hydrogen peroxide forming and quenching potential of mouse liver mitochondria

    Examination of the superoxide/hydrogen peroxide forming and quenching potential of mouse liver mitochondria Liam Slade, Julia Chalker, Nidhi Kuksal, Adrian Young, Danielle Gardiner, Ryan J. Mailloux PII: DOI: Reference:

S0304-4165(17)30162-9 doi:10.1016/j.bbagen.2017.05.010 BBAGEN 28837

To appear in:

BBA - General Subjects

Received date: Revised date: Accepted date:

3 February 2017 7 May 2017 10 May 2017

Please cite this article as: Liam Slade, Julia Chalker, Nidhi Kuksal, Adrian Young, Danielle Gardiner, Ryan J. Mailloux, Examination of the superoxide/hydrogen peroxide forming and quenching potential of mouse liver mitochondria, BBA - General Subjects (2017), doi:10.1016/j.bbagen.2017.05.010

This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to our customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proof before it is published in its final form. Please note that during the production process errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT Examination of the superoxide/hydrogen peroxide forming and quenching potential of mouse liver mitochondria

RI

PT

Liam Slade, Julia Chalker, Nidhi Kuksal, Adrian Young, Danielle Gardiner, and Ryan J. Mailloux*

NU

SC

Memorial University of Newfoundland, Department of Biochemistry, St. John’s, Newfoundland, Canada.

AC CE P

TE

D

MA

* corresponding author: [email protected]

1

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT Abstract Pyruvate dehydrogenase (PDHC) and α-ketoglutarate dehydrogenase complex

PT

(KGDHC) are important sources of reactive oxygen species (ROS). In addition, it

RI

has been found that mitochondria can also serve as sinks for cellular hydrogen

SC

peroxide (H2O2). However, the ROS forming and quenching capacity of liver

NU

mitochondria has never been thoroughly examined. Here, we show that mouse liver mitochondria use catalase, glutathione (GSH), and peroxiredoxin (PRX) systems to

MA

quench ROS. Incubation of mitochondria with catalase inhibitor 3-amino-1,2,4triazole (triazole) induced a significant increase in pyruvate or α-ketoglutarate

TE

D

driven O2●-/H2O2 formation. 1-choro-2,4-dinitrobenzene (CDNB), which depletes glutathione (GSH), elicited a similar effect. Auranofin (AF), a thioredoxin

AC CE P

reductase-2 (TR2) inhibitor which disables the PRX system, did not significantly change O2●-/H2O2 formation. By contrast catalase, GSH, and PRX were all required to scavenging extramitochondrial H2O2. In this study, the ROS forming potential of PDHC, KGDHC, Complex I, and Complex III was also profiled.

Titration of

mitochondria with 3-methyl-2-oxovaleric acid (KMV), a specific inhibitor for O2●/H2O2 production by KGDHC, induced a ~86% and ~84% decrease in ROS production

during

α-ketoglutarate

and

pyruvate

oxidation.

Titration

of

myxothiazol, a Complex III inhibitor, decreased O2●-/H2O2 formation by ~45%. Rotenone also lowered ROS production in mitochondria metabolizing pyruvate or α-ketoglutarate indicating Complex I does not contribute to ROS production during

2

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT forward electron transfer from NADH. Taken together, our results indicate that KGDHC and Complex III are high capacity sites for O2●-/H2O2 production in mouse

PT

liver mitochondria. We also confirm that catalase plays a role in quenching either

SC

RI

exogenous or intramitochondrial H2O2.

NU

Keywords: mitochondria, liver, hydrogen peroxide, Krebs cycle, antioxidant defense,

AC CE P

TE

D

MA

superoxide

3

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

PT

Introduction

Mitochondria are quantifiably the most important sources of ROS in mammalian

RI

cells. Once considered unfortunate by-products of respiration, it is now well known that

SC

ROS can serve as important secondary messengers [1]. Superoxide (O2●-) and hydrogen

NU

peroxide (H2O2) are the principle ROS formed by mitochondria. Superoxide is often considered to be the proximal ROS produced by mitochondria which is then rapidly

MA

dismutated to H2O2. However, recent studies have revealed that ROS forming sites in

