Skip Navigation



International Immunology Advance Access published online on November 1, 2007
International Immunology, doi:10.1093/intimm/dxm111
This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
19/12/1413    most recent
dxm111v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
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 Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Belyakov, I. M.
Right arrow Articles by Berzofsky, J. A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Belyakov, I. M.
Right arrow Articles by Berzofsky, J. A.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Published by Oxford University Press 2007.

Role of {alpha}3 domain of class I MHC molecules in the activation of high- and low-avidity CD8+ CTLs

Igor M. Belyakov1, Steven Kozlowski2, Michael Mage3, Jeffrey D. Ahlers1, Lisa F. Boyd3, David H. Margulies3 and Jay A. Berzofsky1

1 Molecular Immunogenetics and Vaccine Research Section, Vaccine Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD 20892, USA
2 Office of Biotechnology Products, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, Bethesda, MD 20892, USA
3 Laboratory of Immunology, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD 20892, USA

Correspondence to: Correspondence to: I. M. Belyakov; E-mail: igorbelyakov{at}yahoo.com


   Abstract
Top
 Abstract
Introduction
 Methods
 Results
 Discussion
 Funding
 References
 
CD8 can serve as a co-receptor or accessory molecule on the surface of CTL. As a co-receptor, CD8 can bind to the {alpha}3 domain of the same MHC class I molecules as the TCR to facilitate TCR signaling. To evaluate the role of the MHC class I molecule {alpha}3 domain in the activation of CD8+ CTL, we have produced a soluble 227 mutant of H-2Dd, with a point mutation in the {alpha}3 domain (Glu227->Lys). 227 mutant class I–peptide complexes were not able to effectively activate H-2Dd-restricted CD8 T cells in vitro, as measured by IFN-{gamma} production by an epitope-specific CD8+ CTL line. However, the 227 mutant class I–peptide complexes in the presence of another MHC class I molecule (H-2Kb) (that cannot present the peptide) with a normal {alpha}3 domain can induce the activation of CD8+ CTL. Therefore, in order to activate CD8+ CTL, the {alpha}3 domain of MHC class I does not have to be located on the same molecule with the {alpha}1 and {alpha}2 domains of MHC class I. A low-avidity CD8+ CTL line was significantly less sensitive to stimulation by the 227 mutant class I–peptide complexes in the presence of the H-2Kb molecule. Thus, low-avidity CTL may not be able to take advantage of the interaction between CD8 and the {alpha}3 domain of non-presenting class I MHC molecules, perhaps because of a shorter dwell time for the TCR–MHC interaction.

Keywords: cytotoxic T lymphocytes, MHC class I, avidity, epitope, peptide, TCR


   Introduction
Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
Methods
 Results
 Discussion
 Funding
 References
 
CD8 CTLs are a major effector for protection against many viral pathogens and tumors (1–10). Activation of CD8+ CTL is controlled by multiple receptor–ligand interactions between antigen-presenting cells (APCs) and CD8+ T cells (11–18). Two signals are required for T-cell activation: signal 1 results from antigen-specific interaction between MHC–peptide complexes on the APC with the TCR on the T-cell surface (19); signal 2 is mediated by interactions of co-stimulatory molecules on the APC with their receptors on CD8+ T cells. Activation of CD8+ CTL is strengthened by binding of the CD8 co-receptor with the {alpha}3 domain of MHC class I. In the presence of a weak signal 1 (because of low-affinity peptide) or sub-optimal signal 2, the activation of CD8+ T cells depends on the CD8 co-receptor; whereas in the presence of a strong signal 1 and signal 2, the co-receptor role of CD8 is redundant (20). CD8 promotes the formation of TCR–MHC class I–peptide complexes (21) and directly associates with Lck (22, 23). CD8 acts by augmenting signaling by focusing Lck into close proximity with the TCR (20, 22). In a study by Shen et al. (24), co-receptor and accessory functions on the surface of CTL were evaluated. It was demonstrated that the {alpha}3 domain-mutant class I–peptide complexes were bound by CTL and triggered degranulation, however, to much lower levels than wild-type class I–peptide complexes. While co-receptor functions of CD8 were diminished by a point mutation in the {alpha}3 domain of the MHC class I (Glu227->Lys), the ability of CD8+ T cells to be activated by TCR stimulation to bind class I molecules with high avidity (accessory function of CD8) was preserved (24). These data were strengthened by Knall et al. (25), who confirmed that CD8 functions much more efficiently as a co-receptor than as an accessory molecule for T-cell effector function. It was demonstrated that cells expressing a mutant H-2Kb molecule required the addition of 100-fold more exogenous peptide than did cells expressing the wild-type molecule in order to elicit significant lysis (26). Fluorescence resonance energy transfer (FRET) microscopy demonstrated transient interaction between CD3{zeta} and CD8ß at the synapse between a T cell and an APC loaded with agonist peptide (18). Also non-stimulatory endogenous or exogenous peptides, presented simultaneously with specific peptides, enhanced the CD8–TCR interaction (18). However, the role of {alpha}3 domain of class I MHC molecules in the activation of high- and low-avidity CD8+ CTLs was never investigated before. Some previous work in the field had supported the conclusion that MHC molecules not presenting the peptide could interact with CD8 and contribute to the T-cell response (18,27–31), whereas other studies had come to the opposite conclusion (32–35). Therefore, the current study was undertaken in part to resolve the issue.

