Identification and molecular characterization of allergenic nsLTP from durum wheat (Triticum turgidum)

Background: Common wheat (Triticum aestivum) and durum wheat (T. turgidum) are both involved in Baker's asthma (BA) and food allergy (FA) including wheat-dependent exercise-induced asthma (WDEIA). However, allergens in durum wheat have not been described, and the over-expression of T. turgidum non-specific lipid-transfer protein (nsLTPs) is considered to increase resistance to phytopathogens. Objective: To identify and assess the allergenicity of nsLTP from T. turgidum. Methods: Recombinant T. turgidum nsLTP Tri tu 14 was generated and tested for structural integrity (circular dichroism-spectroscopy) and purity (SDS-PAGE). Thirty-two wheat allergic patients were enrolled: 20 Spanish patients (BA) with positive bronchial challenge to wheat flour, and 12 Italian patients (wheat FA/WDEIA) with positive double-blind placebo-controlled food challenge/open food challenge (OFC) to pasta. IgE values to wheat, Tri tu 14, Tri a 14 (T. aestivum) and Pru p 3 (P. persica) were determined by ImmunoCAP testing. Allergenic potency (in vitro mediator release) and IgE cross-reactivity were investigated. Results: Tri tu 14 was found to share 49% and 52% amino acid identity with Tri a 14 and Pru p 3, respectively. Among 25 Tri a 14 CAP positive sera, 23 (92%) were reactive to wheat extract, 22 (88%) to Tri tu 14 and 20 (80%) to Pru p 3. The correlation between Tri a 14 and Tri tu 14 specific IgE levels was r = 0.97 (BA) and r = 0.93 (FA/WDEIA), respectively. FA/WDEIA patients showed higher specific IgE values to Tri tu 14 and Pru p 3 than BA patients. Tri tu 14 displayed allergenic activity by mediator release from effector cells and IgE cross-reactivity with Pru p 3. The degree of IgE cross-reactivity between the two wheat nsLTPs varied between individual patients. Conclusions and Clinical Relevance: Sensitization to Tri tu 14 likely appears to be more important in wheat FA/WDEIA than in BA. Over-expression of Tri tu 14 in wheat would represent a risk for patients with nsLTP-mediated FA

Food allergy in the Netherlands: differences in clinical severity, causative foods, sensitization and DBPCFC between community and outpatients

Background: It is unknown whether food allergy (FA) in an unselected population is comparable to those from an outpatient clinic population. Objective: To discover if FA in a random sample from the Dutch community is comparable to that of outpatients. Methods: This study was part of the Europrevall-project. A random sample of 6600 adults received a questionnaire. Those with symptoms to one of 24 defined priority foods were tested for sΙgE. Participants with a positive case history and elevated sIgE were evaluated by double-blind placebo-controlled food challenge (DBPCFC). Outpatients with a suspicion of FA were evaluated by questionnaire, sIgE and DBPCFC. Results: In the community, severe symptoms were reported less often than in outpatients (39.3% vs. 54.3%). Participants in the community were less commonly sensitized to any of the foods. When selecting only those with a probable FA (i.e. symptoms of priority food and elevation of sIgE to the respective food), no major differences were observed with respect to severity, causative foods, sensitization and DBPCFC between the groups. Conclusion: In the Netherlands, there are large differences in self-reported FA between community and outpatients. However, Dutch community and outpatients with a probable FA do not differ with respect to severity, causative foods, sensitization and DBPCFC-outcome

Origin and evolution of water oxidation before the last common ancestor of the Cyanobacteria

Photosystem II, the water oxidizing enzyme, altered the course of evolution by filling the atmosphere with oxygen. Here, we reconstruct the origin and evolution of water oxidation at an unprecedented level of detail by studying the phylogeny of all D1 subunits, the main protein coordinating the water oxidizing cluster (Mn4CaO5) of Photosystem II. We show that D1 exists in several forms making well-defined clades, some of which could have evolved before the origin of water oxidation and presenting many atypical characteristics. The most ancient form is found in the genome of Gloeobacter kilaueensis JS-1 and this has a C-terminus with a higher sequence identity to D2 than to any other D1. Two other groups of early evolving D1 correspond to those expressed under prolonged far-red illumination and in darkness. These atypical D1 forms are characterized by a dramatically different Mn4CaO5 binding site and a Photosystem II containing such a site may assemble an unconventional metal cluster. The first D1 forms with a full set of ligands to the Mn4CaO5 cluster are grouped with D1 proteins expressed only under low oxygen concentrations and the latest evolving form is the dominant type of D1 found in all cyanobacteria and plastids. In addition, we show that the plastid ancestor had a D1 more similar to those in early branching Synechococcus. We suggest each one of these forms of D1 originated from transitional forms at different stages towards the innovation and optimization of water oxidation before the last common ancestor of all known cyanobacteria