D

mitochondria can produce a mixture of O2●- and H2O2 [2-4]. For instance, H2O2 accounts

TE

for ~75% of the total ROS formed by dihydrolipoamide dehydrogenase subunit (E3) of

AC CE P

pyruvate dehydrogenase (PDHC) and α-ketoglutarate dehydrogenase (KGDHC) [3]. Complex I and III of the respiratory chain are often considered to be the only sites for ROS formation in mitochondria. However, evidence collected over the past few years has shown that skeletal muscle mitochondria can contain up to 11 potential sources of O2●and/or H2O2 [5]. PDHC and KGDHC have been found to be important sources of O2●/H2O2 in liver, muscle, and brain mitochondria [3, 6]. PDHC and KGDHC have also been shown to form ~4x and ~8x more ROS than Complex I in skeletal muscle mitochondria [6]. Other high capacity ROS forming sites in muscle mitochondria include Complex II, Complex III, and glycerol-3-phosphate dehydrogenase [5]. Complex I can also be a high capacity ROS forming site but only during reverse electron flow from the ubiquinone pool [5]. In addition, purified PDHC and KGDHC have the capacity to generate ROS via 4

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT reverse electron transfer from NADH [3, 4, 7]. PDHC and KGDHC are also targets for oxidative modification by H2O2 where the reversible redox modification of either enzyme

PT

complex controls ROS emission, enzyme activity, and protects from oxidative damage [8,

RI

9].

SC

At high enough quantities O2●- and H2O2 can induce oxidative distress leading cell

NU

damage and death [10]. Thus, mitochondria must tightly control ROS levels to take advantage of its signaling properties whilst simultaneously avoiding toxicity.

MA

Mitochondria can control production from individual sites either through redox signaling or induction of proton leaks [11]. Mitochondria are also enriched with antioxidant

D

defense enzymes which play a vital role in controlling ROS levels. The importance of

TE

mitochondrial antioxidant defense systems in clearing O2●- and H2O2 is underscored by

AC CE P

the consequences of the targeted deletion or overexpression of ROS degrading enzymes. Deletion of SOD2 is neonatally lethal and loss of SOD1 is associated with the development of cardiovascular abnormalities [12]. Mitochondria also contain high levels of glutathione (GSH) which utilizes glutathione peroxidase (GPX) to clear H2O2. Mitochondria contain two GPX isozymes; GPX1 is required to eliminate H2O2 and GPX4 quenches lipid hydroperoxides [13]. Elimination of GPX1 accelerates cardiac disease and deletion of GPX4 is embryonically lethal [14, 15]. The peroxiredoxin (PRX) system also plays a vital role in removing mitochondrial H2O2 [16]. Following a round of H2O2 elimination, PRX is oxidized resulting in its deactivation. PRX is reactivated by mitochondrial thioredoxin-2 (TRX2) which is then reduced by thioredoxin reductase-2

5

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT (TR2) in the presence of NADPH. Disabling the PRX system by knocking out TRX2 or TR2 is also embryonically lethal illustrating its importance in removing H2O2 [12]. By

PT

contrast, overexpression of mitochondria-targeted catalase has been associated with

RI

enhanced longevity attributed to increased resistance to oxidative damage [12]. The GSH

SC

and PRX systems are often considered the chief H2O2 quenching systems in mitochondria [17]. However, catalase has also been documented to occur in liver and heart

NU

mitochondria [18-20]. Overall, O2●-/H2O2 removal, much like regulating its production, is

MA

vital for harnessing the redox signaling properties of ROS. Mitochondria contribute significantly to cellular ROS handling [21]. Hydrogen

TE

D

peroxide formed in the cytosol can be quenched by mitochondrial antioxidant defense systems [18, 22, 23]. Substrate catabolism is required to support this function through

AC CE P

NADPH formation which provides the necessary reducing equivalents to maintain antioxidant defense systems in an active state [21]. Liver mitochondria are significant sources of ROS in hepatocytes. Detoxification reactions in the cytosol and fatty acid catabolism in peroxisomes can also result in the over production of cellular ROS. Thus, liver mitochondria are likely to be exposed to high concentrations of O2●- and H2O2 due to substrate oxidation in mitochondria and the natural physiological functions of hepatocytes. Here, we confirm that catalase forms an important arm of the antioxidant defense system in liver mitochondria which plays a role in quenching exogenous H2O2 or ROS formed by substrate catabolism. We also show that KGDHC is a major source of O2●-/H2O2 in liver mitochondria forming almost as much ROS as Complex III.

