The JI
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     
 

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Spangler, B. D.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Spangler, B. D.

The Journal of Immunology, Vol 146, Issue 5 1591-1595, Copyright © 1991 by American Association of Immunologists

ARTICLES

Binding to native proteins by antipeptide monoclonal antibodies

BD Spangler
Biological and Medical Research Division, Argonne National Laboratory, IL 60439-4833.

mAb raised against synthetic peptides derived from cholera toxin, myohemerythrin, and sickle hemoglobin were analyzed by both solid-phase and solution-phase methods. Antipeptide mAb against cholera toxin (mAb TE32 and TE33), against myohemerythrin (mAb B13I2, B13C2, and B13F2), and against sickle hemoglobin (mAb HuS-1 and HuS-2), had been previously described and used for vaccine development, structural characterization, or identification of a specific antigenic determinant, and each was apparently capable of binding both peptide and native Ag. In this study, all were found to bind whole protein when tested against immobilized Ag in a standard solid-phase assay (ELISA), yet none of the antibodies recognized the Ag in its true native form, failing to bind when tested in several solution-phase assay systems, including size exclusion HPLC. This discrepancy may be the result of modifications of the epitope created by interaction and possible denaturation of the protein on the solid-phase matrix. As a consequence, binding of these antibodies to peptides, either immobilized or in solution, or to immobilized protein, cannot be used to infer that the peptide has assumed a conformation that corresponds to that of the cognate sequence in the native protein. A re-evaluation of binding data that relates antipeptide mAb to native structural characteristics may be necessary.


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Am. J. Pathol.Home page
G. E. Davis, K. J. Bayless, M. J. Davis, and G. A. Meininger
Regulation of Tissue Injury Responses by the Exposure of Matricryptic Sites within Extracellular Matrix Molecules
Am. J. Pathol., May 1, 2000; 156(5): 1489 - 1498.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J. Biol. Chem.Home page
G. Wu, R. MacKenzie, P. J. Durda, and P. Tsang
The Binding of a Glycoprotein 120 V3 Loop Peptide to HIV-1 Neutralizing Antibodies. STRUCTURAL IMPLICATIONS
J. Biol. Chem., November 17, 2000; 275(47): 36645 - 36652.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
This Website Copyright © 1991 by The American Association of Immunologists, Inc. All rights reserved.
All Contents Copyright © 1991 by The American Association of Immunologists, Inc. All rights reserved.