| Literature DB >> 34943968 |
Larry N Singh1, Shih-Han Kao2, Douglas C Wallace1,3.
Abstract
Neurodegenerative disorders that are triggered by injury typically have variable and unpredictable outcomes due to the complex and multifactorial cascade of events following the injury and during recovery. Hence, several factors beyond the initial injury likely contribute to the disease progression and pathology, and among these are genetic factors. Genetics is a recognized factor in determining the outcome of common neurodegenerative diseases. The role of mitochondrial genetics and function in traditional neurodegenerative diseases, such as Alzheimer's and Parkinson's diseases, is well-established. Much less is known about mitochondrial genetics, however, regarding neurodegenerative diseases that result from injuries such as traumatic brain injury and ischaemic stroke. We discuss the potential role of mitochondrial DNA genetics in the progression and outcome of injury-related neurodegenerative diseases. We present a guide for understanding mitochondrial genetic variation, along with the nuances of quantifying mitochondrial DNA variation. Evidence supporting a role for mitochondrial DNA as a risk factor for neurodegenerative disease is also reviewed and examined. Further research into the impact of mitochondrial DNA on neurodegenerative disease resulting from injury will likely offer key insights into the genetic factors that determine the outcome of these diseases together with potential targets for treatment.Entities:
Keywords: evolution; genetics; genomics; ischaemic stroke; mitochondria; traumatic brain injury
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34943968 PMCID: PMC8715673 DOI: 10.3390/cells10123460
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Cells ISSN: 2073-4409 Impact factor: 6.600
Figure 1Heteroplasmy and the threshold effect.
Figure 2Endosymbiotic Theory and CoRR hypothesis. While the exact timing and emergency of eukaryotes is still unclear, recurrent gene transfer evidence supports the hypothesis that the original precursor to eukaryotic cells was a prokaryotic microbe that ingested an aerobic bacterium [20]. Following a period of evolution, the proto-mitochondrion would then have lost the genes which permitted adaptation of the free-living bacterium to environmental changes. Essential genes were also transferred from the bacterium into the nucleus. This gene transfer led to modern mtDNA in which only genes with core roles in the electron transport chain were retained in the mtDNA.
Figure 3NUMT formation. Nuclear encoded mitochondrial sequences (NUMT) arise when mtDNA sequences are released from the mitochondrion and enter the nucleus to become incorporated into the nuclear DNA.
Figure 4Impact of NUMTs on heteroplasmy quantification. (A) If there are no variants in the sequencing reads from mtDNA, the reads will align perfectly to either NUMTs in the nDNA or mtDNA. Reads shorter than the NUMTs sequences will align ambiguously to both NUMTs and mtDNA, and the alignment software has no way of determining exactly where the reads should go. There are several practical options to handle this case (1) drop non-unique alignments, (2) choose an alignment randomly to either NUMTs or mtDNA, or (3) favor alignments to mtDNA. None of these options will affect heteroplasmy computation--since there are no variants by definition, there cannot be any heteroplasmic variants. These options, however, will each give different and erroneous calculations for the read depth of mtDNA coverage. (B) Consider reads that originate from mtDNA and possess a novel variant (a variant that does not appear in either the reference nDNA or reference mtDNA). Alignments to either NUMTs or mtDNA will be imperfect, i.e., there will be mismatches. Furthermore, the alignment software cannot accurately determine whether the reads are from mtDNA or nDNA and will assign these reads to both. Again, there are several options, all of which are error prone. If the reads are aligned randomly or with preference to mtDNA, as in this figure, then the variant heteroplasmy level will be underestimated, as some reads will inaccurately be aligned to NUMT regions. The more copies of this NUMT there are, the more reads will erroneously align to NUMTs, thus further reducing the heteroplasmy estimate. Similar issues arise if the reads originally originated from NUMTs instead of mtDNA, as reads could erroneously align to the mtDNA, inflating the estimate of heteroplasmy.