In a study by Takeshita et al. (31), a cell-free antigen-presenting system was developed to quantitatively analyze the molecular interactions involved in CD8+ CTL recognition. Soluble MHC class I molecules (H-2Dd) on plastic were used to present an HIV peptide to an antigen-specific CD8+ CTL clone and induced production of IFN-{gamma} as a result of T-cell activation. It was demonstrated that the magnitude of T-cell activation showed first-order dependence on the concentration of the P18-I10 peptide but second-order dependence on that of the soluble H-2Dd molecule. This study suggested that one MHC molecule can play more than one role in activating the CD8+ CTL since T-cell activation was more sensitive to the concentration of the MHC molecule than to that of peptide (31). Also it was demonstrated that an irrelevant MHC class I molecule (H-2Kb) augmented CD8+ T-cell responses at lower peptide concentrations (31) and changed the dependency of the response on MHC concentration from second order to first order, perhaps by reducing the dependence on the relevant MHC molecule to its role in presenting peptide.

The co-receptor role of CD8 (CD8–{alpha}3 interaction) for the activation of high- versus low-avidity CTL is not well understood (36, 37). The role of the wild-type {alpha}3 domain of another MHC class I molecule (H-2Kb) (that cannot present the peptide) for activation of antigen-specific CD8+ CTL depends on the system studied. To investigate the role of the interaction of the {alpha}3 domain of MHC class I molecules with CD8 in the activation of the CD8+ CTL, we compared the activation of HIV-1 P18-I10-specific CD8+ CTL by soluble wild type MHC class I molecules (H-2Dd) and soluble H-2Dd molecules with a mutation in position 227 (Glu to Lys) (227 mutant) that prevents binding of CD8 to the {alpha}3 domain. The soluble 227 mutant on plastic was not effective in activating the CD8+ T-cell line in vitro. However, the {alpha}3 domain from another MHC class I molecule (H-2Kb) could contribute to the activation of CD8+ CTL. Thus, for activation of CD8+ CTL, the {alpha}3 domain does not have to be located in the same molecule with the {alpha}1 and {alpha}2 domains of MHC class I presenting the peptide. A low-avidity CTL line was less well activated by the 227 mutant in the presence of H-2Kb compared with a high-avidity CD8+ CTL line. This difference may be explained by more stable binding of {alpha}1 and {alpha}2 domains of the MHC class I–peptide complex by the TCR of a high-avidity CD8+ CTL compared with a low-affinity TCR–MHC class I–peptide interaction in low-avidity CTL.


   Methods
Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Methods
Results
 Discussion
 Funding
 References
 
Cell lines and cell purification
The HIV-envelope gp160-specific CD8+ line was derived from BALB/c mice immunized with a recombinant vaccinia virus expressing HIV-1 gp160IIIB (vPE16) (38), a kind gift of P. Earl and B. Moss. The spleens were aseptically removed and single-cell suspensions prepared by gently teasing them through sterile screens. The erythrocytes were lysed in Tris-buffered ammonium chloride and the remaining cells washed extensively in RPMI-1640 containing 2% fetal bovine serum (39, 40). Antigen-specific T cells were isolated from the spleen by multiple in vitro re-stimulations with irradiated syngeneic spleen cells pulsed with 0.001 µM (for high-avidity CD8+ CTL) or with 10 µM (for low-avidity CD8+ CTL) concentration of P18-I10 peptide (41, 42).

Soluble class I MHC proteins and 227 mutant
L-cell transfectants expressing either the H-2Dd molecule (consisting of the {alpha}1, {alpha}2 and {alpha}3 domains of H-2Dd and the C-terminal residues of the obligately soluble Q10b molecules) or the Glu 227-Lys mutant were cultured and supernatants harvested. H-2Dd was purified as previously described (43, 44).

Soluble class I MHC-presenting system
The soluble class I MHC-presenting system was originally described by Takeshita et al. (31). Soluble H-2Dd or 227 mutant of H-2Dd was coated onto the 96-well microtiter plastic plate (Immulon-4, Dynatech, Chantilly, VA, USA), titrating from 0 to 3 µg per well in 50 µl of PBS for 2 h at 37°C. The plates were washed twice with PBS and blocked with 1% BSA (Sigma, St Louis, MO, USA) for 45 min. P18 peptide in 50 µl of 10% FCS complete T cell medium was added and the plates were incubated overnight at 37°C and 6% CO2. The plates were washed with PBS three or four times. CTL lines (104) were added to each well in 10% FCS complete T cell medium. The supernatants were harvested after 24 h incubation at 37°C (31).

ELISA for IFN-{gamma}
The concentration of IFN-{gamma} in the supernatants was studied by an ELISA assay as previously described (45).

CTL assay
Cytolytic activity of CTL lines was measured by a 4-h assay with 51Cr-labeled targets as described previously (46). P815 cells were used as targets cells. CD8+ CTL lines were assayed for lysis of target cells pulsed with different concentrations of antigen at an effector-to-target ratio of 10:1. For testing the peptide specificity of CTL, 51Cr-labeled P815 targets were pulsed for 2 h with peptide at the beginning of the assay. The percent-specific 51Cr release was calculated as 100 x (experimental release – spontaneous release)/(maximum release – spontaneous release). Maximum release was determined from supernatants of cells that were lysed by addition of 5% Triton X-100. Spontaneous release was determined from target cells incubated without added effector cells (47).


   Results
Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Methods
 Results
Discussion
 Funding
 References
 
