HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

J. Biol. Chem., Vol. 283, Issue 24, 16384-16390, June 13, 2008

This Article Abstract Full Text (PDF) An addition or correction has been published All Versions of this Article: 283/24/16384    most recent M801321200v1 Submit a Letter to Editor Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when eLetters are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Request Permissions Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Taylor, A. I. Articles by Calvert, R. A. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Taylor, A. I. Articles by Calvert, R. A. Social Bookmarking                      What's this?

Avian IgY Binds to a Monocyte Receptor with IgG-like Kinetics Despite an IgE-like Structure^*

From the Randall Division of Cell and Molecular Biophysics, King's College London, New Hunt's House, Guy's Campus, London SE1 1UL, United Kingdom

Received for publication, February 19, 2008 , and in revised form, March 17, 2008.

	ABSTRACT

TOP ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES RESULTS DISCUSSION REFERENCES

 
An ancestor of avian IgY was the evolutionary precursor of mammalian IgG and IgE, and present day chicken IgY performs the function of human IgG despite having the domain structure of human IgE. The kinetics of IgY binding to its receptor on a chicken monocyte cell line, MQ-NCSU, were measured, the first time that the binding of a non-mammalian antibody to a non-mammalian cell has been investigated (k₊₁ = 1.14 ± 0.46 x 10⁵ mol^–1sec^–1, k_–1 = 2.30 ± 0.14 x 10^–3 s^–1, and K_a = 4.95 x 10⁷ M^–1). This is a lower affinity than that recorded for mammalian IgE-high affinity receptor interactions (Ka 10¹⁰ M^–1) but is within the range of mammalian IgG-high affinity receptor interactions (human: Ka 10⁸–10⁹ M^–1 mouse: Ka 10⁷–10⁸ M^–1. IgE has an extra pair of immunoglobulin domains when compared with IgG. Their presence reduces the dissociation rate of IgE from its receptor 20-fold, thus contributing to the high affinity of IgE. To assess the effect of the equivalent domains on the kinetics of IgY binding, IgY-Fc fragments with and without this domain were cloned and expressed in mammalian cells. In contrast to IgE, their presence in IgY has little effect on the association rate and no effect on dissociation. Whatever the function of this extra domain pair in avian IgY, it has persisted for at least 310 million years and has been co-opted in mammalian IgE to generate a uniquely slow dissociation rate and high affinity.

	INTRODUCTION

TOP ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES RESULTS DISCUSSION REFERENCES

 
IgY is the principal serum antibody of amphibians, reptiles, and birds and shares a common ancestor with both mammalian IgG and IgE (1, 2). The cDNA sequence of the chicken upsilon () heavy chain (3) reveals that, like more basal amphibian IgY (4, 5), avian IgY contains a domain pair (C2)⁴ that has been conserved in mammalian IgE (as C2) but truncated to form the "hinge" region in mammalian IgG (3). Thus, an orthologous domain pair must have existed in the common (IgY-like) ancestor prior to its duplication and subsequent divergence in the mammalian lineage. Avian IgY is the closest extant protein to this ancestor and therefore the most logical choice for study of the evolution of modern IgG and IgE from an ancient IgY-like ancestor.

IgG, the principal mammalian serum antibody, aggregates and facilitates opsonization of antigens, activates complement, and provides protection for the fetus following transport across the placenta. IgE does not activate complement nor cross the placenta but can sensitize effector cells (principally mast cells and basophils) and typically mediates anaphylactic reactions (6). It is well known for its involvement in allergic disease but probably also provides defense against parasitic infections (7).

Avian IgY appears to combine the functions of mammalian IgG and IgE. As the major serum antibody, it provides defense against infection (8) but also mediates anaphylaxis (9). Chicken mast cells activated by IgY are responsible for local anaphylactic reactions in the gut, which play a role in defense against protozoan infections (10, 11). Antibody-dependent hypersensitivity and fatal systemic anaphylactic shock have also been demonstrated in chickens (9, 12, 13) and shown to be mediated by basophils (14), which are much more numerous than mast cells in birds (in contrast to mammals in which the reverse is true) (15). These phenomena constitute indirect evidence for the presence of IgY receptors on both chicken monocytes/macrophages and basophils.

The heavy chain of IgY consists of four constant Ig domains and one variable Ig domain (3), as in mammalian IgE. It is clear from sequence comparisons that after the divergence of the synapsids 310 million years ago (16, 17), but before the divergence of the non-eutherian mammals 166 million years ago (18), duplication of the -gene occurred; this was followed by differentiation into the two Ig classes unique to mammals, IgG and IgE, as indicated by their presence in monotremes (19, 20). In IgG, the second domain of the heavy chain constant region condensed to form the hinge polypeptide (3), whereas in IgE, the domain was retained as C2 so that, like IgY, the Fc fragment consists of three constant Ig domain pairs. The two inter-heavy-chain disulfide bridges in the C2 domain are present also in C2 at the same locations and in the hinge of IgG (Fig. 1).

