Afshan N Malik1, Anna Czajka2, Phil Cunningham2. 1. Diabetes Research Group, Division of Diabetes and Nutritional Sciences, School of Life Science and Medicine, King's College London, SE1 1UL, UK. Electronic address: afshan.malik@kcl.ac.uk. 2. Diabetes Research Group, Division of Diabetes and Nutritional Sciences, School of Life Science and Medicine, King's College London, SE1 1UL, UK.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Mitochondria contain an extra-nuclear genome in the form of mitochondrial DNA (MtDNA), damage to which can lead to inflammation and bioenergetic deficit. Changes in MtDNA levels are increasingly used as a biomarker of mitochondrial dysfunction. We previously reported that in humans, fragments in the nuclear genome known as nuclear mitochondrial insertion sequences (NumtS) affect accurate quantification of MtDNA. In the current paper our aim was to determine whether mouse NumtS affect the quantification of MtDNA and to establish a method designed to avoid this. METHODS: The existence of NumtS in the mouse genome was confirmed using blast N, unique MtDNA regions were identified using FASTA, and MtDNA primers which do not co-amplify NumtS were designed and tested. MtDNA copy numbers were determined in a range of mouse tissues as the ratio of the mitochondrial and nuclear genome using real time qPCR and absolute quantification. RESULTS: Approximately 95% of mouse MtDNA was duplicated in the nuclear genome as NumtS which were located in 15 out of 21 chromosomes. A unique region was identified and primers flanking this region were used. MtDNA levels differed significantly in mouse tissues being the highest in the heart, with levels in descending order (highest to lowest) in kidney, liver, blood, brain, islets and lung. CONCLUSION: The presence of NumtS in the nuclear genome of mouse could lead to erroneous data when studying MtDNA content or mutation. The unique primers described here will allow accurate quantification of MtDNA content in mouse models without co-amplification of NumtS.
BACKGROUND: Mitochondria contain an extra-nuclear genome in the form of mitochondrial DNA (MtDNA), damage to which can lead to inflammation and bioenergetic deficit. Changes in MtDNA levels are increasingly used as a biomarker of mitochondrial dysfunction. We previously reported that in humans, fragments in the nuclear genome known as nuclear mitochondrial insertion sequences (NumtS) affect accurate quantification of MtDNA. In the current paper our aim was to determine whether mouse NumtS affect the quantification of MtDNA and to establish a method designed to avoid this. METHODS: The existence of NumtS in the mouse genome was confirmed using blast N, unique MtDNA regions were identified using FASTA, and MtDNA primers which do not co-amplify NumtS were designed and tested. MtDNA copy numbers were determined in a range of mouse tissues as the ratio of the mitochondrial and nuclear genome using real time qPCR and absolute quantification. RESULTS: Approximately 95% of mouse MtDNA was duplicated in the nuclear genome as NumtS which were located in 15 out of 21 chromosomes. A unique region was identified and primers flanking this region were used. MtDNA levels differed significantly in mouse tissues being the highest in the heart, with levels in descending order (highest to lowest) in kidney, liver, blood, brain, islets and lung. CONCLUSION: The presence of NumtS in the nuclear genome of mouse could lead to erroneous data when studying MtDNA content or mutation. The unique primers described here will allow accurate quantification of MtDNA content in mouse models without co-amplification of NumtS.
Authors: Makoto Fujiwara; Li Tian; Phuong T Le; Victoria E DeMambro; Kathleen A Becker; Clifford J Rosen; Anyonya R Guntur Journal: J Biol Chem Date: 2019-07-02 Impact factor: 5.157
Authors: Ajay Kumar; Kentaro Noda; Brian Philips; Murugesan Velayutham; Donna B Stolz; Mark T Gladwin; Sruti Shiva; Jonathan D'Cunha Journal: Am J Physiol Lung Cell Mol Physiol Date: 2020-02-19 Impact factor: 5.464
Authors: Victoria L Gremminger; Youngjae Jeong; Rory P Cunningham; Grace M Meers; R Scott Rector; Charlotte L Phillips Journal: J Bone Miner Res Date: 2019-06-13 Impact factor: 6.741
Authors: Susanne Schuster; Casey D Johnson; Marie Hennebelle; Theresa Holtmann; Ameer Y Taha; Irina A Kirpich; Akiko Eguchi; Christopher E Ramsden; Bettina G Papouchado; Craig J McClain; Ariel E Feldstein Journal: J Lipid Res Date: 2018-07-03 Impact factor: 5.922
Authors: Bereketeab Haileselassie; Riddhita Mukherjee; Amit U Joshi; Brooke A Napier; Liliana M Massis; Nicolai Patrick Ostberg; Bruno B Queliconi; Denise Monack; Daniel Bernstein; Daria Mochly-Rosen Journal: J Mol Cell Cardiol Date: 2019-04-11 Impact factor: 5.000
Authors: Simon Leonhard April; Marcel Philipp Trefny; He Liu; Zhaoyue He; Jean-Sébastien Rougier; Souzan Salemi; Radu Olariu; Hans Rudolf Widmer; Hans-Uwe Simon Journal: Cell Death Differ Date: 2018-08-28 Impact factor: 15.828
Authors: Nolwenn Joffin; Vivian A Paschoal; Christy M Gliniak; Clair Crewe; Abdallah Elnwasany; Luke I Szweda; Qianbin Zhang; Chelsea Hepler; Christine M Kusminski; Ruth Gordillo; Da Young Oh; Rana K Gupta; Philipp E Scherer Journal: Cell Stem Cell Date: 2021-02-03 Impact factor: 24.633
Authors: Yuhao Liu; Ying Zhao; Yousef Shukha; Haocheng Lu; Lu Wang; Zhipeng Liu; Cai Liu; Yang Zhao; Huilun Wang; Guizhen Zhao; Wenying Liang; Yanbo Fan; Lin Chang; Arif Yurdagul; Christopher B Pattillo; A Wayne Orr; Michael Aviram; Bo Wen; Minerva T Garcia-Barrio; Jifeng Zhang; Wanqing Liu; Duxin Sun; Tony Hayek; Y Eugene Chen; Oren Rom Journal: Cell Rep Date: 2021-07-27 Impact factor: 9.423