6 ms·

The Anglerfish Deleted Its Immune System to Fuse with Its Mate

74 points by MindGods 6y ago

rootsudo 6y ago
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=anDIlMVgNwk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=anDIlMVgNwk
- soperj 6y ago
  Awesome video. Thanks for sharing. Puts the news in context.
Falling3 6y ago
Anglerfish have always been the animal that top the charts for me in disgust, terror, and fascination. Really cool to learn more about the way they live.
- dvtrn 6y ago
  They are absolutely terrifying to me on a visual level but holy crap are they cool creatures
  - Falling3 6y ago
    Not only the aesthetics, but also the idea that individuals of one sex dissolve into their mates bodies. It's all kind of nightmarish.
    - dvtrn 6y ago
      No no, that’s the cool part haha
- loudandskittish 6y ago
  I spent many years thinking they were invented as scary video game baddies...was pretty horrified when I found out they're actually real.
surround 6y ago
Mirror: https://archive.is/fRNhJ https://archive.is/fRNhJ
kelsolaar 6y ago
Absolutely fascinating! Is there any other animal known to have evolved like that?
- nn3 6y ago
  There is an insect species with live birth, where the males never get born, but mate with their sisters while still in the mother's body. The sisters then get born already pregnant. I guess they beat the anglerfish in weirdness.
- sriacha 6y ago
  There's an excellent essay by the evolutionary biologist Steven Jay Gould about sexual dimorphism [0], mostly in the context of anglerfish, but which also mentions a parasitic mollusk, of which the male embeds itself in the female body and looses most all organs except the testes. That same essay leaves us with this gem of a quote: "In some ultimate Freudian sense, what male could resist the fantasy of a life as a penis with a heart, deeply and permanently embedded within a caring and providing female?" [0] https://books.google.com/books?id=o6g2tvN0nJoC&lpg=PT15&ots=dAd72sWoLa&dq=gould+big+fish+little+fish&pg=PT15&hl=en#v=onepage&q&f=false https://books.google.com/books?id=o6g2tvN0nJoC&lpg=PT15&ots=...
lend000 6y ago
If I am understanding correctly, a virus that targeted any receptors within the Anglerfish would be fatal 100% of the time?
- tchaffee 6y ago
  The article seemed to imply that's one thing that deserves more research.
- est31 6y ago
  They still have an innate immune system, and the article mentions researchers suspecting that the innate immune system is stronger in anglerfish.
  - lend000 6y ago
    Can an innate immune system do anything about a virus that has already entered the organism? Or perhaps they just have such a strong outer layer and are so dispersed that viruses rarely evolve to target them, and quickly die out if they do.
    - HarryHirsch 6y ago
      Yes. There are cellular receptors that recognize viral features (dsRNA &c). The innate immune system is the first line of defense in vertebrates and the only thing that nonvertebrates have, and it's pretty efficient.
    - est31 6y ago
      There has been an evolutionary arms race between viruses and potential host cells where host cells constantly figure out new defenses and viruses figure out ways to counter them. The adaptive immune system is a very sophisticated defense mechanism, but not the only one available. E.g. check out Toll like receptors [1], PKR [2], APOBEC3, etc. Viruses of course have to counter these defenses somehow, but it still slows them down, and if only because they require additional RNA/DNA to encode it which can mutate and render subsequent viruses inactive. There is a great lecture on the topic of intrinsic and innate defenses against viruses by Vincent Racianello [3]. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toll-like_receptor#Summary_of_known_mammalian_TLRs https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toll-like_receptor#Summary_of_... [2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protein_kinase_R https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protein_kinase_R [3]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QMNbrTlV4_w https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QMNbrTlV4_w
DoreenMichele 6y ago
Well, this is cool and all, but: Boehm believes that the anglerfish somehow boosts its own innate immune system to make up for the loss of the adaptive system. So it hasn't actually deleted its entire immune system, like the title suggests. Just some part of it. I mean I hated the title on sight because I don't even know what "the immune system" is. And I've thought about this a whole lot and written a few rambly blog posts about it (probably not currently online). If you talk about "your circulatory system," you can name specific organs, etc. Same is true if you talk about "your nervous system" or "your digestive tract." The same is not true of "your immune system." Your skin is part of your immune system. It helps keep out invaders. Your saliva and stomach acid are part of your immune system. They help kill microbes in your food to help make it safe for you to eat. The mucus lining all mucus membranes in your body, including your respiratory tract and digestive tract, is part of your immune system. It helps keep out invaders. So while it's fascinating that this fish has apparently deleted some important pieces of its immune system, I don't think it is accurate to say "it deleted its immune system" (in its entirety) because the odds are good it still has many systems that help protect it from invading microbes, starting with some kind of skin/scales/hide and including some kind of digestive function. It's a really interesting piece, but the immune system isn't any one thing. It's everything the body does to try to keep out invaders and white blood cells are just one part of that.
- cjhveal 6y ago
  I do think the title could have been made more accurate by weakening it, but I'm curious linguistically why the title as is evokes hatred. Would you feel it similarly misleading if a headline said "individual crashes their car" but it turned out they had another conveyance and could still drive? Is it that the title leaves open the ambiguity that it could be referring to one of its immune systems versus the entire immune system? Or is it to do with the semantics of the verb deleted that implies a completeness of removal? I suppose the closest parallel I can think of is "Big bank deletes its security system", which would be confusing, but I wouldn't be led to believe that they removed all their doors and windows too, even if they are technically components of physical security, and I wouldn't really expect that to be disambiguated in the headline. To me personally, the most characteristic part of the immune system is the adaptive portion of it, and when I hear that an organism's immune system is deleted, the first thing that comes to mind is that it doesn't produce or recognize antibodies, rather than that it has deleted its skin and mucosa, so this doesn't really feel that dishonest compared to other forms of click-bait. Not perfectly accurate, but if it had said "deleted some of its immune system", I probably wouldn't have assumed that it was missing its entire adaptive immune system. To me, it feels like the pragmatics dulls the semantic ambiguity to a pretty tolerable level, especially for popular science reporting. Maybe I'm missing the point and the issue at hand is how we talk about the immune system in general. Hope this doesn't come off as attacking, I'm interested in understanding the semantic point you're presenting.
chiefalchemist 6y ago
Can someone explain this in the context of evolution? How is this "mating ritual" an adaptive advantage? How does going from two of the species to one a benefit? I understand they're mating, but that's not immediate.
- koolba 6y ago
  In the dark depths where the anglerfish lives, it’s rare to encounter a mate. Evolving a mechanism to allow the male to latch onto the female well in advance of mating ensures the female has access to sperm when it’s ready to produce eggs. Otherwise it’d be a gamble to randomly encounter a male during the short window when mating is viable. For the male, minimizing its size and lowering its immune system allows it to more efficiently live off the females for the long period of time until it gets to mate.
  - wruza 6y ago
    Given that it was not designed, but evolved gradually, it is easy to deduce that recently males were just floating around, sticking, and then feeding off female's blood by biting into their body. They basically be born and eat women like parasites, but with a reproduction feedback. Remember that when someone calls life a beauty again.
    - programmarchy 6y ago
      It's odd that the Darwinian phrase "survival of the fittest" conjures up images of strength and beauty, but parasitism is a surprisingly common and highly effective fitness strategy.
wruza 6y ago
hopes that the finding will perhaps lead to a new understanding of immunosuppression in humans, and perhaps better treatments for organ transplant recipients in the future Honestly that always sounds like a little stretch to me, like porting kqueue user code to iocp through cygwin under wine and expecting the same io performance.

