15 Pages
3795Words
Introduction of How Is Antigen Variation Of Pathogens Used Assignment
Get free written samples from expert assignment writers and academic writing services in UK.
The infectious agent can invest in the immune system and immune surveillance and can alter its antigenic structure. Saade et al. (2020) have stated that specific antigens can respond in the immune system against infected pathogens. When the immune resonance occurs against the antigen, it produces cells of proteins called antibodies. The presence of antigens develops antigenic variation that can defend against them. This study is going to analyse the methods of antigenic variation on the used pathogen in the body and developed the ways to develop the antigenic variation against the development of the pathogenic organisms.
“Antigenic variation” is the mechanism that can be activated by any infectious organ. This mechanism is related to the phase variation and makes the mechanism of antigenic escape. Antigenic variation makes enables the pathogens to avoid “immune response” and allows the “re-infection” in previously infected hosts. According to Wémeau et al. (2018), Antigenic variation can occur with a variety of molecules like proteins and carbohydrates that can result in “gene conversion”. “Antigenic variation” occurs in many types of pathogenic organisms like bacteria, protozoa, and viruses. In bacteria, it can be demonstrated in “Neisseria meningitidis” and “Neisseria gonorrhoeae”.
Antigenic Drift vs. Antigenic shift in the virus body
(Source: Influenced by Cohen et al. 2019)
After infections, it stimulates its host immune response and so makes a critical role in bacterial adhesion. As per the view of Cohen et al. (2019), in protozoa, the antigenic variation is employed in the “Trypanosoma brucei” and “Plasmodium falciparum”. “Antigenic drift” occurs here and male an imperfect replication of the genome and the amount of drift has a negative impact on the fitness of the body’s immune system. As per the opinion of Sarmah et al. (2018), “Antigenic shift” can restructure the protein stores in the viral genome and make influence infection in human strains. So, the antigenic variation is the observation of the isolating of a single species that make a variable of cross-reactivity and can be tested by a “stranded serum”. The “antigenic variation” is important for both super infection and re-infection and to develop a subset of variants to make a dense population of the infected organisms.
-
Importance of antigenic variations
Pathogens produce different kinds of antigens in order to avoid the impact on the immune system of the host body. Additionally, variation in the antigens helps the pathogens to attack different kinds of host tissues. As per the view of Stephens (2020), in the case of “Chlamydia Trachomatis”, the locus of a “plasticity zone” also known as “ompA plus omcB” produced the antigen in those microbes. Some species of “Chlamydia, Rickettsia, and Listeria” also produce different kinds of antigens that helped them to attack different kinds of hosts (Ncbi.nlm.nih.gov, 2021, b). In addition to that, those microbes attack different parts of the host body including the “cellular vesicle and nervous system”. Those above-mentioned microbes produce different kinds of genes including “rOmpA and rOmpB” which helped the microbe to bring variation in their host species (Ncbi.nlm.nih.gov, 2021. a). Bringing variation in antigen allowed the pathogens to develop different kinds of diseases in the host bodies. Additionally, Dendrou et al. (2018) stated that pathogens developed different kinds of proteins that helped to develop different kinds of antigenic sequences to attack the host bodies. This kind of issue also develops conflicts in the process of vaccination that have a direct impact on the immune system of the host body. As per the view of Beaty et al. (2020), in order to develop variation in the gene sequences while producing new antigens, pathogens have to change the cycle of “replication and translation”. This kind of activity helped the microbes to bring changes in the protein sequences that allowed them to develop pathogenicity against the vaccination process.
Change in gene sequences of OmpA
(Source: Influenced by Stephens, 2020)
Different “antigenic shifts” helped to overcome the effect of the vaccine whereas “antigenic drift” helped to change the surface protein of the antigens. That allowed to recognise the host body and also helped to secrete the chemicals to penetrate the outer surface of the host body. Xue et al. (2018), identified that the gene named “HA and NA” leads the change in the antigen and also allowed the “Influenza A virus” to attract their host bodies. In addition to that those genes helped to cover 8 genes with 11 proteins including “nucleoprotein, non-structural protein 1, nuclear export protein, membrane proteins M1 and M2 and many more” that make the antigen more complex. These changes allowed the pathogens to later their gene sequences to produce antigens that helped them to infect the host cells. Pathogens improved their gene sequences in order to increase the effectives of the antigens.
-
Importance of antigens in pathogen
Pathogens have a huge dependency on the gene that produces antigens. The protein molecules that attack the host body are known as antigens. Those materials have a negative impact on the immune system of the host tissue. As per the view of Akkaya et al. (2020), pathogens attract the “B cells” of the host body that affected the immune system while affecting the memory “B cells”. In addition to that, antigens also affected the memory system of the host body which develops some diseases in the host body. In addition to that, Zhang et al. (2018) stated that improving the “lipid, proteins and the chemical compound” helped the pathogens to change the process of infection. Hence, changing the chemical composition helped the pathogens to attract different kinds of host bodies.