Purified recombinant soluble class I molecules (H-2Dd) coated on plastic plates effectively presented peptide P18-I10 to the CD8+ CTL line specific for this peptide, as measured by IFN-{gamma} production by the line (Fig. 1). In this experiment, a high-avidity CD8+ CTL line was used. This CD8+ CTL line was raised from spleen cells of BALB/c mice, which were immunized with HIV-recombinant vaccinia virus (vPE16), by multiple in vitro re-stimulations with irradiated syngeneic spleen cells pulsed with 0.001 µM P18-I10 peptide. The level of activation of CD8+ CTL was dependent on the P18-I10 peptide concentration, which was loaded onto the soluble class I molecules (Fig. 1). We noted that for our CD8+ CTL line, the optimal pulsing concentration of P18-I10 peptide was 1 µM, and we used this concentration of P18-I10 peptide in our future experiments (Fig. 1). When the lower concentrations of P18-I10 peptide were used (0.01–0.1 µM), the production of IFN-{gamma} was slightly reduced (Fig. 1). As a control, we studied the soluble H-2Kb molecules and noted that H-2Kb was not able to present P18-I10 peptide to CD8+ CTL line (data not shown). The activation of CD8+ CTL in vitro was greatly dependent on the concentration of soluble H-2Dd molecules (wild type) on plastic. Presentation of P18-I10 peptide to the CD8+ CTL line was detectable (by measurement of IFN-{gamma} concentration in cell culture media) when as little as 0.1 µg per well of wild type soluble H-2Dd was used. A 0.2 µg per well raised the IFN-{gamma} level production by CD8+ CTL line to plateau level (Fig. 2A). To investigate the role of the {alpha}3 domain of MHC class I molecules in the activation of CD8+ CTL, we used soluble H-2Dd molecules with a mutation in position 227 (Glu to Lys) (227 mutant) that prevents binding of CD8. Activation of a high-avidity CD8+ T-cell line by the 227 mutant class I–peptide complexes was diminished (Fig. 2A). 227-mutant class I–peptide complexes were not able to effectively activate CD8 T cells in vitro, as measured by IFN-{gamma} production by the P18-I10-specific CD8+ CTL line. The response of the CD8+ CTL reached a plateau level at a concentration of the 227 mutant class I–peptide complexes of 2.5 µg per well (Fig. 2A). However, the magnitude of the CD8+ CTL activation at the peak by 227 mutant class I–peptide complexes was about three times lower compared with activation of CD8 CTL by the wild-type H-2Dd (Fig. 2A).


Figure 1
View larger version (13K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[Download PowerPoint slide]
  		Fig. 1. Activation of a high-avidity CTL lines on MHC-coated plastic depends on P18-I10 peptide and MHC concentration. A high-avidity CD8 CTL line from spleen cells of BALB/c mice immunized with HIV-recombinant vaccinia virus (vPE16), grown by multiple in vitro re-stimulations with irradiated syngeneic spleen cells pulsed with 0.001 µM P18-I10 peptide, was activated on plastic with different concentrations of P18-I10 peptide (0.01, 0.1, 1 and 10 µM), loaded on soluble class I molecules coated on the plastic (0, 0.01, 0.15 and 0.18 µg per well of H-2Dd). P18-I10 peptide in 50 µl of 10% FCS complete T cell medium was added and the plates were incubated overnight at 37°C and 6% CO2. The plates were washed with PBS three or four times. CTL lines (104) were added to each well in 10% FCS complete T cell medium. Presentation of P18-I10 peptide to CD8+ CTL line was detectable by measurement of IFN-{gamma} concentration in cell culture media after 24 h incubation at 37°C (31). These experiments were performed twice with comparable results.

 

Figure 2
View larger version (12K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[Download PowerPoint slide]
  		Fig. 2. The {alpha}3 domain of MHC class I molecules does not have to be located in the same molecules with the {alpha}1 and {alpha}2 domains of MHC class I presenting the peptide in order to activate CD8+ CTL. Another type of MHC class I molecule can provide the {alpha}3 domain for the activation of CD8+ CTL. The {alpha}3 domain from H-2Kb molecules compensates for the altered signal from the dysfunctional {alpha}3 domain of mutant H-2Dd. (A) 227 mutant dose-dependent activation of CD8+ CTL, while the concentration of H-2Kb is constant (0.5 µg per well). (B) {alpha}3 domain of Kb dose-dependent activation of CD8+ CTL, while the concentration of 227 mutant is constant (1.2 µg per well). These experiments were performed twice with comparable results.

 
We asked whether the {alpha}3 domain from other MHC I molecules different from H-2Dd would compensate by a non-specific signal from the other {alpha}3 domain to CD8 molecules. It is known that H-2Kb molecules cannot present the P18-I10 peptide to CD8+ CTL (48; Fig. 2B). We directly added the standard concentration of soluble H-2Kb class I molecules (0.5 µg per well) to wells which were coated with the 227 mutant of H-2Dd. In this experiment, we titrated the concentration of 227 mutant from 0 to 3 µg per well (Fig. 2A). As a control, we compared the activation of CD8+ CTL cells by wild-type H-2Dd molecules that were loaded with P18-I10 peptide. A concentration of 0.2 µg per well of wild type of soluble H-2Dd in presence of I10 peptide elevated the level of IFN-{gamma} to a plateau. The range of concentrations of 227 mutant H-2Dd from 0 to 1.2 µg per well in the presence of 0.5 µg per well of soluble H-2Kb molecules was not sufficient to significantly activate CD8+ CTL cells in vitro (Fig. 2A). When we used concentrations of the 227 mutant higher than 1.5 µg per well in the presence of 0.5 µg per well of H-2Kb, a significant up-regulation of IFN-{gamma} production by CD8+ CTL was observed. The level of activation of CD8+ CTL was almost on a plateau level when 2 µg per well (and higher) of 227 H-2Dd mutant class I–peptide complexes in presence of H-2Kb molecules were used and was not significantly different from the response to wild-type H-2Dd loaded with peptide (Fig. 2A). Thus, the co-receptor signal for CD8+ CTL activation on plastic by mutant H-2Dd can be compensated by the presence of the {alpha}3 domain from another MHC class I molecule.