Human mast cells and basophils express the high affinity IgE receptor (FcRI), which has an affinity for IgE that is uniquely high: Ka 10¹⁰ M^–1 (7). We have shown, through our studies with IgE, IgE-Fc, and a subfragment of IgE-Fc consisting of only the C3 and C4 domains termed Fc3–4 (21), that the high affinity is due to the slow dissociation rate from FcRI (22, 23) and that the C2 domains are in part responsible (24). With a half-life on tissue mast cells of 2–3 weeks (25), IgE can effectively and persistently sensitize these cells for rapid degranulation upon encounter with antigen (allergen). The rapidity of degranulation is responsible for the life-threatening response of anaphylaxis, making an understanding of the mechanism by which the C2 domains alter the dissociation rate of IgE from its receptor a medically important issue.

View larger version (22K): [in this window] [in a new window]   FIGURE 1. The domain structure of avian IgY and its mammalian homologues, IgG and IgE. Schematic representations of the antibodies composed of variable (V) or constant (C) immunoglobulin domains that make up the heavy (H or //) and light (L) chains are shown with Fab and Fc fragments circled. Inter-chain disulfide bonds are shown as solid (known) or dashed (putative) lines. The domain structure of IgG shown here is that of human IgG1, with the hinge region represented by a curved line linking C1 and C2. Other subclasses of IgG vary in hinge length and number of inter-heavy chain disulfides.

	EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES

TOP ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES RESULTS DISCUSSION REFERENCES

 
Cloning of Fc2–4 and Fc3–4—There is no intron between the CH1 and CH2 exons in chicken (26). Hence, the N terminus of chicken C2, Val-231 by the numbering system of Suzuki and Lee (27), was identified by a Clustal W alignment of the sequences of the heavy chain constant region of human IgE (28) and of duck IgY (29) with that of chicken IgY taken from Parvari et al. (3). The second residue of C2 is a cysteine that in IgE forms an intra-chain disulfide bond with C1; it was therefore mutated to an alanine in Fc2–4 and has similarly been mutated in Fc2–4. The N-terminal 4 amino acids of IgY-Fc were Asp-Ile (from an EcoRV site) Val-Ala.

Fc3–4 included the residues Asp-Ile from an EcoRV restriction site and 2 amino acids from C2, one of which, a cysteine, was thought to be required to form a functionally important inter-chain disulfide bond (21). For this reason, a similar Fc3–4 with an N terminus including Cys-340 was cloned and expressed, but the protein formed intra-chain disulfide bonds with the extra Cys-347 in chicken IgY (Fig. 1). A C347S mutant led to expression of a functional protein, Fc3–4, which has been used for the study reported here.

The polymerase chain reaction was used to engineer EcoRV and PmeI sites onto the 5' and 3' termini, respectively, of both Fc2–4 and Fc3–4 cDNA from a chicken splenocyte library (kindly donated by Dr. John Young, Institute of Animal Health, Compton UK). Using a holding vector, a PmeI site was introduced after the stop codon of IgE-Fc so that using EcoRV and PmeI, IgY-Fc could be exchanged for IgE-Fc and then inserted into the pRY vector as a HindIII-HindIII cassette (30). Vectors were transfected into NS0 mouse myeloma cells for production of stable clones expressing Fc2–4 or Fc3–4.

Purification and Characterization of IgY-Fc Fragment—NS0 mouse myeloma cell supernatants were purified by elution from an anti-IgY-agarose affinity column (Gallus Immunotech, DAIgY-AGA) with 0.2 M glycine, pH 2.5, and dialyzed against phosphate-buffered saline (PBS) containing 0.05% sodium azide. Protein concentrations were measured in a Cary 50 spectrophotometer (Varian). The molar extinction coefficients for IgY, Fc2–4, and Fc3–4 were calculated using ProtParam software (31) and were 209,125, 90,965, and 62,505 mol^–1cm^–1, respectively. Proteins were analyzed on denaturing SDS gels containing 12% acrylamide and the buffer system of Laemmli (32). Western blots used a semidry transfer method (33), and anti-IgY horseradish peroxidase (Promega, G135A) was used for detection.

Cell Lines—The MQ-NCSU cell line was provided by Dr. M. A. Qureshi, National Program Leader, Animal Genetics, United States Department of Agriculture Cooperative State Research Education and Extension Service, Washington, D.C. (34). Cells were grown at 37 °C in modified LM-Hahn medium omitting fetal bovine serum and chick serum, and thereby exogenous IgY, but including 8% ultra-low IgG fetal bovine serum (Invitrogen, catalog number 16250-078).

Flow Cytometry (FACS)—FACS was used to detect immunostained cells following their incubation with specific antibodies and/or antibody conjugates. In all experiments, cells were washed (by centrifugation at 1000 x g for 5 min) and incubated for 10 min in PBS containing 1% bovine serum albumin (BSA) (Sigma, catalog number A7030) before staining for 1 h at 4 °C with chicken IgY-(Fab)₂ (Rockland, catalog number 003-0104), (Fab)₂ + whole IgY, IgY, or buffer before incubation with a mouse monoclonal antibody (Sigma, catalog number C-7295), which was found to be an anti-C2,⁵ and detection by anti-mouse fluorophore-conjugated secondary antibodies (Dako, catalog number F0479). Cells were washed twice with PBS-BSA both before and after all antibody incubation steps and fixed in PBS + 4% formaldehyde (Sigma, catalog number F1635) before analysis in a FACSCalibur instrument (BD Biosciences).