6

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

RI

PT

Materials and Methods

SC

Chemicals: 1-chloro-2,4-dinitrobenzene (CDNB), 3-amino-1,3,4-triazole (triazole), auranofin (AF), H2O2 (30% solution), pyruvate, malate, 2-oxoglutarate, mannitol, Hepes,

NU

sucrose, EGTA, fatty acid free bovine serum albumin, Bradford reagent, superoxide

MA

dismutase (SOD), myxothiazol, 3-methyl-2-oxovaleric acid (KMV), and horse radish peroxidase (HRP) were purchased from Sigma. Amplex Ultra Red (AUR) reagent was

D

acquired from Invitrogen. Anti-acyl-CoA oxidase-1 and anti-KGDHC (E1 subunit) were

TE

purchased from Abcam. Anti-catalase, anti-glutathione peroxidase-1, anti-Sod2, anti-

AC CE P

thioredoxin-2, anti-mouse and anti-rabbit horseradish peroxidase secondary antibodies and CPI-613 were purchased from Santa Cruz.

Preparation of mitochondria: All experiments were approved by Memorial University’s Animal Care and Use committee and conducted according to institutional and Federal animal care guidelines. All steps were performed on ice or 4°C. Male C57BL/6N mice were purchased from Charles River Laboratories at 8 weeks of age. Mice were euthanized by cervical dislocation under isoflurane anesthesia at 9 weeks of age. Livers were then removed and placed in buffer composed of mannitol (220 mM), EGTA (1 mM), sucrose (70 mM), and Hepes (10 mM) (pH 7.4, abbreviated MESH buffer)

7

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT supplemented with 0.5% fatty acid free BSA (MESH-B). Livers were cut into small pieces, washed twice, and homogenized in 15 mL MESH-B using the Potter-Elvejham

PT

method. Homogenates were centrifuged at 800 xg for 9 min. Fat was skimmed from the

RI

top and the supernatant was centrifuged at 10,000 xg for 9 min to pellet mitochondria.

SC

The supernatant was decanted, excess fat was wiped clean from the sides of the tubes, and then mitochondrial pellets were washed in 15 mL MESH-B and centrifuged at 10,000

NU

xg for 9 min. The final mitochondrial pellet was resuspended in 500 µL MESH giving a

MA

final concentration of 15-20 mg/mL. Protein content was quantified by Bradford Assay using BSA as a standard.

TE

D

Assessment of mitochondrial O2●-/H2O2 production: Mitochondrial O2●-/H2O2 production was examined using the Amplex Ultra Red (AUR) assay as described previously [24].

AC CE P

Mitochondria were first diluted to 3 mg/mL in MESH and then stored on ice. Samples were then diluted to 0.3 mg/mL in the wells of a black 96-well plate containing MESH-B (note that for CPI-613 assays BSA was excluded). Mitochondria were allowed to equilibrate for a few minutes and were then treated with CDNB (0-10 µM), triazole (0-10 mM), AF (0-10 µM), KMV (0-10 mM) with or without rotenone (4 µM), CPI-613 (0-150 µM), or myxothiazol (0-10 µM) and incubated for 15 min at 25 °C. Reaction mixtures were then supplemented with HRP (3 U/mL), SOD (25 U/mL), and AUR (10 µM). Reactions were initiated by the addition of pyruvate (50 µM) and malate (50 µM) or αketoglutarate (50 µM) and malate (50 µM). We have shown in previous studies that 50 µM pyruvate or α-ketoglutarate with 50 µM malate can induce measurable rates in

8

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT mitochondrial O2●-/H2O2 production [3, 11]. This concentration is slightly below the reported Km for pyruvate carrier (~150 µM) [25]. In addition, malate transporter and α-

PT

ketoglutarate carrier were reported to have a Km of ~200 µM [26, 27]. However, it

RI

should be noted that in a previous study we observed that adding pyruvate to a final

SC

concentration of 150 µM only induces a small increase in O2●-/H2O2 production [3]. In addition, it has been found by others that low µM concentrations of other substrates like

NU

succinate can induce measurable rates of ROS production by submitochondrial particles

MA

[28]. Considering that the reported levels of Krebs cycle metabolites in mitochondria is in the low to mid-µM range we decided to stimulate ROS production with 50 µM substrate

D

[29]. O2●-/H2O2 production was tracked at the excitation:emission wavelengths 565 nm:

TE

600 nm using a Synergi Mx2 microplate reader and Gen5 software (BioTek).

