{"title":"Electrostatic potential is the dominant force in antigenic selection of naïve T-cells and B-cells for activation and maturation","authors":"Kripa N. Nand, Christopher Bystroff","doi":"10.1016/j.imlet.2025.107037","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Peptide antigenicity can be predicted from sequence using a simple method invented by Hopp and Woods in the early 1980′s. Since then, a much clearer understanding of T-cell/B-cell signaling and maturation calls for a new understanding of the amino acid determinants of antigenicity. We show that short peptides with more charged side chains generate significantly higher titers of peptide specific antibodies in co-immunized mice. Peptide docking simulations using linearized Poisson-Boltzmann calculations of electrostatic potential show that immunoglobulins distinguish the cognate peptide sequence from randomly selected sequences at \"arms length\" (10–20 Å) with >70 % of alternative sequences having higher energy at this distance, consistent with the weak specificity observed for naive T-cell and B-cell receptor interactions with MHC-bound antigen. Orders of magnitude lower complexity of the state space of charged surfaces as compared to the state space of surface shapes suggests a dominant role of electrostatics in selecting naive immune cells from the population of circulating cell lines. We propose a two-stage antigen recognition process, first electrostatic and then shape-based, that explains the dominant contribution of charged residues to peptide immunogenicity.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":13413,"journal":{"name":"Immunology letters","volume":"276 ","pages":"Article 107037"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Immunology letters","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0165247825000707","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"IMMUNOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Peptide antigenicity can be predicted from sequence using a simple method invented by Hopp and Woods in the early 1980′s. Since then, a much clearer understanding of T-cell/B-cell signaling and maturation calls for a new understanding of the amino acid determinants of antigenicity. We show that short peptides with more charged side chains generate significantly higher titers of peptide specific antibodies in co-immunized mice. Peptide docking simulations using linearized Poisson-Boltzmann calculations of electrostatic potential show that immunoglobulins distinguish the cognate peptide sequence from randomly selected sequences at "arms length" (10–20 Å) with >70 % of alternative sequences having higher energy at this distance, consistent with the weak specificity observed for naive T-cell and B-cell receptor interactions with MHC-bound antigen. Orders of magnitude lower complexity of the state space of charged surfaces as compared to the state space of surface shapes suggests a dominant role of electrostatics in selecting naive immune cells from the population of circulating cell lines. We propose a two-stage antigen recognition process, first electrostatic and then shape-based, that explains the dominant contribution of charged residues to peptide immunogenicity.
期刊介绍:
Immunology Letters provides a vehicle for the speedy publication of experimental papers, (mini)Reviews and Letters to the Editor addressing all aspects of molecular and cellular immunology. The essential criteria for publication will be clarity, experimental soundness and novelty. Results contradictory to current accepted thinking or ideas divergent from actual dogmas will be considered for publication provided that they are based on solid experimental findings.
Preference will be given to papers of immediate importance to other investigators, either by their experimental data, new ideas or new methodology. Scientific correspondence to the Editor-in-Chief related to the published papers may also be accepted provided that they are short and scientifically relevant to the papers mentioned, in order to provide a continuing forum for discussion.