Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 117

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 88 of the 88 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Optogenetic control shows that kinetic proofreading regulates the activity of the T cell receptor

Yousefi, O Sascha, Günther, Matthias, Hörner, Maximilian, Chalupsky, Julia, Wess, Maximilian, Brandl, Simon M, Smith, Robert W, Fleck, Christian, Kunkel, Tim, Zurbriggen, Matias D, Höfer, Thomas, Weber, Wilfried, Schamel, Wolfgang WA·2019·eLife

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

The immune system distinguishes between self and foreign antigens. The kinetic proofreading (KPR) model proposes that T cells discriminate self from foreign ligands by the different ligand binding half-lives to the T cell receptor (TCR). It is challenging to test KPR as the available experimental systems fall short of only altering the binding half-lives and keeping other parameters of the interaction unchanged. We engineered an optogenetic system using the plant photoreceptor phytochrome B (PhyB) as a ligand to selectively control the dynamics of ligand binding to the TCR by light. This opto-ligand-TCR system was combined with the unique property of PhyB to continuously cycle between the binding and non-binding states under red light, with the light intensity determining the cycling rate and thus the binding duration. Mathematical modeling of our experimental datasets showed that indeed the ligand-TCR interaction half-life is the decisive factor for activating downstream TCR signaling, substantiating KPR.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.7554/elife.42475

Cites

88 of 88 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Metadata

Authors
Yousefi, O. S., Günther, M., Hörner, M., Chalupsky, J., Wess, M., Brandl, S. M., Smith, R. W., Fleck, C., Kunkel, T., Zurbriggen, M. D., Höfer, T., Weber, W., & Schamel, W. W.
Venue
eLife
Published
2019-04-05
Volume
8
ISSN
2050-084X
Cited by
117
References
88
Language
en
Funders
Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (EXC2189, GSC-4, EXC294, EXC81, INST 39/899-1 FUGG)

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.