Botryllid ascidians, a small but geographically widely distributed group of compound tunicates, are being used as a model system for the study of allorecognition. Botryllid ascidians possess a unique type of immunity. Pairs of colonies that meet through their extending ampullae either fuse to form a chimera or develop cytotoxic lesions at contact zones (rejection). This first tier of allorecognition is succeeded (in cases of fusion) by two additional tiers, not reviewed here (the colony resorption phenomenon and the phenomenon of somatic and germ cell parasitism). Fusion and rejection are controlled by a single highly polymorphic gene locus termed the fusibility/histocompatibility (Fu/HC) locus. One shared allele on the Fu/HC locus is enough for fusion. Rejecting colonies do not share any Fu/HC alleles. To date, 14 botryllid ascidians have been studied for their fusibility patterns; of these, the cosmopolitan species Botryllus schlosseri (Pallas, 1766) has emerged as the most studied taxon. This review summarizes studies revealing the various types of noncompatible responses that are expressed following the application of the "colony allorecognition assay" and the "cut surface assay". These include divergent alloresponses related to different populations of the same botryllid species, distinctive allorecognition sites, polymorphism and a repertoire of Fu/HC alleles, a state of low responsiveness as opposed to the expected immunological memory, the retreat growth phenomenon, and the irreversible nature of the rejection process. A detailed description of the accumulated knowledge on the effector cells (morula cells and macrophages), the humoral and cellular molecules (at the biochemical and molecular levels), and the prophenoloxidase system is given. Links between allogeneic responses and the evolutionary ecology of botryllid ascidians are revealed. Since tunicates occupy a key phylogenetic position in the origin of the vertebrates, the study of colony allorecognition in this group may shed light on self/nonself recognition elements in other multicellular organisms, including vertebrates.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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 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".