Also we performed the analysis with a standard sub-optimal concentration of 227 mutant (1.2 µg per well) on the plastic together with a titrated range of H-2Kb MHC class I molecules (from 0 to 3 µg per well) in order to activate the CD8+ CTL in vitro (Fig. 2B). A concentration of H-2Kb of 0.5 µg and higher in the presence of the 227 mutant class I–peptide complexes can induce the activation of CD8+ CTL (Fig. 2B). In contrast, H-2Kb alone does not stimulate at any concentration. Thus, the non-specific signal provided by the {alpha}3 domain of MHC class I molecules (through the interaction with CD8 molecules on CTL) in case of the {alpha}3 deficiency can be fully compensated by the {alpha}3 domain from other MHC class I molecules (such as H-2Kb). In order to activate CD8+ CTL, the {alpha}3 domain of the MHC class I molecule does not have to be located on the same molecules with the {alpha}1 and {alpha}2 domains. Other types of MHC class I can provide the {alpha}3 domain to work with the 227 mutant.

We developed high- and low-avidity CD8+ CTL lines to compare their sensitivity with the {alpha}3 domain on a different MHC molecule. These CD8+ CTL lines were raised from spleen cells of BALB/c mice immunized with HIV-recombinant vaccinia virus (vPE16) by multiple in vitro re-stimulations with irradiated syngeneic spleen cells pulsed with 0.001 µM (for high-avidity CD8+ CTL) or with 10 µM (for low-avidity CD8+ CTL) concentration of P18-I10 peptide and assayed for lysis of target cells pulsed with different concentrations of antigen at an effector-to-target ratio of 10:1 (Fig. 3A). The high-avidity CTL line was raised on APCs pulsed with the lowest concentrations of P18-I10, whereas the CTL lines raised on APCs pulsed with the highest concentration of P18-I10 required much higher concentrations of peptide on the targets to achieve the same level of lysis and are thus lower avidity CD8+ CTL (Fig. 3A). Also in our experiments, we used high- and low-avidity CTL lines with a similar level of CD8 expression to exclude that parameter as a variable. We characterized the activation of low-avidity CD8+ CTL under the same conditions as high-avidity CD8+ CTL in the presence of titrated amounts of the 227 mutant and constant H-2Kb (0.5 µg per well) (Fig. 3B). The low-avidity CTL was not activated even in the presence of a high concentration of 227 mutant class I–peptide complexes in the presence of H-2Kb molecules. One of the predictions was that low-avidity CD8+ CTL required more time for antigen recognition and activation. However, this was not the case. We studied CD8+ T-cell activation at different time points and found that low-avidity CD8 CTL cannot be activated even after a long in vitro stimulation on plastic with the 227 mutant MHC class I molecules loaded with P18-I10 peptide (Fig. 3C). These data demonstrate that the avidity of the CD8+ CTL is a most important factor for effective CD8+ T-cell activation in vitro and in vivo.


Figure 3
View larger version (9K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[Download PowerPoint slide]
  		Fig. 3. Generation of low- and high-avidity CD8+ CTL lines in vitro. (A) CD8+ CTL lines were raised from spleen cells of BALB/c mice immunized with HIV-recombinant vaccinia virus (vPE16) by multiple in vitro re-stimulations with irradiated syngeneic spleen cells pulsed with 0.001 µM (for high-avidity CD8+ CTL) or with 10 µM (for low-avidity CD8+ CTL) concentration of P18-I10 peptide and assayed for lysis of target cells pulsed with different concentrations of antigen at an effector-to-target ratio of 10:1. (B) The low avidity of P18-I10-specific CD8+ CTL line was activated less effectively by the titrated amount of 227 mutant class I–peptide complexes plus H-2Kb (concentration of H-2Kb is constant, 0.5 µg per well) compared with the high-avidity P18-I10-specific CD8+ CT line. (C) Kinetics of activation of high- versus low-avidity CD8+ CTL lines by 227 mutant H-2Dd plus P18-I10 peptide. Diamonds, high-avidity CTL; squares, low-avidity CTL. These experiments were performed twice with comparable results.

 

   Discussion
Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Methods
 Results
 Discussion
Funding
 References
 
Activation of CD8 T cells required at least two signals. Signal 1 results from antigen-specific recognition of the MHC class I–peptide complex on the APC by the TCR, whereas signal 2 is provided by the non-specific interaction of co-stimulatory molecules on APC with their receptors on CD8 CTL (16, 20). Signal 1 alone is not sufficient to activate fully naive CD8 T cells despite the induction of TCR down-regulation. Activation and differentiation of CD8+ T cells at low MHC–peptide densities required signal 2 with both B7 and Intercellular adhesion molecule-1 on the same APC (20). CD8 can bind to the same MHC class I molecules as the TCR to improve the efficiency of TCR signaling and thus serve as a co-receptor. Also CD8 CTL can be activated by TCR stimulation to bind to MHC class I molecules with high avidity, including CD8 interaction with MHC class I molecules not recognized by the TCR as antigenic complexes, to enhance CD8+ CTL responses. In this context, CD8 can serve as an accessory molecule. The CD8 co-receptor interacts with MHC class I molecules through an acidic loop in the {alpha}3 domain and this interaction is required for effective CD8+ CTL activation (35, 49, 50) and in positive and negative selection of developing T cells (51). In a study by Shepherd et al. (52), H-2Kb-specific recognition of H-2Kb structural mutant (a single Glu->Lys amino acid substitution at position 222 in the H-2Kb {alpha}3 domain) by CD8-independent CTL was unaltered, while the response by CD8-dependent CTL was completely abrogated. However, the mechanism of CD8 co-receptor–ligand interactions is not very well understood. Since endogenous class I molecules were expressed by all the transfected cell lines, the study by Connolly et al. (34) concluded that CD8 and the {alpha}ßTCR must interact with the same class I molecule . For recognition by CD8-dependent CTLs, residue 227 must be either glutamic acid or aspartic acid and cannot be either basic or uncharged (34). Others suggested that the CD8 and TCR must co-localize in lipid rafts (17). Our study demonstrates that a CD8+ CTL line can significantly benefit from the {alpha}3 domain on a non-TCR-binding MHC. A likely mechanism for this is an interaction with CD8 co-localized with TCR in lipid rafts (Fig. 4). Probably, it is still not as effective as true co-localization on the same MHC because Lck is moved closer to its target in the lipid rafts. However, this effect of CD8 co-localization with TCR in lipid rafts may be significantly amplified by the interaction of co-stimulatory molecules on APC with their receptors on CD8 CTL. Also it is possible that an isolated T-cell clone or restricted population may have a low, but otherwise undetectable {alpha}1/{alpha}2 domain interaction with H-2Kb and CD8 activation might be mediated by binding to a second TCR that is close to the H-2Dd-binding TCR. However, as it was discussed above, our previous studies have never detected any hint of recognition of H-2Kb by high- and/or low-avidity P18-I10 CTL lines or by primary T cells from immunized animals and it would seem exceedingly unlikely for the whole population to behave this way.


