| Literature DB >> 24690218 |
Jeffrey A Stuart1, Lucas A Maddalena, Max Merilovich, Ellen L Robb.
Abstract
Since its inception more than four decades ago, the Mitochondrial Free Radical Theory of Aging (MFRTA) has served as a touchstone for research into the biology of aging. The MFRTA suggests that oxidative damage to cellular macromolecules caused by reactive oxygen species (ROS) originating from mitochondria accumulates in cells over an animal's lifespan and eventually leads to the dysfunction and failure that characterizes aging. A central prediction of the theory is that the ability to ameliorate or slow this process should be associated with a slowed rate of aging and thus increased lifespan. A vast pool of data bearing on this idea has now been published. ROS production, ROS neutralization and macromolecule repair have all been extensively studied in the context of longevity. We review experimental evidence from comparisons between naturally long- or short-lived animal species, from calorie restricted animals, and from genetically modified animals and weigh the strength of results supporting the MFRTA. Viewed as a whole, the data accumulated from these studies have too often failed to support the theory. Excellent, well controlled studies from the past decade in particular have isolated ROS as an experimental variable and have shown no relationship between its production or neutralization and aging or longevity. Instead, a role for mitochondrial ROS as intracellular messengers involved in the regulation of some basic cellular processes, such as proliferation, differentiation and death, has emerged. If mitochondrial ROS are involved in the aging process, it seems very likely it will be via highly specific and regulated cellular processes and not through indiscriminate oxidative damage to macromolecules.Entities:
Year: 2014 PMID: 24690218 PMCID: PMC3977679 DOI: 10.1186/2046-2395-3-4
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Longev Healthspan ISSN: 2046-2395
Figure 1Mitochondrial ROS generation, neutralization, macromolecular damage and repair. A. Superoxide (O2•-) is generated in the mitochondrial matrix or inner membrane space (IMS) when an electron is donated to O2 (shown for complex I and III here). Superoxide produced in the IMS is converted to H2O2 by Cu/Zn superoxide dismutase (CuZnSOD). Superoxide produced in the matrix is converted to H2O2 by Mn superoxide dismustase (MnSOD). H2O2 can be neutralized to H2O through the action of the glutathione peroxidase (GPX)/glutathione reductase (GR) cycle at the expense of reducing equivalents (NADPH) (reduced glutathione = GSH; oxidized glutathione = GSSG). H2O2 may also be converted to H2O by peroxiredoxin (Prx), coupled to the oxidation of reduced thioredoxin (Trx). Oxidized Trx is reduced by thioredoxin reductase (TrxR) at the expense of reducing equivalents (nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide phosphate, NADPH). H2O2 can also diffuse into the cytosol, where it is neutralized to H2O by catalase (CAT) or other cytosolic enzymes (not shown). Superoxide in the matrix or IMS can form other ROS, such as peroxynitrite (ONOO-). H2O2 may also form other ROS, such as hydroxyl radicals (•OH). B. ROS produced by mitochondria can damage nuclear and mitochondrial DNA, causing lesions, including base modifications. These effects are countered by a variety of DNA repair processes, including the base excision repair pathway. C. ROS generated by mitochondria may damage cytosolic proteins. Heat shock proteins (Hsps) interact with misfolded proteins and assist in returning proteins to their native structure. Alternatively, damaged proteins can be ubiquitinated (Ub) and degraded by proteasomes. D. ROS generated by mitochondria can damage membrane phospholipid fatty acids via peroxidation reactions. Note that, for the purpose of clarity, this figure omits and/or simplifies some pathways involved in mitochondrial ROS metabolism.
Hydrogen peroxide production by isolated mitochondria or tissue of relatively short- and long-lived animal species
| Fruit fly | Whole body | Pyruvate + proline | Weak correlation | [ |
| Glycerol-3-phosphate | Weak correlation males only | |||
| Glycerol-3-phosphate + rotenone | ||||
| No correlation | ||||
| Naked mole rat | Vascular tissue | Succinate ± rotenone | No correlation | [ |
| Domestic pigeon | Isolated heart mitochondria | Succinate | Negative correlation | [ |
| Succinate + rotenone | No correlation | |||
| Laboratory mouse | Isolated liver mitochondria | Glutamate + malate | No correlation when standardized to total O2 consumption | [ |
| Laboratory mouse | Isolated mitochondria from pectoralis (sparrow) or hindlimb (rat) muscle | Multiple substrates | No correlation when O2 consumption rates considered | [ |
| Pigeon (species not indicated), rat ( | Isolated mitochondria from heart, muscle and liver | Pyruvate + malate | Higher rates in pigeon muscle | [ |
| Succinate | ||||
| Higher rates in rat heart | ||||
| Succinate + rotenone | ||||
| Higher rates in rat heart | ||||
| Little brown bat | Isolated mitochondria from brain, heart, kidney | Not given | No correlation | [ |
| Little brown bat | Isolated liver mitochondria | Glutamate + malate | Negative correlation | [ |
| 12 mammalian and avian species | Isolated heart mitochondria | Succinate | Negative correlation | [ |
| Succinate + rotenone | ||||
| No correlation | ||||
| No correlation | ||||
| Pyruvate + malate ± rotentone |
*MLSP = Maximum Lifespan.
