T cell interactions with B cells during germinal center formation, a three‐step model
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Establishment of effective immunity against invading microbes depends on continuous generation of antibodies that facilitate pathogen clearance. Long-lived plasma cells with the capacity to produce high affinity antibodies evolve in germinal centers (GCs), where B cells undergo somatic hypermutation and are subjected to affinity-based selection. Here, we focus on the cellular interactions that take place early in the antibody immune response during GC colonization. Clones bearing B-cell receptors with different affinities and specificities compete for entry to the GC, at the boundary between the B-cell and T-cell zones in lymphoid organs. During this process, B cells compete for interactions with T follicular helper cells, which provide selection signals required for differentiation into GC cells and antibody secreting cells. These cellular engagements are long-lasting and depend on activation of adhesion molecules that support persistent interactions and promote transmission of signals between the cells. Here, we discuss how interactions between cognate T and B cells are primarily maintained by three types of molecular interactions: homophilic signaling lymphocytic activation molecule (SLAM) interactions, T-cell receptor: peptide-loaded major histocompatibility class II (pMHCII), and LFA-1:ICAMs. These essential components support a three-step process that controls clonal selection for entry into the antibody affinity maturation response in the GC, and establishment of long-lasting antibody-mediated immunity.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
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".