View larger version (9K): [in this window] [in a new window]   FIGURE 2. IgY binding to chicken monocytes is dependent on the Fc region. Prior to detection with mouse anti-C2 (followed by anti-mouse IgS-fluorescein isothiocyanate (Igs-FITC)), cells (shaded histograms) were incubated in PBS-BSA containing 20 µM IgY-Fab alone (A), 50 nM IgY alone (B), or 50 nM IgY+20 µM IgY-Fab (C). Control cells (open histograms) were incubated with PBS-BSA alone before detection. Values shown are ratios of mean fluorescence intensity of each sample to that of control cells.

View larger version (11K): [in this window] [in a new window]   FIGURE 3. Characterization of IgY and IgY-Fc fragments. Whole IgY from chicken serum and recombinant IgY-Fc fragments secreted from mouse myeloma (NS0) cells were purified by affinity chromatography and analyzed using denaturing (SDS) 12% polyacrylamide gels, either stained with Coomassie Brilliant Blue (A and B) or Western-blotted with polyclonal anti-IgY antibodies (C and D). Samples were either non-reduced (A and C) or reduced with 2% β-mercaptoethanol (B and D). Lane 1, IgY. Lane 2, Fc2–4. Lane 3, Fc3–4 (C340S). Molecular weight markers are shown in kDa.

Cell Binding Assays—MQ-NCSU cells were washed in PBS, 1% BSA, 0.05% sodium azide, pH 7.4, and incubated at 23 °C for 10 min before resuspension at 10⁷ cells/ml. In experiments to determine the association rate constant, duplicate samples of 10⁶ cells were incubated with 10 nM ¹²⁵I-labeled IgY, Fc2–4, or Fc3–4 at 23 °C. At regular intervals, cells were centrifuged through 200 µl of phthalate oil (36), and the radioactivity of the cell pellet was determined using a Wizard 1480 gamma counter (PerkinElmer Life Sciences). The initial rate of association was determined from a linear fit of cpm versus time. Standard errors were generated by the fitting procedure but, due to uncertainty in number of the receptors per cell (see "Discussion"), larger errors have been added to the final values.

Dissociation experiments were performed using the method of Kulczycki and Metzger (37) but with all steps carried out at room temperature; cells were first incubated with 10 nM ¹²⁵I-labeled IgY, Fc2–4, or Fc3–4 for 1 h and then resuspended in an excess of unlabeled IgY, and their radioactivity was assayed as above. Nonspecific binding was measured by incubating cells with an excess (350 nM) of unlabeled IgY for 1 h at room temperature before the addition of 10 nM labeled IgY, and the counts obtained were subtracted from the total bound counts. The mean number of receptor sites per MQ-NCSU cell was determined by titrating to saturation with ¹²⁵I-labeled IgY or Fc2–4 of known specific activity. Dissociation rate constants were determined both by non-linear regression analysis from a plot of cpm versus time (according to Equation 20, p88, in Goodrich and Kugel (38)) and from linear regression analysis of a plot of ln(cpm) versus time.

	RESULTS

TOP ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES RESULTS DISCUSSION REFERENCES

 
The much higher affinity of IgE for its receptor on mast cells when compared with IgG for any of its receptors and the role of the extra C2 domain pair in IgE prompted this study of chicken IgY, the closest extant immunoglobulin to the ancestor that evolved into all three antibodies.

In a preliminary FACS experiment, it was established that chicken serum IgY binds to MQ-NCSU cells in an Fc-dependent manner; IgY Fabs at 400x molar excess over whole IgY were unable to bind to cells or to inhibit IgY binding (Fig. 2). The binding constants determined in the studies described below are thus for IgY and IgY-Fc binding to an IgY-Fc receptor on a chicken monocyte cell line.

The action of papain on IgY does not give rise to an Fc2–4 fragment since the C2 domain is digested away (27). Hence, to assess the role of C2, Fc2–4 and Fc3–4 were cloned and expressed as recombinant proteins. Purified IgY (Fig. 3, lane 1), recombinant Fc2–4 (lane 2), and Fc3–4 (lane 3), both unreduced (Fig. 3, A and C) and reduced (Fig. 3, B and D), were electrophoresed and stained with Coomassie Brilliant Blue (Fig. 3, A and B) or transferred to nitrocellulose and stained with anti-IgY horseradish peroxidase conjugate (Fig. 3, C and D). Reduced heavy chains gave rise to a single band (Fig. 3C, lanes 1–3), suggesting that the small amount of heterogeneous-sized material in unreduced samples was due to the formation of non-native disulfide bonds on exposure to 100 °C in SDS buffer (39) and not to degradation or heterogeneity of glycosylation. Western blots of the same samples (Fig. 3, C and D) showed that the polypeptides are indeed IgY of approximately the expected molecular mass with only a minor band of Fc3–4 monomer (Fig. 3C, lane 3). All were glycosylated as shown by periodic acid Schiff staining,⁵ and all had essentially no free sulfydryls per mole of IgY or its fragments, as determined by reduction and carboxymethylation (40).⁵

