Received date: November 01, 2014 Accepted date: January 12, 2015 Published date: January 15, 2015
Citation: Leclerc M, Kresdorn N (2016) The Asterias Rubens Complement System: Comparisons with Lower Vertebrates. J Cell Sci Ther 7:236. doi:10.4172/2157-7013.1000236
Copyright: © 2016 Leclerc M, et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Visit for more related articles at Journal of Cell Science & Therapy
Seven complement components have been discovered in 2013, when compared to mouse genome. Another component: the C6 component was found in sea star, when compared to rainbow trout genome:”Oncorhynchus mykiss”.
Invertebrate innate; Adaptative immunity
We have recently described the” Sea star complement Evidence” . We remarked that C6 and C7 components were missing in sea star transcriptome when compared to mouse one.
An extensive study allowed us to research these components in less evolved animals (phylogenetically speaking) than mouse. Genomic features of the rainbow trout: Oncorhynchus mykiss have helped us, in this study.
At this point, we were attempting to determine how many similar complement components might be present in Asterias rubens (Invertebrate) and in Oncorhynchus mykiss (Vertebrate).
Sea stars Asterias rubens were obtained from the Biology Institute (Gothenbugh University)
1.100 bp from one side of the approximately 200 bp fragments. Sequences were assembled using Velvet (Zerbino and Birney .
C6 was discovered in trout in 2006 .
Sea star C1q subunits A, B, C, were sequenced in A. rubens .
C2, C4B, and C3 which is central in mammals to both the classical and alternative pathways, C9,
C5, C8 were also sequenced  in Asterias rubens
As for C6, it was shown as following, when compared to Oncorhynchus mykiss genome:
One contig (Contig11285|m.9708) could be annotated via BLASTX to Oncorhynchus mykiss “Complement component C6” from the Trembl database, with an e-value of 3.75e-13. On an aligned region of 113 amino acids, 37 positive and 56 identical amino acids were found.
C7 was not found.
We find much more complement components in the sea star than in trout: 8 out of 9, when compared to mouse. How do we explain these differences between trout and A. rubens? Phylogenetically speaking the sea star could be situated in “an evolutive cul de sac”and might evolved more quickly than rainbow trout, in term of innate immunity. As for adaptative immunity, rainbow trout is more evolved than Asterias rubens which presents an “invertebrate primitive antibody” in response to antigenic injury [5,6]. This review has described a rather rich catalogue of immune factors in sea star and trout that serve as potent molecules in the defense of these animals against environmental threats. Taken together one cannot come away with any conclusion other than sea stars have developed a very impressive set of mechanisms to deal with environmental threats. The same logic would apply to an explanation of why the sea star A. rubens has evolved the ability to develop innate and adaptative immunity. Further studies are bound to unravel the mystery and add to the above information to give a clearly picture of the sequence of events.