Survival data for mice over-expressing or under-expressing antioxidant enzymes
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| C57BL/6 (males) | 50 | 1,165 d (1,092 to 1,245) [versus 1,128 d (1,080 to 1,206)] | No | [ | |
| Not indicated | 24 | N/A - 43.0 months [versus 36.5 months] and | N/A* | [ | |
| C57BL/6 (females) | 70 | 1,027 d (1,044 to 1,154) [versus 1,034 d (1,002 to 1,099)] | No | [ | |
| | | | | | |
| C57BL/6 (male) | 44 | 1,121 d [versus 1,090 d] | No | [ | |
| CD1 | 119 | 30 months [versus 31 months]! | No | [ | |
| CD1 | 200 | 31 months [versus 31 months]! | No | [ | |
| C57BL/6 | 10 | 762 d (761 to 767) [versus 1,076 d (1,035 to 1,298)] | Yes - decrease in mean lifespan | [ | |
| C57BL/6 | 12 | N/A - 28.7 ± 1.3 months [versus 29.8 ± 2.1 months]^ | No | [ | |
| C57BL/6 | 18 | N/A - 20.8 ± 0.7 months [versus 29.8 ± 2.1 monthsC1]^ | Yes | [ | |
| | | | | | |
| C57BL/6 (male) | 44 | 1,099 d [versus 1,090 d] | No | [ | |
| C57BL/6 < | 44 | N/A (only a survivor curve was given - clear values not provided) | No’ | [ | |
| C57BL/6 < | 62 | N/A | Yes - increased median and maximum lifespan | [ | |
| C57BL/6 < | 78 | N/A | No | [ | |
| | | | | | |
| C57BL/6 (males) | 18 | 1,072 d (1,062 to 1,080) [versus 1,106 d (1,026 to 1,161)] | No | [ | |
| C57BL/6 (females) | 50 | 1,126 ± 20 d [versus 1,145 ± 9 d] | Yes - significant increase in mean lifespan only | [ | |
| | | | | | |
| C57BL/6 (females) | 59 | 1,063 d (1,031 to 1,183) [versus 1,091 d (1,040 to 1,188)] | No | [ | |
| | | | | | |
| C57BL/6 (males)> | 41 | 1,134 d [versus 1,159 d] | No# | [ | |
| C57BL/6 (males)> | 60 | 1,151 d [versus 1,143 d] | No# | [ | |
| C57BL/6 (females) | 40 | 1,152 d [versus 1,230 d] | No | [ | |
| | | | | | |
| Mix of C57BL/6 J & 129 (females) | 26 | 1,059 d (1,020 to 1,139) [versus 1,186 d (1,086 to 1,359)] | No | [ | |
| | | | | | |
| Mix of C57BL/6 J & 129 (males) | 25 | 1,157 d (1,105 to 1,203) [versus 1,140 d (1,092 to 1,204)]C2 | No | [ | |
| C57BL/6 J | 17 | N/A - 409 ± 33 d [versus 680 ± 71 d]^ | Yes - increase in mean lifespan | [ | |
| C57BL/6 J | 8 | N/A - 672 ± 80 d [versus 680 ± 71 d]^ | No | [ | |
| | | | | | |
| C57BL/6 (males) | 54 | 1,075 d [versus 1,090 d] | No | [ | |
| C57BL/6 | 11 | 886 d (817 to 883) [versus 1,076 d (1,035 to 1,298)] | Yes | [ | |
| C57BL/6 (males) | 47 | 1,098 d [versus 1,090 d] | No | [ | |
| C57BL/6 | 11 | 1,025 d (938 to 1,099) [versus 1,076 d (1,035 to 1,298)] | No | [ | |
| C57BL/6 | 25 | 1,057 d (1,027 to 1,298) [versus 1,091 d (1,040 to 1,188)] | No | [ | |
| C57BL/6 | 33 | 1,121 d (1,069 to 1,248) [versus 1,091 d (1,040 to 1,188)] | No | [ | |
| C57BL/6 (males) | 11 | 828 d (799 to 868) [versus 1,076 d (1,035 to 1,298)] | Yes - decrease in mean lifespan | [ | |
| C57BL/6 (males) | 16 | 866 d (817 to 883 [versus 1,076 d (1,035 to 1,298)] | Yes - decrease in mean and median lifespan | [ | |
| C57BL/6 | 40 | 1,124 d (1,086 to 1,359) [versus 1,076 d (1,035 to 1,298)] | No | [ |
Tg = transgenic overexpression.
d = days.
$Sample size of genetically manipulated mice groups. Sample sizes were generally similar or identical to that of WT control groups, except in [31], where N = 119 for control group.
N/A = not available.
*Statistical analysis was not performed. Increased maximum lifespan was observed, but no changes in mean lifespan (Means: Sod2 Tg = 28.8 months versus WT = 27.6 months).
& Max lifespan (90th percentile survival was not provided).
!95th percentile survival.
^Mean lifespan ± SEM (90th percentile survival was not provided).
C1Control groups consisted of Sod1+/+ and Sod1+/− mice. Values are ± SEM.
PCatalase was targeted to the peroxisome.
mCatalase was targeted to mitochondria.
nCatalase was targeted to the nucleus.
`A slight significant extension of median lifespan was observed in one mouse line (and no extension of maximum lifespan).
>Two separate cohorts of mice were used in the study.
C2Control mice consisted of both WT and Msr mice.
#No change in mean or 90th percentile survival, but P <0.05 for 10th percentile survival.