View larger version (7K): [in this window] [in a new window]   FIGURE 4. Binding of IgY to chicken monocytes. Dissociation experiments were performed by incubating MQ-NCSU cells with 10 nM 125I-IgY from chicken serum for 1 h followed by the addition of an excess of unlabeled IgY. Cells were spun through phthalate oil, and their radioactivity (in cpm) was measured at regular intervals and normalized to the initial value. The dissociation rate constant was determined by both non-linear (A) and linear (B) regression analyses. Data from a single dissociation experiment are shown. Association experiments were performed by measuring the radioactivity of cell pellets at regular intervals starting from the addition of 10 nM 125I-IgY. Mean data from two duplicate experiments are shown ± S.E. (error bars)(C). All experiments were performed at room temperature.

View larger version (8K): [in this window] [in a new window]   FIGURE 5. Binding of IgY-Fc fragments to chicken monocytes. Dissociation experiments were performed by incubating MQ-NCSU cells with 10 nM 125I-labeled IgY-Fc2–4 () or IgY-Fc3–4 () for 1 h followed by the addition of an excess of unlabeled whole IgY. Cells were spun through phthalate oil, and their radioactivity (in cpm) was measured at regular intervals and normalized to the initial value. Mean data from two duplicate experiments are shown ± S.E. (A). Association experiments were performed by measuring the radioactivity of cell pellets at regular intervals starting from the addition of 10 nM 125I-labeled Fc2–4 () or Fc3–4 (). Mean data from two duplicate experiments are shown ± S.E. (error bars)(B). Some error bars are too close to experimental points to be clearly visible. All experiments were performed at room temperature.

To measure the rate of association of ¹²⁵I-IgY with MQ-NCSU cells, an estimate of the number of receptors per cell was made. Measurements on two different days led to an estimate of 20,000, and the likely error in this value is discussed below. The value obtained for k₊₁ is 1.14 ± 0.04 x 10⁵ mol^–1 s^–1 (Fig. 4C). The two rate constants lead to a value for K_a = 4.95 x 10⁷ M.

When the binding kinetics of the IgY-Fc fragments were determined, Fc2–4 was found to display the same rate of dissociation as Fc3–4 (Fig. 5A), showing that the C2 domain pair does not have a detectable effect on the rate of dissociation. The association rate constant for Fc2–4 was 3.66 ± 0.16 x 10⁵ mol^–1 s^–1, and for Fc3–4, it was 1.64 ± 0.01 x 10⁵ mol^–1 s^–1, which differ only by a factor of about 2 (Fig. 5B). This is not a significant difference given the errors inherent in this technique (discussed below).

	DISCUSSION

TOP ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES RESULTS DISCUSSION REFERENCES

 
These studies determine for the first time the binding kinetics of IgY and its Fc fragments to cells and demonstrate that the affinity is more similar to that of IgG for its high affinity receptor than IgE for its high affinity receptor. Furthermore, the kinetics of the interaction are not affected by the presence or absence of the C2 domain pair, in contrast to the effect that the C2 pair has on the kinetics of IgE binding to FcRI (24).

IgY dissociates from its receptor on the MQ-NCSU chicken monocyte cell line with a rate constant of k_–1 = 2.30 ± 0.14 x 10^–3 s^–1 at 23 °C (Fig. 4A). Although 10 times faster than the dissociation of human IgG1 from the monocyte cell line U937 (k_–1 = 1.1 ± 0.1 x 10^–4 s^–1) (41), k_–1 for IgY is close to the value 3.5 x 10^–3 s^–1 (no error reported) measured for the dissociation of mouse IgG subclass 2a from the mouse macrophage cell line P388D (42). Dissociation of human IgE from (cord blood) mast cells is so slow by comparison that even at 37 °C, values of 6.05 x 10^–5 s^–1 (43) (no error given) and 6.93 ± 0.54 x 10^–5 s^–1 (44) have been recorded.

A value of 1.14 ± 0.04 x 10⁵ mol^–1 s^–1 has been determined for the association rate constant of IgY with MQ-NCSU cells, although a much larger error is inherent in this value (and consequently the K_a) than in that of the dissociation rate constant. The number of receptors per cell is a factor in the calculation, and it has been reported that Fc receptor number on human monocytes may vary on average by ±25% and up to 40% (45); the error in k₊₁for IgY may therefore be as much as ±40%. The value of k₊₁ for IgE binding to the FcRI chain expressed on Chinese hamster ovary cells at 25 °C is 3.1 ± 0.3 x 10⁵ mol^–1 s^–1 (30), and for human IgG1 to U937 cells, it is 2.1 ± 0.2 x 10⁵ mol^–1 s^–1 (41). Thus, the association rate constant for human IgE differs from the value determined here for IgY binding to MQ-NCSU cells by a factor of only 2.7, in contrast to the difference in affinity, which is about 700-fold (K_a = 4.95 x 10⁷ M^–1 for IgY; K_a = 3.4 x 10¹⁰ M^–1 for IgE) (30). The difference between IgY and IgE in their affinity for cells is therefore due almost entirely to a difference in their rates of dissociation (as it is for IgG when compared with IgE). The affinity of IgY reported here is within the range of mammalian IgG-high affinity receptor interactions: e.g. human K_a 10⁸–10⁹ M^–1; mouse K_a 10⁷–10⁸ M^–1 (46).

