4.5 Article

Mitochondrial dysfunction in rat with nonalcoholic fatty liver Involvement of complex I, reactive oxygen species and cardiolipin

期刊

BIOCHIMICA ET BIOPHYSICA ACTA-BIOENERGETICS
卷 1767, 期 10, 页码 1260-1267

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.bbabio.2007.07.011

关键词

nonalcoholic fatty liver; mitochondria; complex I; ROS; cardiolipin

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Mitochondrial dysfunction and oxidative stress play a central role in the pathophysiology of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD). This study aimed to elucidate the mechanism(s) responsible for mitochondrial dysfunction in nonalcoholic fatty liver. Fatty liver was induced in rats with a choline-deficient (CD) diet for 30 days. We examined the effect of CD diet on various parameters related to mitochondrial function such as complex I activity, oxygen consumption, reactive oxygen species (ROS) generation and cardiolipin content and oxidation. The activity of complex I was reduced by 35% in mitochondria isolated from CD livers compared with the controls. These changes in complex I activity were associated with parallel changes in state 3 respiration. Hydrogen peroxide (H2O2) generation was significantly increased in mitochondria isolated from CD livers. The mitochondrial content of cardiolipin, a phospholipid required for optimal activity of complex 1, decreased by 38% as function of CD diet, while there was a significantly increase in the level of peroxidized cardiolipin. The lower complex I activity in mitochondria from CD livers could be completely restored to the level of control livers by exogenously added cardiolipin. This effect of cardiolipin could not be replaced by other phospholipids nor by peroxidized cardiolipin. It is concluded that CD diet causes mitochondrial complex I dysfunction which can be attributed to ROS-induced cardiolipin oxidation. These findings provide new insights into the alterations underlying mitochondrial dysfunction in NAFLD. (C) 2007 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

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

4.5
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