74 points by MindGods 6y ago

rootsudo 6y ago

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=anDIlMVgNwk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=anDIlMVgNwk

soperj 6y ago
Awesome video. Thanks for sharing. Puts the news in context.

Falling3 6y ago

Anglerfish have always been the animal that top the charts for me in disgust, terror, and fascination. Really cool to learn more about the way they live.

dvtrn 6y ago
They are absolutely terrifying to me on a visual level but holy crap are they cool creatures
- Falling3 6y ago
  Not only the aesthetics, but also the idea that individuals of one sex dissolve into their mates bodies. It's all kind of nightmarish.
  - dvtrn 6y ago
    No no, that’s the cool part haha
loudandskittish 6y ago
I spent many years thinking they were invented as scary video game baddies...was pretty horrified when I found out they're actually real.

surround 6y ago

Mirror: https://archive.is/fRNhJ https://archive.is/fRNhJ

kelsolaar 6y ago

Absolutely fascinating! Is there any other animal known to have evolved like that?

nn3 6y ago
There is an insect species with live birth, where the males never get born, but mate with their sisters while still in the mother's body. The sisters then get born already pregnant. I guess they beat the anglerfish in weirdness.
sriacha 6y ago
There's an excellent essay by the evolutionary biologist Steven Jay Gould about sexual dimorphism [0], mostly in the context of anglerfish, but which also mentions a parasitic mollusk, of which the male embeds itself in the female body and looses most all organs except the testes. That same essay leaves us with this gem of a quote: "In some ultimate Freudian sense, what male could resist the fantasy of a life as a penis with a heart, deeply and permanently embedded within a caring and providing female?" [0] https://books.google.com/books?id=o6g2tvN0nJoC&lpg=PT15&ots=dAd72sWoLa&dq=gould+big+fish+little+fish&pg=PT15&hl=en#v=onepage&q&f=false https://books.google.com/books?id=o6g2tvN0nJoC&lpg=PT15&ots=...

lend000 6y ago

If I am understanding correctly, a virus that targeted any receptors within the Anglerfish would be fatal 100% of the time?