The presence of the C2 domain pair slows the rate of dissociation of IgE from FcRI by a factor of approximately 20, as shown by a comparison of the binding kinetics of two IgE fragments, one with this domain (Fc2–4) and one without (Fc3–4) (22, 24). The influence of the C2 domains on the kinetics of IgY binding to cells was therefore investigated using two corresponding IgY fragments, Fc2–4 and Fc3–4, differing only by the C2 domain pair. The dissociation curves of Fc2–4 and Fc3–4 can be superimposed (Fig. 5A), showing that unlike IgE-Fc (24), the presence of the C2 domain pair has no effect on the rate of dissociation. Although the values for the association rate constants differ by a factor of 2.2 (k₊₁ = 3.66 ± 0.16 x 10⁵ mol^–1 s^–1 for Fc2–4; k₊₁ = 1.64 ± 0.01 x 10⁵ mol^–1 s^–1 for Fc3–4), the potential error in these values due to possible variability in cell receptor number of ±40% means that these values are not significantly different.

Although the C2 domains of chicken IgY do not appear to contribute to receptor binding on monocytes, this does not preclude a role in, for instance, binding to mast cells or basophils. However, cutaneous anaphylaxis experiments in chickens (9) have shown that IgY is not retained in tissue for as long as mammalian IgE (i.e. only for days rather than weeks), which suggests that the dissociation rate of IgY from mast cells is also more akin to that of IgG than IgE. A function for C2 is likely, however, as it has persisted in both mammals and birds for the 310 million years since Synapsida and Reptilia diverged, and it has recently been estimated that DNA coding for a non-functional protein domain has a half-life of only 4 million years in the genome (47, 48).

The association constant determined in the experiments described in this report (K_a = 4.95 x 10⁷ M^–1) is close to that determined for the interaction between chicken serum IgY and an extracellular domain of a member of the chicken leukocyte receptor complex (LRC), CHIR-AB1, as measured by surface plasmon resonance: K_a = 3.70 x 10⁷ M^–1 (49). Since CHIR-AB1 mRNA was detectable in chicken M11 primary macrophages (49), it is likely that CHIR-AB1 is the molecule responsible for IgY binding to MQ-NCSU monocytes in the data presented here. One caveat in comparing these two values is that association constants obtained by cell binding and SPR sometimes differ; K_a for IgE binding to the FcRI chain displayed on Chinese hamster ovary cells is 10x higher than the value obtained by surface plasmon resonance (22, 24, 30). Furthermore, additional polypeptide chains in the native, cell-bound receptor may influence affinity.

Another issue to consider is whether the MQ-NCSU cells express more than one receptor. The human monocyte cell line, U937, expresses a number of both IgG and IgE receptors, and MQ-NCSU cells may express receptors homologous to these, to which IgY may in principle bind. However, in studies of IgG binding to U937 cells, only one receptor, FcRI, is detected, despite the presence of others, FcRII and FcRIII, because the dissociation rates are too fast to be measured (50). Similarly, IgE binding to U937 cells detects neither CD23 (low affinity receptor for IgE) unless induced (because it is expressed at such a low level) (51) nor FcRI (which requires neuraminidase treatment to unmask it) (52). The kinetic data reported here for IgY binding to MQ-NCSU cells suggest that a single receptor is being detected.

Comparison of the association rate constants measured here in cell binding for IgY with those determined by surface plasmon resonance (49) also shows good agreement: 1.14 x 10⁵ mol^–1 s^–1 and 2.4 x 10⁵ mol^–1 s^–1, respectively. These authors also measured the binding kinetics for an IgY-Fc fragment produced by papain digestion, consisting of a dimer of the C3 and C4 domains (49). Their value of k₊₁ = 3.9 x 10⁶ mol^–1 s^–1 for this fragment is 24x faster than that reported here, k₊₁ = 1.64 ± 0.01 x 10⁵ mol^–1 s^–1, for the recombinant Fc3–4. However, we also generated an Fc fragment by papain digestion and found, by N-terminal sequencing (27),⁵ that a substantial proportion of the material consists of an incomplete C3 domain; this may explain the discrepancy between the two k₊₁ values.

