New Issue: Orbital Catastrophe Ahead? Read Now

Immune Cells Found to Protect Against Snakebites

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

When a venomous snake bites its prey, a deadly cocktail of toxins rushes into the victim¿s body causing sweating or chills, nausea, blurred vision, convulsions, and ultimately, death. It has long been thought that the victim¿s immune system exacerbated the effects of the venom. Now, a new study shows that mast cells in the immune system of mice actually unleash proteins that break down some of the most toxic components of snake venom.

Found in all mammalian immune systems, mast cells were assumed to worsen snakebite symptoms because they respond to a variety of triggers in the body, including bacteria and parasites, by instigating tissue changes such as inflammation and blood vessel dilation. Although these reactions can be helpful, out of control mast cells sometimes overreact to certain chemical compounds, causing allergic reactions, asthma and anaphylaxis--the latter of which can be fatal in its most severe form, anaphylactic shock. Most animal venom triggers an immediate mast cell response, which scientists assumed was probably similarly harmful.

Researchers led by Stephen Galli and Martin Metz of the Stanford University School of Medicine, however, were encouraged by previous results that showed mast cells protect mice against the toxic protein endothelin-1, which is associated with conditions such as sepsis and high blood pressure. Because this protein closely resembles sarafotoxin, the most toxic substance in the venom of the Israeli mole viper, the researchers hypothesized that mast cells might offer some protection from this compound as well. Injecting the viper venom into mice with normally functioning immune systems and also into genetically altered mice that lack mast cells, they found that the normal mice could withstand 10 times the amount of venom. The researchers also tested the venoms of the western diamondback rattlesnake and the southern copperhead, along with the honeybee, and found that mast cells produce proteases that break down a different toxic component in each of them.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


The next step, according to the researchers, is to work with human mast cells to see if they exhibit the same protective effects. If so, the results of this study, published in the July 28 issue of Science, may someday lead to less species-specific snakebite treatments. The researchers also hope that other potentially positive mast cell effects will be investigated. ¿I don¿t think that evolution came up with the mast cell so that people could eat a peanut and suddenly die,¿ says study author Galli. ¿Hopefully this will help researchers think about other ways mast cells might be beneficial.¿

About Karen Schrock

Kate Schrock has been an editor of Scientific American MIND since 2007, where she edits feature articles and runs Head Lines, the magazine's news department. After studying astronomy and physics at the University of Southern California, she worked in the Laboratory of Neuro Imaging at the University of California, Los Angeles, studying the brain structure of people with schizophrenia. She then enrolled in the Science, Health and Environmental Reporting program at New York University, where she earned a master's degree in journalism.

More by Karen Schrock

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe