Search

Mitochondria are quantifiably the most important sources of superoxide (O2●−) and hydrogen peroxide (H2O2) in mammalian cells. The overproduction of these molecules has been studied mostly in the contexts of the pathogenesis of human diseases and aging. However, controlled bursts in mitochondrial ROS production, most notably H2O2, also plays a vital role in the transmission of cellular information. Striking a balance between utilizing H2O2 in second messaging whilst avoiding its deleterious effects requires the use of sophisticated feedback control and H2O2 degrading mechanisms. Mitochondria are enriched with H2O2 degrading enzymes to desensitize redox signals. These organelles also use a series of negative feedback loops, such as proton leaks or protein S-glutathionylation, to inhibit H2O2 production. Understanding how mitochondria produce ROS is also important for comprehending how these organelles use H2O2 in eustress signaling. Indeed, twelve different enzymes associated with nutrient metabolism and oxidative phosphorylation (OXPHOS) can serve as important ROS sources. This includes several flavoproteins and respiratory complexes I-III. Progress in understanding how mitochondria generate H2O2 for signaling must also account for critical physiological factors that strongly influence ROS production, such as sex differences and genetic variances in genes encoding antioxidants and proteins involved in mitochondrial bioenergetics. In the present review, I provide an updated view on how mitochondria budget cellular H2O2 production. These discussions will focus on the potential addition of two acyl-CoA dehydrogenases to the list of ROS generators and the impact of important phenotypic and physiological factors such as tissue type, mouse strain, and sex on production by these individual sites.

Our group recently published a study demonstrating that deleting the gene encoding the matrix thiol oxidoreductase, glutaredoxin-2 (GRX2), alters the bioenergetics of mitochondria isolated from male C57BL/6N mice. Here, we conducted a similar study, examining H2O2 production and respiration in mitochondria isolated from female mice heterozygous (GRX2+/−) or homozygous (GRX2−/−) for glutaredoxin-2. First, we observed that deleting the Grx2 gene does not alter the rate of H2O2 production in liver and muscle mitochondria oxidizing pyruvate, α-ketoglutarate, or succinate. Examination of the rates of H2O2 release from liver mitochondria isolated from male and female mice revealed that (1) sex has an impact on the rate of ROS production by liver and muscle mitochondria and (2) loss of GRX2 only altered ROS release in mitochondria collected from male mice. Assessment of the bioenergetics of these mitochondria revealed that loss of GRX2 increased proton leak-dependent and phosphorylating respiration in liver mitochondria isolated from female mice but did not alter rates of respiration in liver mitochondria from male mice. Furthermore, we found that deleting the Grx2 gene did not alter rates of respiration in muscle mitochondria collected from female mice. This contrasts with male mice where loss of GRX2 substantially augmented proton leaks and ADP-stimulated respiration. Our findings indicate that some fundamental sexual dimorphisms exist between GRX2-deficient male and female rodents.

Although circadian biorhythms of mitochondria and cells are highly conserved and crucial for the well-being of complex animals, there is a paucity of studies on the reciprocal interactions between oxidative stress, redox modifications, metabolism, thermoregulation, and other major oscillatory physiological processes. To address this limitation, we hypothesize that circadian/ultradian interaction of the redoxome, bioenergetics, and temperature signaling strongly determine the differential activities of the sleep–wake cycling of mammalians and birds. Posttranslational modifications of proteins by reversible cysteine oxoforms, S-glutathionylation and S-nitrosylation are shown to play a major role in regulating mitochondrial reactive oxygen species production, protein activity, respiration, and metabolomics. Nuclear DNA repair and cellular protein synthesis are maximized during the wake phase, whereas the redoxome is restored and mitochondrial remodeling is maximized during sleep. Hence, our analysis reveals that wakefulness is more protective and restorative to the nucleus (nucleorestorative), whereas sleep is more protective and restorative to mitochondria (mitorestorative). The “redox–bioenergetics–temperature and differential mitochondrial–nuclear regulatory hypothesis” adds to the understanding of mitochondrial respiratory uncoupling, substrate cycling control and hibernation. Similarly, this hypothesis explains how the oscillatory redox–bioenergetics–temperature–regulated sleep–wake states, when perturbed by mitochondrial interactome disturbances, influence the pathogenesis of aging, cancer, spaceflight health effects, sudden infant death syndrome, and diseases of the metabolism and nervous system.

Mitochondrial uncoupling proteins (UCP) 1-3 fulfill many physiological functions, ranging from non-shivering thermogenesis (UCP1) to glucose-stimulated insulin release (GSIS) and satiety signaling (UCP2) and muscle fuel metabolism (UCP3). Several studies have suggested that UCPs mediate these functions by facilitating proton return to the matrix. This would decrease protonic backpressure on the respiratory chain, lowering the production of hydrogen peroxide (H2O2), a second messenger. However, controlling mitochondrial H2O2 production to prevent oxidative stress by activating these leaks through these proteins is still enthusiastically debated. This is due to compelling evidence that UCP2/3 fulfill other function(s) and the inability to reproduce findings that UCP1-3 use inducible leaks to control reactive oxygen species (ROS) production. Further, other studies have found that UCP2/3 may serve as Ca2+. Therefore, we performed a systematic review aiming to summarize the results collected on the topic. A literature search using a list of curated keywords in Pubmed, BIOSIS Citation Index and Scopus was conducted. Potentially relevant references were screened, duplicate references eliminated, and then literature titles and abstracts were evaluated using Rayyan software. A total of 1101 eligible studies were identified for the review. From this total, 416 studies were evaluated based on our inclusion criteria. In general, most studies identified a role for UCPs in preventing oxidative stress, and in some cases, this may be related to the induction of leaks and lowering protonic backpressure on the respiratory chain. However, some studies also generated evidence that UCP2/3 may mitigate oxidative stress by transporting Ca2+ into the matrix, exporting lipid hydroperoxides, or by transporting C-4 metabolites. Additionally, some showed that activating UCP1 or 3 can increase mitochondrial ROS production, even though there is still augmented protection from oxidative stress. Conclusion: Overall, most available studies demonstrate that UCPs, particularly UCP2/3, prevent oxidative stress. However, the mechanism utilized to do so remains elusive and raises the question that UCP2/3 should be renamed, since they may still not be true “uncoupling proteins”.