4.8 Article

Mitochondrial fragmentation drives selective removal of deleterious mtDNA in the germline

期刊

NATURE
卷 570, 期 7761, 页码 380-+

出版社

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/s41586-019-1213-4

关键词

-

资金

  1. Canadian Institutes of Health Research grant [FRN 159510]
  2. National Institutes of Health [R37HD41900]
  3. Canada First Research Excellence Fund

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Mitochondria contain their own genomes that, unlike nuclear genomes, are inherited only in the maternal line. Owing to a high mutation rate and low levels of recombination of mitrochondrial DNA (mtDNA), special selection mechanisms exist in the female germline to prevent the accumulation of deleterious mutations(1-5). However, the molecular mechanisms that underpin selection are poorly understood(6). Here we visualize germline selection in Drosophila using an allele-specific fluorescent in situ-hybridization approach to distinguish wild-type from mutant mtDNA. Selection first manifests in the early stages of Drosophila oogenesis, triggered by reduction of the pro-fusion protein Mitofusin. This leads to the physical separation of mitochondrial genomes into different mitochondrial fragments, which prevents the mixing of genomes and their products and thereby reduces complementation. Once fragmented, mitochondria that contain mutant genomes are less able to produce ATP, which marks them for selection through a process that requires the mitophagy proteins Atg1 and BNIP3. A reduction in Atg1 or BNIP3 decreases the amount of wild-type mtDNA, which suggests a link between mitochondrial turnover and mtDNA replication. Fragmentation is not only necessary for selection in germline tissues, but is also sufficient to induce selection in somatic tissues in which selection is normally absent. We postulate that there is a generalizable mechanism for selection against deleterious mtDNA mutations, which may enable the development of strategies for the treatment of mtDNA disorders.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据