135k views
5 votes
Compare and contrast the affinity hypothesis and altered peptide hypothesis to explain the thymic selection paradox (why we don't negatively select all cells that we positively select).

User Mattbdean
by
7.2k points

1 Answer

2 votes

Final answer:

The affinity hypothesis suggests that T cells with higher affinity for self-antigens are more likely to undergo negative selection, while the altered peptide hypothesis proposes that the presentation of self-antigens in the thymus may be altered, leading to different outcomes during thymic selection.

Step-by-step explanation:

The affinity hypothesis and altered peptide hypothesis are two theories that explain the thymic selection paradox, which refers to why not all T cells that are positively selected are negatively selected. The affinity hypothesis suggests that T cells with higher affinity for self-antigens are more likely to undergo negative selection, while T cells with lower affinity are more likely to escape negative selection. On the other hand, the altered peptide hypothesis proposes that the presentation of self-antigens in the thymus may be altered, leading to different outcomes during thymic selection.

For example, under the affinity hypothesis, T cells that strongly bind to self-antigens may be negatively selected to prevent autoimmunity. However, T cells with weaker binding affinity may still be allowed to mature and contribute to the immune response. Under the altered peptide hypothesis, changes in the presentation of self-antigens may result in T cells not being recognized as self-reactive, allowing them to escape negative selection.

User Cnrhgn
by
7.8k points