Laboratory of Neuroimmunology, Department of Neurobiology, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, University of California at Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA 90095-1763, USA.
Phys Life Rev. 2010 Mar;7(1):55-78. doi: 10.1016/j.plrev.2009.12.001. Epub 2009 Dec 22.
This review will examine the evolution of immune mechanisms by emphasizing information from animal groups exclusive of all vertebrates. There will be a focus on concepts that propelled the immune system into prominent discourse in the life sciences. The self/not self hypothesis was crucial and so was the concern for immunologic memory or anamnesia, development of cancer, autoimmunity, and clonal selection. Now we may be able to deconstruct clonal selection since it is not applicable in the sense that it is not applicable to invertebrate mechanisms. Clonal selection seems to be purely as all evidence indicates a vertebrate strategy and therefore irrelevant to invertebrates. Some views may insist that anthropocentric mammalian immunologists utilized a tool to propel: the universal innate immune system of ubiquitous and plentiful invertebrates as an essential system for vertebrates. This was advantageous for all immunology; moreover innate immunity acquired an extended raison d'être. Innate immunity should help if there would be a failure of the adaptive immune system. Still to be answered are questions concerning immunologic surveillance that includes clonal selection. We can then ask does immunologic surveillance play a role in the survival of invertebrates that most universally seem to not develop cancer of vertebrates especially mammals; invertebrates only develop benign tumor. A recent proposal concerns an alternative explanation that is all embracing. Danger hypothesis operates in striking contrast to the self/not self hypothesis. This view holds that the immune system is adapted to intervene not because self is threatened but because of the system's sense of danger. This perception occurs by means of signals other than recognition of microbial pattern recognition molecules characteristic of invertebrates. Response to danger may be another way of analyzing innate immunity that does not trigger the production of clones and therefore does not rely entirely on the self/not self model. The review will end with certain perspectives on artificial immune systems new on the scene and the product of computational immunologists. The tentative view is to question if the immune systems of invertebrates might be amenable to such an analysis? This would offer more credence to the innate system, often pushed aside thus favoring the adaptive responses.
这篇综述将考察免疫机制的演变,重点强调来自无脊椎动物以外的动物群体的信息。本文将关注推动免疫系统成为生命科学重要议题的概念。自我/非我假说至关重要,免疫记忆或回忆、癌症的发生、自身免疫和克隆选择的关注也同样重要。现在,我们或许可以对克隆选择进行解构,因为它不适用于无脊椎动物的机制,这与最初的设想并不相符。克隆选择似乎纯粹是因为所有证据都表明这是一种脊椎动物的策略,因此与无脊椎动物无关。一些观点可能坚持认为,人类中心主义的哺乳动物免疫学家利用一种工具来推动:无处不在且丰富的无脊椎动物普遍存在的先天免疫系统,作为脊椎动物的重要系统。这对所有免疫学都是有利的;此外,先天免疫获得了更广泛的存在理由。如果适应性免疫系统出现故障,先天免疫系统应该会有所帮助。仍然需要回答的问题是关于免疫监视的问题,包括克隆选择。然后我们可以问,免疫监视是否在无脊椎动物的生存中发挥作用,无脊椎动物似乎普遍不会患上脊椎动物,尤其是哺乳动物的癌症;无脊椎动物只会患上良性肿瘤。最近的一个提议涉及一个全面的替代解释。危险假说与自我/非我假说形成鲜明对比。这一观点认为,免疫系统之所以能够进行干预,不是因为自我受到了威胁,而是因为系统对危险的感知。这种感知是通过微生物模式识别分子的识别以外的其他信号来实现的,这些信号是无脊椎动物所特有的。对危险的反应可能是另一种分析先天免疫的方法,它不会触发克隆的产生,因此不完全依赖于自我/非我模型。这篇综述将以新兴的计算免疫学家所创造的人工免疫系统的某些观点结束。一个试探性的观点是,质疑无脊椎动物的免疫系统是否能够接受这样的分析?这将为先天系统提供更多的可信度,因为先天系统经常被忽视,从而更有利于适应性反应。