Position of the nucleoproteins
(Source: Influenced by Zhang et al., 2018)
Br4inging variation in antigens helped to attract different kinds of hosts while escaping the immune system. As per the view of Angulo-Romero et al. (2018), different kinds of immune systems including “IgG, IgA, and IgM” helped the host cells to develop the immune system against the antigens produced by the microbes. This article also stated that escaping that immunoglobulin has helped the pathogens to attract the host in a frequent manner. In addition to that Graham et al. (2019), state that microbes develop their antigen producing capability which helped to change the molecular structure of the pathogens allowing them to produce different kinds of antigens. At the same time, the outer layer of the pathogens is made up of glycoprotein mainly present on the outer surface of the “icosahedral viruses”. Different kinds of pathogens including “viruses, bacteria and many more” make changes in their gene sequences to bring changes in their antigens. That mainly affected “IgA and IgG” which reduce the immune system of the host body. Hence, it can be stated that antigens helped the pathogens to attack the host body while producing different kinds of chemical substances. As per the view of Cesewski and Johnson (2020), changing the sequences in the DNA while replicating their genes helped the pathogens to produce different kinds of pathogens. Different kinds of antigens including “Exogenous, endogenous and auto antigens” aided the pathogens to attack in a different manner on the host body. In addition to that, Harryvan et al. (2021) stated that antigens are mainly heavy chemical compounds that were made up of long-chain of peptides, amino acids and many more. In addition to that, there were some small chemical compounds that sometimes developed immune responses in the host body.
-
The process to develop antigenic variation in pathogens
Bringing variation in the chemical composition of the antigens has helped to attack different kinds of hosts while escaping the immune system of the host. As per the view of Müller et al. (2018), pathogens change the chemical property while changing the gene sequences that produce the proteins for their antigens. This kind of change helped to change the lipid sequences that escape the immune system of the host body. This kind of activity negatively affected the “T and B memory cells”.
Protein specific memory T cells
(Source: Influenced by Müller et al., 2018)
Changing the gene sequences resulted in a “change in DNA sequence, hyper mutation, recombination of sequence cassettes” that supported the pathogens to bring changes in the gene sequences. On the other hand, Sarowska et al. (2019) stated that humans have more folding in their genome that developed difficulty for the pathogens while attacking human-like host bodies. Bringing variation helped to multiply the pathogenicity that aided the microbes to attack the host body in an easy way. In the case of “Influenza A virus” the gene sequences of HA and NA have changed while getting mutated and produced “the B/Victoria/2/87” and “the B/Yamagata/16/88” that helped the pathogen to attack the host bodies while escaping the immune system of the host. This kind of action also allowed attacking the complex immune system of mammals and other vertebrates.
Conversing the gene sequences
(Source: Influenced by Sarowska et al., 2019)
Increasing the complexity in the sequences of the antigens helped to avoid the impact of the immunoglobulin’s of the host bodies. In addition to that Maloy et al. (2018) stated that bringing variation in the gene sequences helped to produce different kinds of genes while performing “replication”. In addition to that, changing the gene sequences in the replication process helped to bring variation while performing the translation process in order to produce protein molecules. There, it can be stated that developing variation in the antigen production process helped to bring variation in the hosts that allowed the pathogens to spread different kinds of diseases in an easy manner. On the other hand, recognizing the antibodies of the host cells supported the pathogens to bring variation in their gene sequences as well as the protein sequences.
-
Usage of antigen variation of pathogens
Pathogens have evolved themselves in form of evading the body system to defence the normal host. For many decades, vertebrates have developed themselves with many ways of defence power against the infection of pathogens. So, such organisms have evolved their strategies also to make infective the immune function of vertebrates. As per the statement of Karsten et al. (2019), the pathogenic organisms have developed themselves to invent the immune surveillance and make altered the antigens. There have some ways of antigenic variation to alter the antigenic types of the organism. The dynamic mechanism of antigenic variation is responsible for the infection of the human body. As per the view of Cohen et al. (2019), when human pollution is gradually developing the antibody, the surface of the protein of the bacteria has evolved to be wide protective to neutralize antibodies. Antigenic drift has occurred and performing the point mutation in the genes of the organisms and so encoding of “hemagglutinin” has happened. As per the view of Woldemeskel et al. (2021), the second surface of the surface protein of influenza virus is neuraminidase which allows the virus to neutralize the antibodies population specifically.
