4.7 Article

Cytochrome c-mediated oxidation of hydroethidine and mito-hydroethidine in mitochondria:: Identification of homo- and heterodimers

期刊

FREE RADICAL BIOLOGY AND MEDICINE
卷 44, 期 5, 页码 835-846

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.freeradbiomed.2007.11.013

关键词

hydroethidine; cytochrome c; mitochondria; HPLC; superoxide; dimerization

资金

  1. NHLBI NIH HHS [P01 HL068769-01, R01 HL067244, R01 HL067244-05, 5P01 HL 68769-01, P01 HL068769, 5R01 HL 067244] Funding Source: Medline
  2. NINDS NIH HHS [R01 NS039958, NS 39958, R01 NS039958-08] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Here we report that ferricytochrome c (cyt c(3+)) induces oxidation of hydroethidine (HE) and mitochondria-targeted hydroethidine (Mito-HE or MitoSOX Red) forming highly characteristic homo- and heterodimeric products. Using an HPLC-electrochemical (EC) method, several products were detected from cyt c(3+)-catalyzed oxidation of HE and Mito-HE and characterized by mass spectrometry and NMR techniques as follows: homodimers (HE-HE, E+-E+, Mito-HE-Mito-HE, and Mito-E+-Mito-E+) and heterodimers (HE-E+ and Mito-HE-Mito-E+), as well as the monomeric ethidium (E+) and mito-ethidium (Mito-E+). Similar products were detected when HE and Mito-HE were incubated with mitochondria. In contrast, mitochondria depleted of cyt c(3+) were much less effective in oxidizing HE or Mito-HE to corresponding dimeric products. Unlike E+ or Mito-E+, the dimeric analogs (E+-E+ and Mito-E+-Mito-E+) were not fluorescent. Superoxide (O2(center dot-)) or Fremy's salt reacts with Mito-HE to form a product, 2-hydroxy-mito-ethidium (2-OH-Mito-E+) that was detected by HPLC. We conclude that HPLC-EC but not the confocal and fluorescence microscopy is a viable technique for measuring superoxide and cyt c(3+)-dependent oxidation products of HE and Mito-HE in cells. Superoxide detection using HE and Mito-HE could be severely compromised due to their propensity to undergo oxidation. (c) 2007 Elsevier Inc. 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

4.7
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