AC CE P

Experiments involving the assessment of the ATP-mediated inhibition of ROS production by KGDHC and PDHC were carried out as described in [6]. Briefly, mitochondria were diluted to 3 mg/mL in 1 mL of ice cold MESH-B containing MgCl2 (2.5 mM) and alamethicin (40 µg/mL) , vortexed, and then incubated on ice for 10 minutes [11]. Samples were then centrifuged at 30,000 xg for 10 min and the resulting pellet was resuspended in 1 mL of MESH-B. Mitochondria were then diluted in a reaction buffer containing HRP, SOD, and AUR as described above. TPP (0.3 mM), NAD+ (1 mM), and CoASH (0.1 mM) were then added to facilitate pyruvate or αketoglutarate metabolism. Rotenone (4 µM) was then added to prevent electron movement through the respiratory chain and then reaction mixtures were supplemented

9

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT with ATP (2.5 mM), pyruvate or α-ketoglutarate (50 µM). Changes in O2●-/H2O2 production were measured as described above.

PT

Mitochondrial H2O2 clearance: The quenching of exogenous H2O2 was assayed as

RI

described in [22]. First, pyruvate (50 µM) and malate (50 µM) were added to each well

SC

followed by CDNB (10M), triazole (10 mM), and/or AF (10 µM). Next, MESH-B was

NU

added to each well along with H2O2 (2.5 µM). Reactions were initiated by the addition of mitochondria (0.3 mg/mL). Reactions were then tracked for different time intervals

MA

ranging from 30 seconds to 5 minutes. At the different time intervals HRP, SOD, and

D

AUR were added and H2O2 measured as described above.

TE

Immunoblot: Mitochondria were diluted to 1 mg/mL in Laemmli buffer and then heated

AC CE P

at 100 °C for 10 minutes. Twenty micrograms of protein was loaded in each well and then samples were electrophoresed through either a 10% isocratic SDS gel (for detection of ACOX1 or catalase) or a 12% isocratic SDS gel (for GPX1 and TRX2). Upon completion proteins were transferred to nitrocellulose membranes by tank transfer. Successful transfer was ascertained by Ponceau S staining. Membranes were then rinsed once with tris-buffered saline (TBS) containing 0.1% (v/v) Tween-20 (TBS-T) and then blocked for 1 hour under constant agitation at room temperature with TBS-T containing 5% (w/v) non-fat skim milk (blocking solution). Membranes were then washed twice with TBS-T and probed with anti-ACOX1 (1/3000), anti-KGDHC (1/3000), anti-GPX1 (1/2000), anti-TRX2 (1/2000), anti-Sod2 (1/3000), or anti-catalase (1/2000) diluted in TBS-T containing 5% (w/v) BSA and 0.02% NaN3. Membranes were incubated 10

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT overnight under constant agitation at 4 °C and then washed twice with TBS-T. Membranes were then probed with anti-mouse and anti-rabbit horseradish peroxidase

PT

conjugate secondary antibodies for 1 hour at room temperature under constant agitation.

RI

Bands were visualized using WestPico Super Signal Chemiluminescent substrate and

SC

ImageQuant LAS 4000. Band intensities were quantified using ImageJ software.

NU

Data analysis: Amplex Ultra Red assays were performed 4-6 times and in duplicate. Immunoblots were conducted in triplicate or quadruplicate and densitometry normalized

MA

to loading controls. All results were analyzed using GraphPad Prism 6 software using 1way and 2-way ANOVA with Fisher’s LSD posthoc test. Results were expressed as a

Results

AC CE P

TE

D

percentage of the control. * or #; p ≤ 0.05, ** or ##; p ≤ 0.01, *** or ###; p ≤ 0.001.

