Antigen Bridging in the Interaction of T Helper Cells and B Cells

  • Joel W. Goodman
  • Danute E. Nitecki
  • Sherman Fong
  • Zehra Kaymakcalan
Part of the Advances in Experimental Medicine and Biology book series (AEMB, volume 150)


Antigen-bridging models of the interaction between T and B lymphocytes rose to prominence in the late 1960s, based principally on two different experimental approaches (1–3). One involved the “carrier effect”, in which physical association between hapten and carrier is required for a secondary antihapten antibody response in animals primed separately with hapten and carrier, and the other involved thymus-marrow reconstitution of irradiated animals, demonstrating that hapten and carrier were recognized by different cell types in the anti-hapten antibody response.


Antigenic Determinant Proline Residue Nominal Antigen Irradiate Animal Axial Translation 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    P.A. Bretscher and M. Cohn. Minimal model for the mechanism of antibody induction and paralysis by antigen. Nature 220: 444 (1968).Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    N.A. Mitchison, K. Rajewsky, and R.B. Taylor. Cooperation of antigenic determinants and of cells in the induction of antibodies, in: “Prague Sym. on Developmental Aspects Formation and Structure.” J. Sterzl and T. Riha, eds., Academic Press, New York (1970).Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    K. Rajewsky, V. Schirrmacher, S. Nase, and N.K. Jerne. The requirement of more than one antigenic determinant for immunogenicity. J. Exp. Med. 129:1131 (1969).PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    J.W. Goodman. Antigenic determinants and antibody combining sites, in: The Antigens, Vol. III, M. Sela, ed., Academic Press, New York (1975).Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    S.S. Alkan, D.E. Nitecki, and J.W. Goodman. Antigen recognition the immune response. The capacity of L-tyosine-pazobenzenearsonate to serve as a carrier for a macro-molecular hapten. J. Immunol. 107:353 (1971).PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    J.W. Goodman, S. Fong, G.K. Lewis, R. Kamin, D.E. Nitecki, and G. Derbalian. Antigen structure and lymphocyte activation. Immunol. Rev. 39:36 (1978).PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    S.S. Alkan, E.B. Williams, D.E. Nitecki, and J.W. Goodman. Antigen recognition and the immune response. Humoral and cellular responses small monofunctional and bifunctional antigen molecules. J. Exp. Med. 135:1228 (1972).PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    M.E. Bush, S.S. Alkan, D.E. Nitecki, and J.W. Goodman. Antigen recognition and the immune response. Self-help with symmetrical bifunctional antigen molecules. J. Exp. Med. 136:1478 (1972).PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    J.W. Goodman, C.J. Bellone, D. Hanes, and D.E. Nitecki. Antigen structural requirements for lymphocyte triggering and cell cooperation, in: Progress in Immunology II, Vol. 2, L. Brent and J. Holbrow, eds. North Holland Publishing Co., (1974).Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    J. Andersson, M.H. Schreier, and F. Melchers. T-cell dependent B-cell stimulation is H-2 restricted and antigen dependent only at the resting B cell level. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. USA 77:1612 (1980).PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    B. Jones and C.A. Janeway, Jr. Cooperative interaction of B lymphocytes with antigen-specific helper T lymphocytes is MHC restricted. Nature 292: 547 (1981).PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    R.N. Apte, I. Lowy, R. De Baetselier, and E. Mozes. Establishment and characterization of continuous helper T cell lines specific to poly(L Tyr, L Glu)-poly(DL Ala)-poly(L Lys). J. Immunol. 127:25 (1981).Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    C.A. Janeway, Jr., R.A. Murgita, F.I. Weinbaum, R. Asofsky, and H.W. Wigzell. Evidence for an immunoglobulin-dependent antigen-specific helper T cell. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. USA 74:4582 (1977).PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    S. Fong, D.E. Nitecki, R.M. Cook, and J.W. Goodman. Spatial requirements between haptenic and carrier determinants for T-dependent antibody responses. J. Exp. Med. 148:817 (1978).PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    V.D. Gupta, R.D. Singh, A.M. Dwivedi. Vibrational spectra and dispersion curves of poly-L-proline II chain. Biopolymers 12: 1377 (1973).PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    P.M. Cowan and S. McGavin. Structure of poly-L-proline. Nature 176: 501 (1955).Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    P.R. Schimmel and P.J. Flory. Conformational energy and configurational statitics of poly-L-proline. Proc. Nat. Acad Sci. USA 58:52 (1967).PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    I.Z. Steinberg, W.F. Harrington, A. Berger, M. Sela, and E. Katchalski. The configurational changes of poly-L-proline in solution. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 82:5263 (1960).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    L. Stryer, and R.P. Haugland. Energy transfer: A spectroscopic ruler. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. USA 58:719 (1967).PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Press, New York 1982

Authors and Affiliations

  • Joel W. Goodman
    • 1
  • Danute E. Nitecki
    • 1
  • Sherman Fong
    • 1
  • Zehra Kaymakcalan
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Microbiology and ImmunologyUniversity of CaliforniaSan FranciscoUSA

Personalised recommendations