Figure 4
View larger version (39K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[Download PowerPoint slide]
  		Fig. 4. Schema of activation of CD8+ CTL by peptide MHC class I complexes on APC. The co-receptor signal for CD8+ CTL activation by mutant H-2Dd can be compensated by the presence of the {alpha}3 domain from another MHC class I molecule, co-localized in the lipid raft and drawing CD8 into the synapse.

 
The quantitative study of peptide–MHC class I–TCR interaction is difficult because it is not always possible to titrate the concentration of MHC class I molecules. This is why the development of a cell-free antigen-presenting system was needed. In the study by Takeshita et al. (31), the titration of MHC class I molecules was done by changing the density of recombinant soluble H-2Dd molecules coated on the plastic plate, and we exploited this system in our study. Peptide and MHC molecules together were sufficient for CD8+ CTL activation in vitro, without the presence of any co-stimulatory molecules. Also MHC class I–peptide interaction was accomplished in the absence of serum, and free peptide was washed away before T cells were added (31). The peptide binding to class I MHC required 1.5–2 h to reach half-maximal responses, and once the peptide was bound to MHC molecules, the complexes were very stable at least for 24 h (31). This study demonstrated that the T-cell response was more sensitive to varying the H-2Dd concentration than to varying the peptide concentration. These results suggested that the H-2Dd molecule played more than one role in the interaction (31). The interaction between the CD8 molecule and a non-polymorphic region of the H-2Dd molecule ({alpha}3 domain) was suggested as the second role for the H-2Dd in CD8+ T-cell activation in addition to presenting peptide to the TCR (31). This was concluded based on the effect of another class I MHC molecule, H-2Kb, that cannot present the peptide, on the shape of the titration curve, changing it from second order to first order in the H-2Dd concentration. Also, a recent FRET microscopy study by Yachi et al. (18) demonstrated non-antigen-specific recruitment of CD8 into the synapse between a T cell and an APC, as reported earlier for CD4 T cells (53). The non-stimulatory peptides induced CD8 clustering to the synapse as efficiently as the antigenic peptide in the conjugates (18). However, the role of non-specific recruitment of CD8 for activation of high- and low-avidity CD8+ CTL was never demonstrated before.

CD8+ CTL that can recognize peptide–MHC only at high antigen concentration are defined as low-avidity CD8+ CTL, while those that can be activated by low concentration of antigen are termed high-avidity CD8+ CTL (36, 41, 54, 55). CD8+ CTL functional avidity has been shown to be an important determinant of in vivo protective efficacy. It was demonstrated that high-avidity CD8+ CTLs are essential for effective clearance of viral infection (41, 42,56–61) and elimination of tumor (62–66). It was also shown that a high-avidity CD8+ CTL expressed a higher level of CD8ß+ compared with a low-avidity CD8+ CTL (67). However, the role of CD8 molecules and CD8–{alpha}3 interaction in activation of high- versus low-avidity CTL is not very well understood (36,68–71). To further explore this role in current study, we characterized the direct role of CD8–{alpha}3 interaction (without involvement of co-stimulatory molecules) for activation of high versus low avidity of CD8+ CTL, using a mutant H-2Dd with residue Glu 227 replaced with Lys, preventing the interaction with CD8. The soluble 227 mutant H-2Dd alone on plastic was not able to effectively activate either the high- or low-avidity CD8+ T-cell line in vitro. However, a non-specific signal provided by the {alpha}3 domain of other MHC class I molecules (H-2Kb) not presenting peptide can restore the activation of high-avidity CD8+ CTL. Thus, for such activation of CD8+ CTL, the {alpha}3 domain does not have to be located on the same molecule with the {alpha}1 and {alpha}2 domains of MHC class I molecule to activate high-avidity CTL (Fig. 4). In contrast, the low-avidity CTL line was less well activated by the H-2Dd 227 mutant plus H-2Kb. This suggests that the low-avidity CTL much more depend on co-receptor CD8–{alpha}3 interaction with the same MHC molecule and probably need the presence of some additional co-stimulatory factors/molecules which are absent in our system. Also, during the activation process on the plastic with soluble MHC class I molecules, cells may not be able to form as many synapses as observed in situ during T-cell activation by APC. Further, high-affinity binding by {alpha}1 and {alpha}2 domains of the MHC class I–peptide complex to the TCR is more stable compared with low-affinity interaction, which may dissociate more rapidly. Thus, the longer dwell time of the TCR CD8+ CTL of high avidity may allow time for the non-presenting MHC molecule to bring CD8 molecules into the lipid raft with their associated kinase Lck to permit phosphorylation of {zeta} chains of the TCR of the high-avidity CD8 CTL, whereas the dwell time may be too short for the low-avidity CTL.

Thus, our study demonstrated that in order to activate CD8+ CTL, the {alpha}3 domain of MHC class I does not have to be located on the same molecule with the {alpha}1 and {alpha}2 domains of MHC class I. The 227 mutant class I–peptide complexes in the presence of the H-2Kb molecule significantly more effectively activated high-avidity CD8+ CTL.


   Funding
Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Methods
 Results
 Discussion
 Funding
References
 
Intramural program of the Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health.


