The Mitochondrial Free Radical Theory of Aging - Supernova: Pliki
The Mitochondrial Free Radical Theory of Aging - Supernova: Pliki
The Mitochondrial Free Radical Theory of Aging - Supernova: Pliki
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
120<br />
<strong>The</strong> <strong>Mitochondrial</strong> <strong>Free</strong> <strong>Radical</strong> <strong>The</strong>ory <strong>of</strong> <strong>Aging</strong><br />
mitochondria falls. This acts as a selective pressure against the mutants, because it is<br />
unidirectional: once a cell has no mutants, its descendants stay that way unless and until<br />
there is a new mutation event, whereas a cell that retains a few mutants can give rise at any<br />
future time to mutant-free descendants. See Section 10.7 for more about genetic drift.<br />
A difficulty with the above explanation is that genetic drift will only exert a significant<br />
pressure to eliminate mutant mtDNA once its copy number is very low, and the typical cell<br />
has a surplus <strong>of</strong> bioenergetic capacity, so the pressure due to intercellular competition may<br />
not get the number <strong>of</strong> mutant molecules low enough for drift to take over. A better<br />
explanation was provided recently: 14b that the necessarily slower protein import <strong>of</strong> mutant<br />
mitochondria, though probably irrelevant in non-dividing cells due to the time available<br />
(see Section 10.6), will select against the mutant mtDNA in dividing cells where SOS is<br />
absent.<br />
10.3.2. How Does mtDNA Survive in the Ovum Until Fertilization?<br />
This is harder—in fact, it is still a flourishing research topic. Since the ovum is a<br />
non-dividing cell until fertilization, it is potentially susceptible to SOS, and it has to avoid it<br />
for dozens <strong>of</strong> years. An age-related increase in oocyte mtDNA deletions has indeed been<br />
found. 14c<br />
Three explanations have been explored, and—unusually—they are probably all correct.<br />
<strong>The</strong> first is that ova are extremely quiescent until ovulation. 15 <strong>The</strong>y have almost no energy<br />
requirements. Thus they probably generate hardly any LECs, so their mitochondria probably<br />
have very little chance to mutate; also, if a mutation arose through replication error, it would<br />
be only very slowly amplified. This is probably sufficient to deal with the case <strong>of</strong> mutations<br />
that arise in the ovum, rather than being already present when it was formed, since those<br />
few mutant mitochondria would be so diluted out during early embryogenesis that they<br />
would be easy prey to replication disadvantage and genetic drift (see above).<br />
<strong>The</strong> second explanation deals with the opposite end <strong>of</strong> the spectrum: the case where a<br />
substantial proportion <strong>of</strong> the mtDNA in the ovum was mutant when it was formed. In such<br />
cases, SOS will ensure that there is no normal mtDNA left by the time <strong>of</strong> ovulation. A<br />
substantial burst <strong>of</strong> energy output on the part <strong>of</strong> the ovum is demanded during its ovulation<br />
and rapid early divisions, which is impossible without working mitochondria. If this<br />
energy is not forthcoming, subsequent cell division <strong>of</strong> that embryo fails, so no gestation will<br />
occur. <strong>The</strong> mother may have to wait another month, or have a litter one <strong>of</strong>fspring smaller,<br />
but that is cheap in evolutionary terms.<br />
What is really expensive in evolutionary terms is the third, intermediate situation:<br />
when there is some mutant mtDNA in the ovum at formation, but not quite so much that<br />
SOS can cause failure <strong>of</strong> early embryogenesis. That circumstance allows the possibility<br />
that the ovum would be fertilised, but that during embryogenesis a proportion <strong>of</strong> cells<br />
would retain enough mutant mitochondria that genetic drift would not eliminate them.<br />
This would mean that the embryo could develop normally, but its aging process would<br />
have a head start. Thus, the affected ovum would get all the biological investment needed<br />
to get it as far as birth and perhaps some way beyond, but it would not get far enough to<br />
have its own <strong>of</strong>fspring, so in evolutionary terms all that investment (<strong>of</strong> parental care, etc.)<br />
would have been wasted. This is a plausible explanation for the very rare occurrence <strong>of</strong><br />
sporadic (non-inherited) mtDNA-linked diseases such as Kearns-Sayre syndrome. 16<br />
It seems that evolution has found an extremely ingenious way to minimise the chance<br />
<strong>of</strong> this last scenario. 17 In the average cell there are at least 1000 mtDNA genomes, but in the<br />
ovum there are about 100,000. <strong>The</strong> simple way to get from 1000 to 100,000 is to engage in<br />
about seven rounds <strong>of</strong> mitochondrial replication; but that is not what happens. Instead, the<br />
mitochondrial population that is destined to inhabit the ovum is first depleted! It is forced