Does complexity belie a simple decision--on the Efroni and Cohen critique of the minimal model for a self-nonself discrimination

Ten experiments that would make a difference in understanding immune mechanisms

Jacques Monod used to say, "Never trust an experiment that is not supported by a good theory." Theory or conceptualization permits us to put order or structure into a vast amount of data in a way that increases understanding. Validly competing theories are most useful when they make testably disprovable predictions. Illustrating the theory-experiment interaction is the goal of this exercise. Stated bleakly, the answers derived from the theory-based experiments described here would impact dramatically on how we understand immune behavior.

A biological context for the self-nonself discrimination and the regulation of effector class by the immune system

An effective immune response to an antigen requires two sets of decisions: Decision 1, the sorting of the repertoire, and Decision 2, the regulation of effector class. The repertoire, because it is somatically generated, large, and random, must be sorted by a somatic mechanism that subtracts those specificities (anti-self) that, if expressed, would debilitate the host, leaving a residue (anti-nonself) that, if not expressed, would result in the death of the host by infection. The self-nonself discrimination is the metaphor used to describe Decision 1, the sorting of the repertoire. In order to be functional, the sorted repertoire must be coupled to a set of biodestructive and ridding effector functions, such that the response to each antigen is treated in a coherent and independent manner. Although a reasonably complete framework for Decision 1 exists, Decision 2 lacks conceptualization. The questions that must be considered to arrive at a proper framework are posed. It should be emphasized that manipulation at the level of Decision 2 is where clinical applications are likely to be found.

The heuristics of biologic theory: the case of self-nonself discrimination

Mel Cohn has responded to our critique of the minimal model of self-nonself discrimination proposed by Langman and him. In this response to Mel Cohn, we summarize the essential differences between our points of view and highlight one criterion (of many) for preferring one theory to another in the complex field of biology: a preferred theory, rather than solving a problem, is heuristic. A good theory is one that activates a scientist to perform experiments that are novel and productive.