   Acknowledgements
 
We thank Patricia Earl and Bernard Moss (NIAID, Bethesda, MD, USA) for the gift of vaccinia virus vPE16. We thank Kannan Natarajan for critical reading of the manuscript and helpful suggestions.


   Abbreviations
 
APC, antigen-presenting cell
FRET, fluorescence resonance energy transfer

   Notes
 
Transmitting editor: I. Pecht

Received 14 June 2007, accepted 4 October 2007.


   References
Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Methods
 Results
 Discussion
 Funding
 References
 

  1. Ahlers JD, Belyakov IM, Berzofsky JA. Cytokine, chemokine and costimulatory molecule modulation to enhance efficacy of HIV vaccines. Curr. Mol. Med. (2003) 3:285.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  2. Ahlers JD, Belyakov IM, Terabe M, et al. A push-pull approach to maximize vaccine efficacy: abrogating suppression with an IL-13 inhibitor while augmenting help with GM-CSF and CD40L. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA (2002) 99:13020.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  3. Ahlers JD, Belyakov IM, Thomas EK, Berzofsky JA. High affinity T-helper epitope induces complementary helper and APC polarization, increased CTL and protection against viral infection. J. Clin. Invest. (2001) 108:1677.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  4. Ahlers JD, Belyakov IM, Matsui S, Berzofsky JA. Mechanisms of cytokine synergy essential for vaccine protection against viral challenge. Int. Immunol. (2001) 13:897.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  5. Belyakov IM, Hammond SA, Ahlers JD, Glenn GM, Berzofsky JA. Transcutaneous immunization induces mucosal CTL and protective immunity by migration of primed skin dendritic cells. J. Clin. Invest. (2004) 113:998.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  6. Kaech SM, Wherry EJ, Ahmed R. Effector and memory T-cell differentiation: implications for vaccine development. Nat. Rev. Immunol. (2002) 2:251.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  7. Belyakov IM, Ahlers JD, Clements JD, Strober W, Berzofsky JA. Interplay of cytokines and adjuvants in the regulation of mucosal and systemic HIV-specific cytotoxic T lymphocytes. J. Immunol. (2000) 165:6454.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  8. McMichael A, Hanke T. The quest for an AIDS vaccine: is the CD8+ T-cell approach feasible. Nat. Rev. Immunol. (2002) 2:283.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  9. Belyakov IM, Derby MA, Ahlers JD, et al. Mucosal immunization with HIV-1 peptide vaccine induces mucosal and systemic cytotoxic T lymphocytes and protective immunity in mice against intrarectal recombinant HIV-vaccinia challenge. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA (1998) 95:1709.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  10. Belyakov IM, Ahlers JD, Brandwein BY, et al. The importance of local mucosal HIV-specific CD8+ cytotoxic T lymphocytes for resistance to mucosal-viral transmission in mice and enhancement of resistance by local administration of IL-12. J. Clin. Invest. (1998) 102:2072.[Web of Science][Medline]
  11. Samberg NL, Scarlett EC, Stauss HJ. The a3 domain of major histocompatibility complex class I molecules plays a critical role in cytotoxic T lymphocyte stimulation. Eur. J. Immunol. (1989) 19:2349.[Web of Science][Medline]
  12. Sabzevari H, Kantor J, Jaigirdar A, et al. Acquisition of CD80 (B7-1) by T cells. J. Immunol. (2001) 166:2505.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  13. Cai Z, Sprent J. Resting and activated T cells display different requirements for CD8 molecules. J. Exp. Med. (1994) 179:2005.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  14. Townsend ARM, Rothbard J, Gotch FM, Bahadur G, Wraith D, McMichael AJ. The epitopes of influenza nucleoprotein recognized by cytotoxic T lymphocytes can be defined with short synthetic peptides. Cell (1986) 44:959.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  15. Germain RN. The ins and outs of antigen processing and presentation. Nature (1986) 322:687.[CrossRef][Medline]
  16. Krogsgaard M, Davis MM. How T cells ‘see’ antigen. Nat. Immunol. (2005) 6:239.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  17. Pecht I, Gakamsky DM. Spatial coordination of CD8 and TCR molecules controls antigen recognition by CD8+ T-cells. FEBS Lett. (2005) 579:3336.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  18. Yachi PP, Ampudia J, Gascoigne NR, Zal T. Nonstimulatory peptides contribute to antigen-induced CD8-T cell receptor interaction at the immunological synapse. Nat. Immunol. (2005) 6:785.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  19. Schwartz RH. T-lymphocyte recognition of antigen in association with gene products of the major histocompatibility complex. Annu. Rev. Immunol. (1985) 3:237.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  20. Cai Z, Brunmark AB, Luxembourg AT, et al. Probing the activation requirements for naive CD8+ T cells with Drosophila cell transfectants as antigen presenting cells. Immunol. Rev. (1998) 165:249.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  21. Garcia KC, Scott CA, Brunmark A, et al. CD8 enhances formation of stable T-cell receptor/MHC class I molecule complexes. Nature (1996) 384:577.[CrossRef][Medline]
  22. Thome M, Germain V, DiSanto JP, Acuto O. The p56lck SH2 domain mediates recruitment of CD8/p56lck to the activated T cell receptor/CD3/zeta complex. Eur. J. Immunol. (1996) 26:2093.[Web of Science][Medline]
  23. Zamoyska R. CD4 and CD8: modulators of T-cell receptor recognition of antigen and of immune responses? Curr. Opin. Immunol. (1998) 10:82.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  24. Shen L, Potter TA, Kane KP. Glu227–>Lys substitution in the acidic loop of major histocompatibility complex class I alpha 3 domain distinguishes low avidity CD8 coreceptor and avidity-enhanced CD8 accessory functions. J. Exp. Med. (1996) 184:1671.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  25. Knall C, Ingold A, Potter TA. Analysis of coreceptor versus accessory molecule function of CD8 as a correlate of exogenous peptide concentration. Mol. Immunol. (1994) 31:875.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  26. Knall C, Smith PA, Potter TA. CD8-dependent CTL require co-engagement of CD8 and the TCR for phosphatidylinositol hydrolysis, but CD8-independent CTL do not and can kill in the absence of phosphatidylinositol hydrolysis. Int. Immunol. (1995) 7:995.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  27. Kane KP, Sherman LA, Mescher MF. Molecular interactions required for triggering alloantigen-specific cytolytic T lymphocytes. J. Immunol. (1989) 142:4153.[Abstract]
