4.4 Article

Mitochondrial ('mild') uncoupling and ROS production: physiologically relevant or not?

Journal

BIOCHEMICAL SOCIETY TRANSACTIONS
Volume 39, Issue -, Pages 1305-1309

Publisher

PORTLAND PRESS LTD
DOI: 10.1042/BST0391305

Keywords

carbonyl cyanide p-trifluoromethoxyphenylhydrazone (FCCP); membrane potential; mitochondrion; oxidative stress; reactive oxygen species (ROS); uncoupling protein (UCP)

Funding

  1. Swedish Research Council
  2. European Union

Ask authors/readers for more resources

During the last decade, the possibility that 'mild' uncoupling could be protective against oxidative damage by diminishing ROS (reactive oxygen species) production has attracted much interest. In the present paper, we briefly examine the evidence for this possibility. It is only ROS production from succinate under reverse electron-flow conditions that is sensitive to membrane potential fluctuations, and so only this type of ROS production could be affected; however, the conditions under which succinate-supported ROS production is observed include succinate concentrations that are supraphysiological. Any decrease in membrane potential, even 'mild uncoupling', must necessarily lead to large increases in respiration, i.e. it must be markedly thermogenic. Mitochondria within cells are normally ATP-producing and thus already have a diminished membrane potential, and treatment of cells, organs or animals with small amounts of artificial uncoupler does not seem to have beneficial effects that are explainable via reduced ROS production. Although it has been suggested that members of the uncoupling protein family (UCP1, UCP2 and UCP3) may mediate a mild uncoupling, present evidence does not unequivocally support such an effect, e.g. the absence of the truly uncoupling protein UCP1 is not associated with increased oxidative damage. Thus present evidence does not support mild uncoupling as a physiologically relevant alleviator of oxidative damage.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available