The studies of Viertlboeck et al. (49) and, we believe, the data reported here, concern the binding of an antibody to a receptor coded within the chicken LRC (on microchromosome 31). The mammalian LRC is a 1-megabase gene cluster on human chromosome 19, consisting of 45 genes, of which 30 encode Ig-like receptors that have mostly HLA class I molecules as ligands (53). In mammals, antibody Fc receptors are encoded mainly within the Fc receptor gene family (on human chromosome 1), but there are two examples of Fc receptors encoded within the mammalian LRC: the IgA receptor FcRI (CD89) and bovine FcRIIb (54). There is a significant difference between the way in which human FcRI interacts with IgA and how the "classical" Fc receptors belonging to the FcR gene cluster interact with IgG and IgE. Crystal structures of these Fc-receptor complexes show that in both IgG and IgE, the binding site lies in a similar region at the N terminus of the homologous C2 and C3 domains, respectively, whereas IgA interacts with its receptor through a site close to the junction between C2 and C3 (55). (It is not yet known to which domains of IgG bovine FcRIIb binds, but the interaction does involve domain 1 of the receptor, which is characteristic of LRC receptor interactions, in contrast to FcR, which involve domain 2.) The chicken LRC sequence is incomplete, but already 103 genes highly related to each other have been identified (56); currently, only CHIR-AB1 has a known ligand. As CHIR-AB1 is more closely related to FcRI than the Fc receptors for IgG or IgE, chicken IgY may bind to its receptor in a similar manner to that in which human IgA binds to FcRI. If so, and if the receptor binding site in IgY lies between C3 and C4 (and not at the N-terminal region of C3), this would be consistent with our observation that the presence of C2 plays no role in the binding kinetics.

Intriguingly, the FcR family in chicken appears to be represented by just a single gene (57, 58), and our preliminary experiments show that this receptor does not bind IgY.⁵ The mammalian FcR complex contains many receptor homologues whose ligands are not antibodies, and these receptors are thought to play a role in immunoregulation (59). These observations, and the data presented in this report, lead us to speculate that Fc receptor function migrated from the LRC to the FcR locus (which subsequently expanded) during the last 310 million years. The migration of Fc receptor function may have been a consequence of the need to shift the binding site in the antibody Fc from the C3/C4 interface in the IgY-like ancestor of IgG and IgE, due to competition from bacterial Fc-binding proteins. Such proteins are known to bind to the C2/C3 interface in IgA (60) and the C2/C3 interface in IgG (61, 62), thereby disabling the immune response by blocking FcR interactions. This selection pressure has led to co-evolution of IgA and its receptor (63); a receptor mutating too slowly to keep up with changing bacterial peptide sequences becomes redundant and may persist only as a pseudogene (as in rabbits) (63) or be eliminated altogether (as in mouse) (64). The IgY-like ancestor of IgG and IgE may have overcome this selection pressure by shifting the binding site to the N-terminal region of the domain that evolved into C2 and C3. Whatever the reason for the persistence of the C2 domains in IgY and its ancestors, its presence in the ancestor of IgE served as a preadaptation for the evolution of an antibody domain (C2) that contributes to the uniquely slow dissociation rate and high affinity for receptor and the consequent advantages this confers for defense against parasites.

	FOOTNOTES

 
^* The costs of publication of this article were defrayed in part by the payment of page charges. This article must therefore be hereby marked "advertisement" in accordance with 18 U.S.C. Section 1734 solely to indicate this fact.

¹ Supported by a Medical Research Council (UK) studentship.

² Supported by the Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council (UK).

³ To whom correspondence should be addressed. Fax: 44-207-848-6435; E-mail: rosy.calvert{at}kcl.ac.uk.

⁴ The abbreviations used are: C2, C3 second and third constant domains of IgY; C2, C3, second and third constant domains of IgE; IgE-Fc, Fc fragment of IgE; IgY-Fc, Fc fragment of IgY; Fab, antigen-binding fragment; Fc2–4, IgY-Fc fragment containing heavy chain constant domains 2, 3, and 4; Fc2–4, IgE-Fc fragment containing heavy chain constant domains 2, 3, and 4; Fc3–4, IgY-Fc fragment containing heavy chain constant domains 3 and 4; Fc3–4, IgE-Fc fragment containing heavy chain constant domains 3 and 4; CH, constant heavy chain domain; FcRI, chain of the high affinity receptor for IgE; CD23, low affinity receptor for IgE; FcRI, high affinity receptor for IgG; FcRI, high affinity receptor for IgA; CHIR-AB1, IgY receptor identified by Viertlboeck et al. (49); LRC, leukocyte receptor complex; Mb, megabase; my, million years; FACS, flow cytometry; PBS, phosphate-buffered saline; BSA, bovine serum albumin.

⁵ A. I. Taylor, H. J. Gould, B. J. Sutton, and R. A. Calvert, unpublished observations.

	ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

 
We thank the Nuclear Medicine Department of Guy's and St. Thomas's Hospital for the use of their PerkinElmer Life Sciences Wizard gamma counter.

	REFERENCES

TOP ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES RESULTS DISCUSSION REFERENCES

 