WHO/IUIS Allergen Nomenclature: Providing a common language

A systematic nomenclature for allergens originated in the early 1980s, when few protein allergens had been described. A group of scientists led by Dr. David G. Marsh developed a nomenclature based on the Linnaean taxonomy, and further established the World Health Organization/International Union of Immunological Societies (WHO/IUIS) Allergen Nomenclature Sub-Committee in 1986. Its stated aim was to standardize the names given to the antigens (allergens) that caused IgE-mediated allergies in humans. The Sub-Committee first published a revised list of allergen names in 1986, which continued to grow with rare publications until 1994. Between 1994 and 2007 the database was a text table online, then converted to a more readily updated website. The allergen list became the Allergen Nomenclature database (www.allergen.org), which currently includes approximately 880 proteins from a wide variety of sources. The Sub-Committee includes experts on clinical and molecular allergology. They review submissions of allergen candidates, using evidence-based criteria developed by the Sub-Committee. The review process assesses the biochemical analysis and the proof of allergenicity submitted, and aims to assign allergen names prior to publication. The Sub-Committee maintains and revises the database, and addresses continuous challenges as new “omics” technologies provide increasing data about potential new allergens. Most journals publishing information on new allergens require an official allergen name, which involves submission of confidential data to the WHO/IUIS Allergen Nomenclature Sub-Committee, sufficient to demonstrate binding of IgE from allergic subjects to the purified protein

IgE Recognition Patterns of Profilin, PR-10, and Tropomyosin Panallergens Tested in 3,113 Allergic Patients by Allergen Microarray-Based Technology

BACKGROUND: IgE recognition of panallergens having highly conserved sequence regions, structure, and function and shared by inhalant and food allergen sources is often observed. METHODS: We evaluated the IgE recognition profile of profilins (Bet v 2, Cyn d 12, Hel a 2, Hev b 8, Mer a 1, Ole e 2, Par j 3, Phl p 12, Pho d 2), PR-10 proteins (Aln g 1, Api g 1, Bet v 1.0101, Bet v 1.0401, Cor a 1, Dau c 1 and Mal d 1.0108) and tropomyosins (Ani s 3, Der p 10, Hel as 1, Pen i 1, Pen m 1, Per a 7) using the Immuno-Solid phase Allergen Chip (ISAC) microarray system. The three panallergen groups were well represented among the allergenic molecules immobilized on the ISAC. Moreover, they are distributed in several taxonomical allergenic sources, either close or distant, and have a route of exposure being either inhalation or ingestion. RESULTS: 3,113 individuals (49.9% female) were selected on the basis of their reactivity to profilins, PR-10 or tropomyosins. 1,521 (48.8%) patients were reactive to profilins (77.6% Mer a 1 IgE(+)), 1,420 (45.6%) to PR-10 (92.5% Bet v 1 IgE(+)) and 632 (20.3%) to tropomyosins (68% Der p 10 IgE(+)). A significant direct relationship between different representative molecules within each group of panallergens was found. 2,688 patients (86.4%) recognized only one out of the three distinct groups of molecules as confirmed also by hierarchical clustering analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Unless exposed to most of the allergens in the same or related allergenic sources, a preferential IgE response to distinct panallergens has been recorded. Allergen microarray IgE testing increases our knowledge of the IgE immune response and related epidemiological features within and between homologous molecules better describing the patients' immunological phenotypes

Choosing and Using a Plant DNA Barcode

The main aim of DNA barcoding is to establish a shared community resource of DNA sequences that can be used for organismal identification and taxonomic clarification. This approach was successfully pioneered in animals using a portion of the cytochrome oxidase 1 (CO1) mitochondrial gene. In plants, establishing a standardized DNA barcoding system has been more challenging. In this paper, we review the process of selecting and refining a plant barcode; evaluate the factors which influence the discriminatory power of the approach; describe some early applications of plant barcoding and summarise major emerging projects; and outline tool development that will be necessary for plant DNA barcoding to advance

A European-Japanese study on peach allergy : IgE to Pru p 7 associates with severity

