EXPANDING ANTI-VENOM STRATEGIES: CAMELID POLYCLONAL ANTIBODIES WITH HIGH CAPACITY TO RECOGNIZE SNAKE VENOM.

Camelid immunoglobulins represent a unique facet of antibody biology, challenging conventional understandings of antibody diversification. IgG2 and IgG3 in particular are composed solely of heavy chains and exhibit a reduced molecular weight (90kDa); their elongated complementarity determining region (CDR) loops play a pivotal role in their functioning, delving deep into enzyme active sites with precision. Serum therapy stands as the primary venom-specific treatment for snakebite envenomation, harnessing purified antibodies available in diverse forms such as whole IgG, monovalent fragment antibody (Fab), or divalent fragment antibody F(ab')2. This investigation looks into the intricacies of IgGs derived from camelid serum previously immunized with crotamine and crotoxin, toxins predominantly in Crotalus durissus venom , exploring their recognition capacity, specificity, and cross-reactivity to snake venoms and its toxins. Initially, IgG purification employed affinity chromatography via protein A and G columns to segregate conventional antibodies (IgG1) from heavy chain antibodies (IgG2 and IgG3) of camelid isotypes sourced from Lama glama serum. Subsequent electrophoretic analysis (SDS-PAGE) revealed distinct bands corresponding to molecular weight profiles of IgG's fractions representing isotypes in Lama glama serum. ELISA cross-reactivity assays demonstrated all three IgG isotypes' ability to recognize the tested venoms. Notably, IgG1 exhibited the lowest interactivity in analyses involving bothropic and crotalic venoms. However, IgG2 and IgG3 displayed notable cross-reactivity, particularly with crotalic venoms and toxins, albeit with exceptions such as PLA

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2024. Published by Elsevier Ltd.

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

Declaration of Competing Interest ☒ The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper. ☐ The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: