Remembering your enemies: mechanisms of within‐generation and multigenerational immune priming in <i>Caenorhabditis elegans</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Pathogens are abundant and drive evolution of host immunity. Whilst immune memory is classically associated with adaptive immunity, studies in diverse species now show that priming of innate immune defences can also protect against secondary infection. Remarkably, priming may also be passed on to progeny to enhance pathogen resistance and promote survival in future generations. Phenotypic changes that occur independent of DNA sequence underlie both 'within-generation' priming and 'multigenerational' priming. However, the molecular mechanisms responsible for these phenomena are still poorly understood. Caenorhabditis elegans is a simple and genetically tractable model organism that has enabled key advances in immunity and environmental epigenetics. Using both natural and human pathogens, researchers have uncovered numerous examples of innate immune priming in this animal. Viral infection models have provided key evidence for a conserved antiviral RNA silencing mechanism that is inherited in progeny. Bacterial infection models have explored mechanisms of within-generation and multigenerational priming that span chromatin modification and transcriptional changes, small RNA pathways, maternal provisioning and pathogen avoidance strategies. Together, these studies are providing novel insight into the immune reactivity of the genome and have important consequences for our understanding of health and evolution. In this review, we present the current evidence for learned protection against pathogens in C. elegans, discuss the significance and limitations of these findings and highlight important avenues of future investigation.
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) | 0.001 | 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".