tchaffee 6y ago
The article seemed to imply that's one thing that deserves more research.
est31 6y ago
They still have an innate immune system, and the article mentions researchers suspecting that the innate immune system is stronger in anglerfish.
- lend000 6y ago
  Can an innate immune system do anything about a virus that has already entered the organism? Or perhaps they just have such a strong outer layer and are so dispersed that viruses rarely evolve to target them, and quickly die out if they do.
  - HarryHirsch 6y ago
    Yes. There are cellular receptors that recognize viral features (dsRNA &c). The innate immune system is the first line of defense in vertebrates and the only thing that nonvertebrates have, and it's pretty efficient.
  - est31 6y ago
    There has been an evolutionary arms race between viruses and potential host cells where host cells constantly figure out new defenses and viruses figure out ways to counter them. The adaptive immune system is a very sophisticated defense mechanism, but not the only one available. E.g. check out Toll like receptors [1], PKR [2], APOBEC3, etc. Viruses of course have to counter these defenses somehow, but it still slows them down, and if only because they require additional RNA/DNA to encode it which can mutate and render subsequent viruses inactive. There is a great lecture on the topic of intrinsic and innate defenses against viruses by Vincent Racianello [3]. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toll-like_receptor#Summary_of_known_mammalian_TLRs https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toll-like_receptor#Summary_of_... [2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protein_kinase_R https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protein_kinase_R [3]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QMNbrTlV4_w https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QMNbrTlV4_w

DoreenMichele 6y ago

Well, this is cool and all, but: Boehm believes that the anglerfish somehow boosts its own innate immune system to make up for the loss of the adaptive system. So it hasn't actually deleted its entire immune system, like the title suggests. Just some part of it. I mean I hated the title on sight because I don't even know what "the immune system" is. And I've thought about this a whole lot and written a few rambly blog posts about it (probably not currently online). If you talk about "your circulatory system," you can name specific organs, etc. Same is true if you talk about "your nervous system" or "your digestive tract." The same is not true of "your immune system." Your skin is part of your immune system. It helps keep out invaders. Your saliva and stomach acid are part of your immune system. They help kill microbes in your food to help make it safe for you to eat. The mucus lining all mucus membranes in your body, including your respiratory tract and digestive tract, is part of your immune system. It helps keep out invaders. So while it's fascinating that this fish has apparently deleted some important pieces of its immune system, I don't think it is accurate to say "it deleted its immune system" (in its entirety) because the odds are good it still has many systems that help protect it from invading microbes, starting with some kind of skin/scales/hide and including some kind of digestive function. It's a really interesting piece, but the immune system isn't any one thing. It's everything the body does to try to keep out invaders and white blood cells are just one part of that.

cjhveal 6y ago
I do think the title could have been made more accurate by weakening it, but I'm curious linguistically why the title as is evokes hatred. Would you feel it similarly misleading if a headline said "individual crashes their car" but it turned out they had another conveyance and could still drive? Is it that the title leaves open the ambiguity that it could be referring to one of its immune systems versus the entire immune system? Or is it to do with the semantics of the verb deleted that implies a completeness of removal? I suppose the closest parallel I can think of is "Big bank deletes its security system", which would be confusing, but I wouldn't be led to believe that they removed all their doors and windows too, even if they are technically components of physical security, and I wouldn't really expect that to be disambiguated in the headline. To me personally, the most characteristic part of the immune system is the adaptive portion of it, and when I hear that an organism's immune system is deleted, the first thing that comes to mind is that it doesn't produce or recognize antibodies, rather than that it has deleted its skin and mucosa, so this doesn't really feel that dishonest compared to other forms of click-bait. Not perfectly accurate, but if it had said "deleted some of its immune system", I probably wouldn't have assumed that it was missing its entire adaptive immune system. To me, it feels like the pragmatics dulls the semantic ambiguity to a pretty tolerable level, especially for popular science reporting. Maybe I'm missing the point and the issue at hand is how we talk about the immune system in general. Hope this doesn't come off as attacking, I'm interested in understanding the semantic point you're presenting.

chiefalchemist 6y ago

Can someone explain this in the context of evolution? How is this "mating ritual" an adaptive advantage? How does going from two of the species to one a benefit? I understand they're mating, but that's not immediate.

koolba 6y ago
In the dark depths where the anglerfish lives, it’s rare to encounter a mate. Evolving a mechanism to allow the male to latch onto the female well in advance of mating ensures the female has access to sperm when it’s ready to produce eggs. Otherwise it’d be a gamble to randomly encounter a male during the short window when mating is viable. For the male, minimizing its size and lowering its immune system allows it to more efficiently live off the females for the long period of time until it gets to mate.
- wruza 6y ago
  Given that it was not designed, but evolved gradually, it is easy to deduce that recently males were just floating around, sticking, and then feeding off female's blood by biting into their body. They basically be born and eat women like parasites, but with a reproduction feedback. Remember that when someone calls life a beauty again.
  - programmarchy 6y ago
    It's odd that the Darwinian phrase "survival of the fittest" conjures up images of strength and beauty, but parasitism is a surprisingly common and highly effective fitness strategy.

wruza 6y ago

hopes that the finding will perhaps lead to a new understanding of immunosuppression in humans, and perhaps better treatments for organ transplant recipients in the future Honestly that always sounds like a little stretch to me, like porting kqueue user code to iocp through cygwin under wine and expecting the same io performance.