1. Flajnik, M. F. (2002) Nat. Rev. Immunol. 2, 688–698[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
2. Warr, G. W., Magor, K. E., and Higgins, D. A. (1995) Immunol. Today 16, 392–398[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
3. Parvari, R., Avivi, A., Lentner, F., Ziv, E., Tel-Or, S., Burstein, Y., and Schechter, I. (1988) EMBO J. 7, 739–744[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
4. Amemiya, C. T., Haire, R. N., and Litman, G. W. (1989) Nucleic Acids Res. 17, 5388[Free Full Text]
5. Fellah, J. S., and Charlemagne, J. (1988) Mol. Immunol. 25, 1377–1386[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
6. Murphy, K. M., Travers, P., Walport, M., and Janeway, C. (2008) Janeway's Immunobiology, pp. 566–567, Garland Science, London
7. Gould, H. J., Sutton, B. J., Beavil, A. J., Beavil, R. L., McCloskey, N., Coker, H. A., Fear, D., and Smurthwaite, L. (2003) Annu. Rev. Immunol. 21, 579–628[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
8. Qureshi, M. A., Heggen, C. L., and Hussain, I. (2000) Dev. Comp. Immunol. 24, 103–119[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
9. Faith, R. E., and Clem, L. W. (1973) Immunology 25, 151–164[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
10. Caldwell, C. C., Hornyak, S. C., Pendleton, E., Campbell, D., and Knowles, A. F. (2001) Arch. Biochem. Biophys. 387, 107–116[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
11. Rose, M. E., Ogilvie, B. M., and Bradley, J. W. (1980) Int. Arch. Allergy Appl. Immunol. 63, 21–29[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
12. Bellavia, A., Marino, V., Gallo, E., Peri, S. M., Bentivegna, C., Agresti, L., and Di Bona, M. (1992) Immunopharmacol. Immunotoxicol. 14, 233–250[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
13. Chand, N., and Eyre, P. (1976) Br. J. Pharmacol. 57, 399–408[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
14. Wilson, A. B., and Heller, E. D. (1976) Int. Arch. Allergy Appl. Immunol. 51, 68–79[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
15. Chand, N., and Eyre, P. (1978) Avian Dis. 22, 639–645[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
16. Hedges, S. B. (2002) Nat. Rev. Genet. 3, 838–849[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
17. Reisz, R. R., and Muller, J. (2004) Trends Genet 20, 237–241[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
18. Bininda-Emonds, O. R., Cardillo, M., Jones, K. E., MacPhee, R. D., Beck, R. M., Grenyer, R., Price, S. A., Vos, R. A., Gittleman, J. L., and Purvis, A. (2007) Nature 446, 507–512[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
19. Vernersson, M., Aveskogh, M., and Hellman, L. (2004) Dev. Comp. Immunol. 28, 61–75[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
20. Vernersson, M., Aveskogh, M., Munday, B., and Hellman, L. (2002) Eur. J. Immunol. 32, 2145–2155[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
21. Shi, J., Ghirlando, R., Beavil, R. L., Beavil, A. J., Keown, M. B., Young, R. J., Owens, R. J., Sutton, B. J., and Gould, H. J. (1997) Biochemistry 36, 2112–2122[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
22. Cook, J. P., Henry, A. J., McDonnell, J. M., Owens, R. J., Sutton, B. J., and Gould, H. J. (1997) Biochemistry 36, 15579–15588[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
23. Henry, A. J., Cook, J. P., McDonnell, J. M., Mackay, G. A., Shi, J., Sutton, B. J., and Gould, H. J. (1997) Biochemistry 36, 15568–15578[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
24. McDonnell, J. M., Calvert, R., Beavil, R. L., Beavil, A. J., Henry, A. J., Sutton, B. J., Gould, H. J., and Cowburn, D. (2001) Nat. Struct. Biol. 8, 437–441[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
25. Geha, R. S., Helm, B., and Gould, H. (1985) Nature 315, 577–578[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
26. Zhao, Y., Rabbani, H., Shimizu, A., and Hammarstrom, L. (2000) Immunology 101, 348–353[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
27. Suzuki, N., and Lee, Y. C. (2004) Glycobiology 14, 275–292[Abstract/Free Full Text]
28. Kenten, J. H., Molgaard, H. V., Houghton, M., Derbyshire, R. B., Viney, J., Bell, L. O., and Gould, H. J. (1982) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 79, 6661–6665[Abstract/Free Full Text]
29. Magor, K. E., Warr, G. W., Middleton, D., Wilson, M. R., and Higgins, D. A. (1992) J. Immunol. 149, 2627–2633[Abstract]
30. Young, R. J., Owens, R. J., Mackay, G. A., Chan, C. M., Shi, J., Hide, M., Francis, D. M., Henry, A. J., Sutton, B. J., and Gould, H. J. (1995) Protein Eng. 8, 193–199[Abstract/Free Full Text]
31. Walker, J. M. (2005) The Proteomics Protocols Handbook, pp. 571–607, Humana Press, Totowa, NJ
32. Laemmli, U. K. (1970) Nature 227, 680–685[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
33. Kyhse-Andersen, J. (1984) J. Biochem. Biophys. Methods 10, 203–209[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
34. Qureshi, M. A., Miller, L., Lillehoj, H. S., and Ficken, M. D. (1990) Vet. Immunol. Immunopathol. 26, 237–250[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
35. McConahey, P. J., and Dixon, F. J. (1980) Methods Enzymol. 70, 210–213[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