  28. O'Rourke AM, Rogers J, Mescher MF. Activated CD8 binding to class I protein mediated by the T-cell receptor results in signalling. Nature (1990) 346:187.[CrossRef][Medline]
  29. Ratnofsky SE, Peterson A, Greenstein JL, Burakoff SJ. Expression and function of CD8 in a murine T cell hybridoma. J. Exp. Med. (1987) 166:1747.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  30. Lustgarten J, Waks T, Eshhar Z. CD4 and CD8 accessory molecules function through interactions with major histocompatibility complex molecules which are not directly associated with the T cell receptor-antigen complex. Eur. J. Immunol. (1991) 21:2507.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  31. Takeshita T, Kozlowski S, England RD, et al. Role of conserved regions of class I MHC molecules in the activation of CD8+ CTL by peptide and purified cell-free class I molecules. Int. Immunol. (1993) 5:1129.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  32. Aldrich CJ, Lowen LC, Mann D, et al. The Q7 a3 domain alters T cell recognition of class I antigens. J. Immunol. (1991) 146:3082.[Abstract]
  33. Potter TA, Rajan TV, Dick RF II, Bluestone JA. Substitution at residue 227 of H-2 class I molecules abrogates recognition by CD8-dependent, but not CD8-independent, cytotoxic T lymphocytes. Nature (1989) 337:73.[CrossRef][Medline]
  34. Connolly JM, Hansen TH, Ingold AL, Potter TA. Recognition by CD8 on cytotoxic T lymphocytes is ablated by several substitutions in the class I a3 domain: CD8 and the T-cell receptor recognize the same class I molecule. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA (1990) 87:2137.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  35. Salter RD, Benjamin RJ, Wesley PK, et al. A binding site for the T-cell co-receptor CD8 on the a3 domain of HLA-A2. Nature (1990) 345:41.[CrossRef][Medline]
  36. Snyder JT, Alexander-Miller MA, Berzofsky JA, Belyakov IM. Molecular mechanisms and biological significance of CTL avidity. Curr. HIV Res. (2003) 1:287.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  37. Alexander-Miller MA. High-avidity CD8+ T cells: optimal soldiers in the war against viruses and tumors. Immunol. Res. (2005) 31:13.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  38. Earl PL, Hugin AW, Moss B. Removal of cryptic poxvirus transcription termination signals from the human immunodeficiency virus type 1 envelope gene enhances expression and immunogenicity of a recombinant vaccinia virus. J. Virol. (1990) 64:2448.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  39. Belyakov IM, Isakov D, Zhu Q, Dzutsev A, Klinman D, Berzofsky JA. Enhancement of CD8+ T cell immunity in the lung by CpG ODN increases protective efficacy of a Modified Vaccinia Ankara vaccine against lethal poxvirus infection even in CD4-deficient host. J. Immunol. (2006) 177:6336.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  40. Belyakov IM, Wyatt LS, Ahlers JD, et al. Induction of mucosal CTL response by intrarectal immunization with a replication-deficient recombinant vaccinia virus expressing HIV 89.6 envelope protein. J. Virol. (1998) 72:8264.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  41. Alexander-Miller MA, Leggatt GR, Berzofsky JA. Selective expansion of high or low avidity cytotoxic T lymphocytes and efficacy for adoptive immunotherapy. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA (1996) 93:4102.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  42. Belyakov IM, Kuznetsov VA, Kelsall B, et al. Impact of vaccine-induced mucosal high avidity CD8+ CTLs in delay of AIDS-viral dissemination from mucosa. Blood (2006) 107:3258.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  43. Kozlowski S, Takeshita T, Boehncke W-H, et al. Excess b2-microglobulin promotes functional peptide association with purified soluble class I MHC molecules. Nature (1991) 349:74.[CrossRef][Medline]
  44. Margulies DH, Ramsey AL, Boyd LF, McCluskey J. Genetic engineering of an H-2Dd/Q10b chimeric histocompatibility antigen: purification of soluble protein from transformant cell supernatants. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA (1986) 83:5252.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  45. Belyakov IM, Earl P, Dzutsev A, et al. Shared modes of protection against poxvirus infection by attenuated and conventional smallpox vaccine viruses. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA (2003) 100:9458.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  46. Belyakov IM, Moss B, Strober W, Berzofsky JA. Mucosal vaccination overcomes the barrier to recombinant vaccinia immunization caused by preexisting poxvirus immunity. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA (1999) 96:4512.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  47. Belyakov IM, Wang J, Koka R, et al. Activating CTL precursors to reveal CTL function without skewing the repertoire by in vitro expansion. Eur. J. Immunol. (2001) 31:3557.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  48. Takahashi H, Cohen J, Hosmalin A, et al. An immunodominant epitope of the HIV gp160 envelope glycoprotein recognized by class I MHC molecule-restricted murine cytotoxic T lymphocytes. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA (1988) 85:3105.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  49. Newberg MH, Ridge JP, Vining DR, Salter RD, Engelhard VH. Species specificity in the interaction of CD8 with the a3 domain of MHC class I molecules. J. Immunol. (1992) 149:136.[Abstract]