Phylogenic reaction of antigenic variation with Cytotoxic T-cell
(Source: Influenced by Raoufi et al. 2020)
The antigenic variation can also disturb the rearrangement of the DNA function of the pathogens and the major surface of antigen make inflect the host. Along with the virus, antigenic variation is most common in bacterial organisms. It affected the rearrangement of DNA and grown public health problems in human society. As per the view of Woldemeskel et al. (2021), the variation can spread to cells and tissues and make effective the extracellular environment of the organism. “L. monocytogenes” is an effective example of a bacterial pathogen that can be susceptible to the use of antigenic variation and can kill the “Cytotoxic T-cells” of the human body. There is the mechanism of the antigenic variation that has evolved to suppress the immune function of the pathogens and capture the cellular genes of the “synthesizing complement-regulatory molecules”. As per the suggestion of Raoufi et al. (2020), in pathogens, the antigenic variation has created two different types of mechanisms and in these one is genetic and another is genetic. As per the statement of Coghill et al. (2018), the genetic subsequences have changed the sequence of DNA and altered the expression of amino acid sequences of the microbes.
On the other hand, the epigenetic mechanism of the antigenic variation is that type of mechanism that affects the gene expression and causes random and spontaneous mutation of gene function. As per the opinion of Lyons-Weiler (2020), antigenic variation is a multiphase antigenic expression in a clonally population. It generally makes capable the pathogens to increase their persistence in the host bodies. The circulating strains of the pathogens can produce a mutation with “neutralizing epitopes” and alter the immune response of the host system. Antigenic variation has occurred in the pathogen bodies with the antigenic components of “glycoprotein” and makes a cost over the surface areas of the pathogens. These types of mutations that make changed the structures of the corresponding proteins and affected the immune systems. The antigenic variation in the pathogen is significant as it induces the function of the antigens and makes effective the infection function over the human population.
Re-infection functions of random antigenic variation
(Source: Influenced by Harding et al. 2018)
As per the statement of Coghill et al. (2018), the antigenic variation has changed the antigenic structure of the infective agents can make large the reassortments of the strains. “Random antigenic variation” is the most effective type of antigenic variation that can be seen in fungal and bacterial pathogens. It has targeted the host antibodies and can extend the duration of the infection. As per the mention of Harding et al. (2018), the random mutation of genes has also occurred with a large gene rearrangement and male the modification of re-infection functions of the pathogens too. Now, it can be said that process and development of antigenic variation are fully focused on the host and the interface of the pathogen. As it particularly increased the rate of the cell surface, the infectious characteristics have been grown with virulence determinants.
The many genetic systems of the antigenic variation and mispaired the gene conversion and so the alternative of genome functions in several pathogens have been changed. Such changes have not altered the primary sequencing of DNA. As per the suggestion of Harding et al. (2018), in very few cases, the length of infection has been done in the first infectious stage of antigenic variation and the transmutation rate in the host is more advanced.
Conclusion
Thus it can be concluded from the above discussion, that the antigenic variation is super effective in the detection and enlargement of pathogenic harms in the body. It reduces the immune system of the body and the defence mechanism against the infectious agents is not started and reduces the effect of the immune function over the specific pathogenic by producing specific antibodies. The bindings of antigenic variation have occurred in different types of organisms and keep the immune system of the body active. The most significant function of antigenic variation is to make the ability of infection extended and so it avoids immune recognition.
Reference list
Akkaya, M., Kwak, K. and Pierce, S.K., 2020. B cell memory: building two walls of protection against pathogens. Nature Reviews Immunology, 20(4), pp.229-238.
Angulo-Romero, J., Infante-García-Pantaleón, F., Domínguez-Vilches, E., Mediavilla-Molina, A. and Caridad-Ocerín, J.M., 2018. Pathogenic and antigenic fungi in school dust of the south of Spain. In Aerobiology (pp. 49-65). CRC Press.
Beaty, B.J., Trent, D.W. and Roehrig, J.T., 2020. Virus variation and evolution: mechanisms and epidemiological significance. In The arboviruses: epidemiology and ecology (pp. 59-86). CRC Press.
Cesewski, E. and Johnson, B.N., 2020. Electrochemical biosensors for pathogen detection. Biosensors and Bioelectronics, 159, p.112214.
Coghill, A.E., Pfeiffer, R.M., Proietti, C., Hsu, W.L., Chien, Y.C., Lekieffre, L., Krause, L., Teng, A., Pablo, J., Kelly, J.Y. and Lou, P.J., 2018. Identification of a novel, EBV-based antibody risk stratification signature for early detection of nasopharyngeal carcinoma in Taiwan. Clinical Cancer Research, 24(6), pp.1305-1314.