36. Segal, D. M., and Hurwitz, E. (1977) J. Immunol. 118, 1338–1347[Abstract/Free Full Text]
37. Kulczycki, A., Jr., and Metzger, H. (1974) J. Exp. Med. 140, 1676–1695[Abstract]
38. Goodrich, J. A., and Kugel, J. F. (2007) Binding and Kinetics for Molecular Biologists, p. 88, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press, Cold Spring Harbor, NY
39. Ikeyama, S. (1987) Mol. Immunol. 24, 231–237[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
40. Ellman, G. L. (1958) Arch. Biochem. Biophys. 74, 443–450[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
41. Shopes, B., Weetall, M., Holowka, D., and Baird, B. (1990) J. Immunol. 145, 3842–3848[Abstract]
42. Unkeless, J. C., and Eisen, H. N. (1975) J. Exp. Med. 142, 1520–1533[Abstract/Free Full Text]
43. Ishizaka, T., Helm, B., Hakimi, J., Niebyl, J., Ishizaka, K., and Gould, H. (1986) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 83, 8323–8327[Abstract/Free Full Text]
44. Ogawa, M., Nakahata, T., Leary, A. G., Sterk, A. R., Ishizaka, K., and Ishizaka, T. (1983) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 80, 4494–4498[Abstract/Free Full Text]
45. Karagiannis, S. N., Wang, Q., East, N., Burke, F., Riffard, S., Bracher, M. G., Thompson, R. G., Durham, S. R., Schwartz, L. B., Balkwill, F. R., and Gould, H. J. (2003) Eur. J. Immunol. 33, 1030–1040[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
46. Hulett, M. D., and Hogarth, P. M. (1994) Adv. Immunol. 57, 1–127[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
47. Lynch, M., and Conery, J. S. (2000) Science 290, 1151–1155[Abstract/Free Full Text]
48. Lynch, M., and Conery, J. S. (2003) J. Struct. Funct. Genomics 3, 35–44[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
49. Viertlboeck, B. C., Schweinsberg, S., Hanczaruk, M. A., Schmitt, R., Du Pasquier, L., Herberg, F. W., and Gobel, T. W. (2007) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 104, 11718–11723[Abstract/Free Full Text]
50. Maenaka, K., van der Merwe, P. A., Stuart, D. I., Jones, E. Y., and Sondermann, P. (2001) J. Biol. Chem. 276, 44898–44904[Abstract/Free Full Text]
51. Karagiannis, S. N., Bracher, M. G., Beavil, R. L., Beavil, A. J., Hunt, J., McCloskey, N., Thompson, R. G., East, N., Burke, F., Sutton, B. J., Dombrowicz, D., Balkwill, F. R., and Gould, H. J. (2008) Cancer Immunol. Immunother. 57, 247–263[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
52. Reischl, I. G., Corvaia, N., Effenberger, F., Wolff-Winiski, B., Kromer, E., and Mudde, G. C. (1996) Clin. Exp. Allergy 26, 630–641[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
53. Martin, A. M., Kulski, J. K., Witt, C., Pontarotti, P., and Christiansen, F. T. (2002) Trends Immunol. 23, 81–88[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
54. Zhang, G., Young, J. R., Tregaskes, C. A., Sopp, P., and Howard, C. J. (1995) J. Immunol. 155, 1534–1541[Abstract]
55. Woof, J. M., and Burton, D. R. (2004) Nat. Rev. Immunol. 4, 89–99[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
56. Laun, K., Coggill, P., Palmer, S., Sims, S., Ning, Z., Ragoussis, J., Volpi, E., Wilson, N., Beck, S., Ziegler, A., and Volz, A. (2006) PLoS Genet. 2, e73[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
57. Fayngerts, S. A., Najakshin, A. M., and Taranin, A. V. (2007) Immunogenetics 59, 493–506[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
58. Taylor, A. I., Gould, H. J., Sutton, B. J., and Calvert, R. A. (2007) Immunogenetics 59, 323–328[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
59. Davis, R. S. (2007) Annu. Rev. Immunol. 25, 525–560[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
60. Pleass, R. J., Areschoug, T., Lindahl, G., and Woof, J. M. (2001) J. Biol. Chem. 276, 8197–8204[Abstract/Free Full Text]
61. Sauer-Eriksson, A. E., Kleywegt, G. J., Uhlen, M., and Jones, T. A. (1995) Structure (Lond.) 3, 265–278[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
62. Deisenhofer, J. (1981) Biochemistry 20, 2361–2370[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
63. Abi-Rached, L., Dorighi, K., Norman, P. J., Yawata, M., and Parham, P. (2007) J. Immunol. 178, 7943–7954[Abstract/Free Full Text]
64. Maruoka, T., Nagata, T., and Kasahara, M. (2004) Immunogenetics 55, 712–716[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]

CiteULike

Complore

Connotea

Del.icio.us

Digg

Reddit

Technorati

This article has been cited by other articles:

				B. C. Viertlboeck, S. Schweinsberg, R. Schmitt, F. W. Herberg, and T. W. Gobel The Chicken Leukocyte Receptor Complex Encodes a Family of Different Affinity FcY Receptors J. Immunol., June 1, 2009; 182(11): 6985 - 6992. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

This Article Abstract Full Text (PDF) An addition or correction has been published All Versions of this Article: 283/24/16384    most recent M801321200v1 Submit a Letter to Editor Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when eLetters are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Request Permissions Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Taylor, A. I. Articles by Calvert, R. A. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Taylor, A. I. Articles by Calvert, R. A. Social Bookmarking                      What's this?