4.6 Article

Mitochondrial complex IV mutation increases reactive oxygen species production and reduces lifespan in aged mice

期刊

ACTA PHYSIOLOGICA
卷 225, 期 4, 页码 -

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/apha.13214

关键词

complex IV mutation; FIS1; lifespan; mitochondrial DNA; reactive oxygen species; SOD2

资金

  1. Federal Ministry for Education and Research (BMBF) grant ROSAge [31P6662]
  2. FORUN Programme [889062]
  3. European Union [633589]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Aim Mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) mutations can negatively influence lifespan and organ function. More than 250 pathogenic mtDNA mutations are known, often involving neurological symptoms. Major neurodegenerative diseases share key etiopathogenetic components ie mtDNA mutations, mitochondrial dysfunction and oxidative stress. Methods Here, we characterized a conplastic mouse strain (C57BL/6 J-mtNOD) carrying an electron transport chain complex IV mutation that leads to an altered cytochrome c oxidase subunit III. Since this mouse also harbours adenine insertions in the mitochondrial tRNA for arginine, we chose the C57BL/6 J-mtMRL as control strain which also carries a heteroplasmic stretch of adenine repetitions in this tRNA isoform. Results Using MitoSOX fluorescence, we observed an elevated mitochondrial superoxide production and a reduced gene expression of superoxide dismutase 2 in the 24-month-old mtNOD mouse as compared to control. Together with the decreased expression of the fission-relevant gene Fis1, these data confirmed that the ageing mtNOD mouse had a mitochondrial dysfunctional phenotype. On the functional level, we could not detect significant differences in synaptic long-term potentiation, but found a markedly poor physical constitution to perform the Morris water maze task at the age of 24 months. Moreover, the median lifespan of mtNOD mice was significantly shorter than of control animals. Conclusion Our findings demonstrate that a complex IV mutation leads to mitochondrial dysfunction that translates into survival.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据