Cohen, L.J., Cho, J.H., Gevers, D. and Chu, H., 2019. Genetic factors and the intestinal microbiome guide development of microbe-based therapies for inflammatory bowel diseases. Gastroenterology, 156(8), pp.2174-2189.
Dendrou, C.A., Petersen, J., Rossjohn, J. and Fugger, L., 2018. HLA variation and disease. Nature Reviews Immunology, 18(5), pp.325-339.
Graham, B.S., Gilman, M.S. and McLellan, J.S., 2019. Structure-based vaccine antigen design. Annual review of medicine, 70, pp.91-104.
Harding, C.M., Hennon, S.W. and Feldman, M.F., 2018. Uncovering the mechanisms of Acinetobacter baumannii virulence. Nature Reviews Microbiology, 16(2), pp.91-102.
Harryvan, T.J., de Lange, S., Hawinkels, L.J. and Verdegaal, E.M., 2021. The ABCs of antigen presentation by stromal Non-Professional antigen-presenting cells. International Journal of Molecular Sciences, 23(1), p.137.
Karsten, C.B., Mehta, N., Shin, S.A., Diefenbach, T.J., Slein, M.D., Karpinski, W., Irvine, E.B., Broge, T., Suscovich, T.J. and Alter, G., 2019. A versatile high-throughput assay to characterize antibody-mediated neutrophil phagocytosis. Journal of immunological methods, 471, pp.46-56.
Lyons-Weiler, J., 2020. Pathogenic priming likely contributes to serious and critical illness and mortality in COVID-19 via autoimmunity. Journal of translational autoimmunity, 3, p.100051.
Maloy, S. and Hughes, K. eds., 2018. Brenner's encyclopedia of genetics. Academic Press.
Müller, L.S., Cosentino, R.O., Förstner, K.U., Guizetti, J., Wedel, C., Kaplan, N., Janzen, C.J., Arampatzi, P., Vogel, J., Steinbiss, S. and Otto, T.D., 2018. Genome organization and DNA accessibility control antigenic variation in trypanosomes. Nature, 563(7729), pp.121-125.
Ncbi.nlm.nih.gov (2021.a), name of gene, Available at: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4453529/ [Accessed on 10.04.2022]
Ncbi.nlm.nih.gov (2021.b), name of pathogens, Available at: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK27114/ [Accessed on 10.04.2022]
Raoufi, E., Hemmati, M., Eftekhari, S., Khaksaran, K., Mahmodi, Z., Farajollahi, M.M. and Mohsenzadegan, M., 2020. Epitope prediction by novel immunoinformatics approach: a state-of-the-art review. International Journal of Peptide Research and Therapeutics, 26(2), pp.1155-1163.
Saade, G., Deblanc, C., Bougon, J., Marois-Créhan, C., Fablet, C., Auray, G., Belloc, C., Leblanc-Maridor, M., Gagnon, C.A., Zhu, J. and Gottschalk, M., 2020. Coinfections and their molecular consequences in the porcine respiratory tract. Veterinary research, 51(1), pp.1-19.
Sarmah, P., Dan, M.M., Adapa, D. and Sarangi, T.K., 2018. A review on common pathogenic microorganisms and their impact on human health. Electronic Journal of Biology, 14(1), pp.50-58.
Sarowska, J., Futoma-Koloch, B., Jama-Kmiecik, A., Frej-Madrzak, M., Ksiazczyk, M., Bugla-Ploskonska, G. and Choroszy-Krol, I., 2019. Virulence factors, prevalence and potential transmission of extraintestinal pathogenic Escherichia coli isolated from different sources: recent reports. Gut pathogens, 11(1), pp.1-16.
Stephens, R.S., 2020. Antigenic variation of Chlamydia trachomatis. In Intracellular Parasitism (pp. 51-62). CRC Press.
Wémeau, J.L., Klein, M., Sadoul, J.L., Briet, C. and Vélayoudom-Céphise, F.L., 2018, December. Graves’ disease: introduction, epidemiology, endogenous and environmental pathogenic factors. In Annales d'endocrinologie (Vol. 79, No. 6, pp. 599-607). Elsevier Masson.
Woldemeskel, B.A., Garliss, C.C. and Blankson, J.N., 2021. SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccines induce broad CD4+ T cell responses that recognize SARS-CoV-2 variants and HCoV-NL63. The Journal of clinical investigation, 131(10).
Xue, K.S., Moncla, L.H., Bedford, T. and Bloom, J.D., 2018. Within-host evolution of human influenza virus. Trends in microbiology, 26(9), pp.781-793.
Zhang, W., Jiang, X., Bao, J., Wang, Y., Liu, H. and Tang, L., 2018. Exosomes in pathogen infections: a bridge to deliver molecules and link functions. Frontiers in immunology, 9, p.90.