Funding Information: M. Fernández‐Rivas received grants or contracts from Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Spanish Government, Aimmune Therapeutics, Diater, and Novartis; payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from Aimmune Therapeutics, Ediciones Mayo S.A., Diater, Ga2LEN, HAL Allergy, GSK, MEDSCAPE, NOVARTIS, and EPG Health; is member of the Data Safety Monitoring Board at DBV and advisory board at Aimmune Therapeutics, Novartis, Reacta Healthcare, and SPRIM. B. Ballmer‐Weber received consulting fees from ALK, Allergopharma, Menarini, Sanofi, Novartis, Thermofisher and Aimune and payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing or educational events from ALK, Menarini, Sanofi, Novartis, and Thermofisher. F. De Blay received grants or contract from Aimmune, Stallergenes Greer, GSK, ALK, Chiesi, and Regeneron. Y. Fukutomi received payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from Thermo Fisher Diagnostics KK. K. Hoffmann‐Sommergruber received funding from Danube Allergy Research Cluster funded by the Country of Lower Austria to (P07) KHS; was Member of the EAACI board until 2022/07. J. Lidholm is employee at Thermo Fisher Scientific. E.N.C Mills received grants or has contracts from Food Standards Agency Patterns and prevalence of adult food allergy (FS101174), European Food Safety Authority (ThRAll; allergenicity prediction [with EuroFIR]) and from Innovate (ML for food allergy); has applied for a patent on oral food challenge meal formulations for diagnosis of food allergy; is member of the Advisory Board of Novartis and Advisory Committee on Novel Foods and Processes; and is shareholder of Reacta Healthcare Ltd. N.G. Papadopoulos received grants or contracts from Capricare, Nestle, Numil, Vianex; received consultancy fees from Abbott, Abbvie, Astra Zeneca, GSK, HAL, Medscape, Menarini/Faes Farma, Mylan, Novartis, Nutricia, OM Pharma, and Regeneron/Sanofi. S. Vieths received royalties or licenses from Schattauer Allergologie Handbuch, Elsevier Nahrungsmittelallergien and Intoleranzen and Karger Food Allergy: Molecular Basis and Clinical Practice; support for attending meetings and/or travel as Associate Editor of the Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology. R. van Ree received consulting fees from HAL Allergy, Citeq, Angany, Reacta Healthcare, Mission MightyMe, and Ab Enzymes; received payment of honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing or educational events from HAL Allergy, Thermo Fisher Scientific and ALK; received payment for expert testimony from AB Enzymes; has stock option at Angany. The rest of the authors declare that they have no relevant conflicts of interest. Funding Information: This work was funded by the European Commission under the 6th Framework Programme through EuroPrevall (FP6‐FOOD‐CT‐2005‐514000), and the 7th Framework Programme iFAAM (grant agreement no. 31214). Funding Information: We thank all the patients for their participation in the study. We would like to thank ALK Abello (Madrid, Spain) for their generous gift of SPT reagents. We thank Angelica Ehrenberg, Jonas Östling and Lars Mattsson (Uppsala) for preparing recombinant Cup s 7 and custom ImmunoCAP tests for this study. We acknowledge the support by the 6th and 7th Framework Programmes of the EU, for EuroPrevall (FP6‐FOOD‐CT‐2005‐514000) and iFAAM (Grant agreement no. 312147), respectively. We thank Alejandro Gonzalo Fernández (Hospital Clinico San Carlos, IdISSC, Madrid) for implementing the FASS in the data set. Publisher Copyright: © 2023 The Authors. Allergy published by European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology and John Wiley & Sons Ltd.BACKGROUND: Pru p 3 and Pru p 7 have been implicated as risk factors for severe peach allergy. This study aimed to establish sensitization patterns to five peach components across Europe and in Japan, to explore their relation to pollen and foods and to predict symptom severity. METHODS: In twelve European (EuroPrevall project) and one Japanese outpatient clinic, a standardized clinical evaluation was conducted in 1231 patients who reported symptoms to peach and/or were sensitized to peach. Specific IgE against Pru p 1, 2, 3, 4 and 7 and against Cup s 7 was measured in 474 of them. Univariable and multivariable Lasso regression was applied to identify combinations of parameters predicting severity. RESULTS: Sensitization to Pru p 3 dominated in Southern Europe but was also quite common in Northern and Central Europe. Sensitization to Pru p 7 was low and variable in the European centers but very dominant in Japan. Severity could be predicted by a model combining age of onset of peach allergy, probable mugwort, Parietaria pollen and latex allergy, and sensitization to Japanese cedar pollen, Pru p 4 and Pru p 7 which resulted in an AUC of 0.73 (95% CI 0.73-0.74). Pru p 3 tended to be a risk factor in South Europe only. CONCLUSIONS: Pru p 7 was confirmed as a significant risk factor for severe peach allergy in Europe and Japan. Combining outcomes from clinical and demographic background with serology resulted in a model that could better predict severity than CRD alone.Peer reviewe

The chlL ( frxC ) gene: Phylogenetic distribution in vascular plants and DNA sequence from Polystichum acrostichoides ( Pteridophyta ) and Synechococcus sp. 7002 ( Cyanobacteria )

We examined chlL ( frxC ) gene evolution using several approaches. Sequences from the chloroplast genome of the fern Polystichum acrostichoides and from the cyanobacterium Synechococcus sp. 7002 were determined and found to be highly conserved. A complete physical map of the fern chloroplast genome and partial maps of other vascular plant taxa show that chlL is located primarily in the small single copy region as in Marchantia polymorpha. A survey of a wide variety of non-angiospermous vascular plant DNAs shows that chlL is widely distributed but has been lost in the pteridophyte Psilotum and (presumably independently) within the Gnetalean gymnosperms.Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/41636/1/606_2004_Article_BF00994092.pd