  50. Wesley PK, Clayberger C, Lyu SC, Krensky AM. The CD8 coreceptor interaction with the alpha 3 domain of HLA class I is critical to the differentiation of human cytotoxic T-lymphocytes specific for HLA-A2 and HLA-Cw4. Hum. Immunol. (1993) 36:149.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  51. Killeen N, Moriarty A, Teh H-S, Littman DR. Requirement for CD8-major histocompatibility complex class I interaction in positive and negative selection of developing T cells. J. Exp. Med. (1992) 176:89.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  52. Shepherd SE, Sun R, Nathenson SG, Sheil JM. Selective reactivity of CD8-independent T lymphocytes to a cytotoxic T lymphocyte-selected H-2Kb mutant altered at position 222 in the alpha 3 domain. Eur. J. Immunol. (1992) 22:647.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  53. Zal T, Zal MA, Gascoigne NR. Inhibition of T cell receptor-coreceptor interactions by antagonist ligands visualized by live FRET imaging of the T-hybridoma immunological synapse. Immunity (2002) 16:521.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  54. Berzofsky JA, Ahlers JD, Belyakov IM. Strategies for designing and optimizing new generation vaccines. Nat. Rev. Immunol. (2001) 1:209.[CrossRef][Medline]
  55. Berzofsky JA, Ahlers JD, Derby MA, Pendleton CD, Arichi T, Belyakov IM. Approaches to improve engineered vaccines for human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) and other viruses that cause chronic infections. Immunol. Rev. (1999) 170:151.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  56. Gray PM, Parks GD, Alexander-Miller MA. A novel CD8-independent high-avidity cytotoxic T-lymphocyte response directed against an epitope in the phosphoprotein of the paramyxovirus simian virus 5. J. Virol. (2001) 75:10065.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  57. Derby MA, Alexander-Miller MA, Tse R, Berzofsky JA. High avidity CTL exploit two complementary mechanisms to provide better protection against viral infection than low avidity CTL. J. Immunol. (2001) 166:1690.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  58. Estcourt MJ, Ramsay AJ, Brooks A, Thomson SA, Medveckzy CJ, Ramshaw IA. Prime-boost immunization generates a high frequency, high-avidity CD8(+) cytotoxic T lymphocyte population. Int. Immunol. (2002) 14:31.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  59. Gallimore A, Dumrese T, Hengartner H, Zinkernagel RM, Rammensee HG. Protective immunity does not correlate with the hierarchy of virus-specific cytotoxic T cell responses to naturally processed peptides. J. Exp. Med. (1998) 187:1647.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  60. Belyakov IM, Isakov D, Zhu Q, Dzutsev A, Berzofsky JA. A novel functional CTL avidity/activity compartmentalization to the site of mucosal immunization contributes to protection of macaques against simian/human immunodeficiency viral depletion of mucosal CD4+ T cells. J. Immunol. (2007) 178:7211.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  61. Belyakov IM, Ahlers JD, Berzofsky JA. Mucosal AIDS vaccines: current status and future directions. Expert Rev. Vaccines. (2004) 3(Suppl):65.[CrossRef]
  62. Zeh HJ III, Perry-Lalley D, Dudley ME, Rosenberg SA, Yang JC. High avidity CTLs for two self-antigens demonstrate superior in vitro and in vivo antitumor efficacy. J. Immunol. (1999) 162:989.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  63. Gervois N, Labarriere N, Le Guiner S, et al. High avidity melanoma-reactive cytotoxic T lymphocytes are efficiently induced from peripheral blood lymphocytes on stimulation by peptide-pulsed melanoma cells. Clin. Cancer. Res. (2000) 6:1459.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  64. Nugent CT, Morgan DJ, Biggs JA, et al. Characterization of CD8+ T lymphocytes that persist after peripheral tolerance to a self antigen expressed in the pancreas. J. Immunol. (2000) 164:191.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  65. Yee C, Savage PA, Lee PP, Davis MM, Greenberg PD. Isolation of high avidity melanoma-reactive CTL from heterogeneous populations using peptide-MHC tetramers. J. Immunol. (1999) 162:2227.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  66. Zheng L, Fisher G, Miller RE, Peschon J, Lynch DH, Lenardo MJ. Induction of apoptosis in mature T cells by tumour necrosis factor. Nature (1995) 377:348.[CrossRef][Medline]
  67. Cawthon AG, Lu H, Alexander-Miller MA. Peptide requirement for CTL activation reflects the sensitivity to CD3 engagement: correlation with CD8alphabeta versus CD8alphaalpha expression. J. Immunol. (2001) 167:2577.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  68. Berzofsky JA, Ahlers J, Janik J, et al. Progress on new vaccine strategies against chronic viral infections. J. Clin. Invest. (2004) 114:450.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  69. Berzofsky JA, Terabe M, Oh S, et al. Progress on new vaccine strategies for the immunotherapy and prevention of cancer. J. Clin. Invest. (2004) 113:1515.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  70. Belyakov IM, Hel Z, Kelsall B, et al. Mucosal AIDS vaccine reduces disease and viral load in gut reservoir and blood after mucosal infection of macaques. Nat. Med. (2001) 7:1320.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  71. Belyakov IM, Berzofsky JA. Immunobiology of mucosal HIV infection and the basis for development of a new generation of mucosal AIDS vaccines. Immunity (2004) 20:247.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]

Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 J. Immunol.Home page
R. Wang, K. Natarajan, and D. H. Margulies
Structural Basis of the CD8{alpha}{beta}/MHC Class I Interaction: Focused Recognition Orients CD8{beta} to a T Cell Proximal Position
J. Immunol., August 15, 2009; 183(4): 2554 - 2564.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
19/12/1413    most recent
dxm111v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
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 Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Belyakov, I. M.
Right arrow Articles by Berzofsky, J. A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Belyakov, I. M.
Right arrow Articles by Berzofsky, J. A.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?