Identification of enzyme systems that quench ROS formed by mitochondrial substrate catabolism Mitochondria were treated with different selective inhibitors that deactivate GSH, PRX, or catalase to discern the individual contribution of each antioxidant defense system towards scavenging H2O2 formed during substrate oxidation. The GSH system 11

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT was disabled with CDNB and AF was utilized to inhibit TR2 which would prevent the reactivation of PRX. Substrate oxidation was initiated with pyruvate (50 µM) and malate

PT

(50 µM). Treatment with 0.5 µM CDNB induced a significant increase in O2●-/H2O2

RI

production (Fig 1A). However, no further increases in O2●-/H2O2 emission were observed

SC

at concentrations greater than 0.5 µM (Fig 1A). It has been documented that 1 µM CDNB can deplete a majority of the GSH pool [8]. Thus, it is anticipated that no further

NU

increase in ROS production was observed since 0.5 µM CDNB depleted the

MA

mitochondrial GSH pool. Next, we examined the effect of disabling the PRX system on substrate-driven mitochondrial ROS production. For this AF was utilized which is a

D

documented inhibitor for TR2. Inclusion of AF did not alter O2●-/H2O2 emission even

TE

when added to a final concentration of 10 µM (Fig 1B). It has been shown that 1 µM AF

AC CE P

induces a robust increase in ROS production in brain mitochondria via the inhibition of TR2 [18]. Moreover, it has been previously documented that low µM amounts of AF can strongly inhibit TR2 in rat liver mitochondria [30]. Next, we tested if catalase inhibitor triazole could affect mitochondrial O2●-/H2O2 production. Inclusion of 0.1 mM triazole induced a significant increase in pyruvate-driven ROS formation (Fig 1C).

Higher

concentrations of triazole did not increase O2●-/H2O2 production further indicating that 0.1 mM triazole was sufficient to fully deactivate catalase. Next, the impact of CDNB, AF, and triazole on mitochondrial O2●-/H2O2 production was tested with α-ketoglutarate. An almost 2-fold increase in ROS production was observed in mitochondria treated with 0.5 µM CDNB (Fig 2A). However, the rate of O2●-/H2O2 production did not increase further at higher CDNB concentrations. Next, the effect of AF on the scavenging of H2O2 12

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT formed by α-ketoglutarate/malate metabolism was tested. No change in O2●-/H2O2 production was observed in mitochondria oxidizing α-ketoglutarate even when 10 µM

PT

AF was included (Fig 2B). Next, the effect of triazole on α-ketoglutarate driven ROS

RI

production was tested. Incubation of mitochondria in triazole (0.1 mM) induced a robust

SC

increase in ROS production (Fig 2C). However, no further increases in O2●-/H2O2 production were observed at higher triazole concentrations (Fig 2C). Collectively our

NU

results demonstrate that GSH and catalase but not the PRX system is required to quench

MA

H2O2 formed during the oxidation of pyruvate or 2-oxoglutarate. The isolation of mitochondria from liver tissue by differential centrifuation can be

TE

D

accompanied by the unwanted contamination of samples with peroxisomes and other organelles. Peroxisomes contain high levels of catalase which are required to eliminate

AC CE P

H2O2 formed during fatty acid oxidation. Thus, it is entirely plausible that the triazole effect we observed above was associated with peroxisomal contamination of our mitochondrial preparations. We decided test our mitochondrial preparations for acylCoA oxidase 1 (ACOX1), an enzyme that oxidizes fatty acids in the lumen of peroxisomes. Immunoblot analysis revealed the almost complete absence of ACOX1 in four different mitochondrial samples suggesting that peroxisomal contamination was minimal (Fig 3A). Next, the relative protein levels for GPX1, TRX2, and catalase were tested. Both GPX1 and TRX2 displayed variable expression between the three separate mitochondrial preparations. However, this was not associated with a variation in total amount of protein loaded per well (Fig 3B). Catalase displayed strong immunoreactive

13

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT bands between individual mitochondrial samples (Fig 3B). Band quantification also revealed that catalase protein levels were significantly higher than GPX1 and TRX2 (Fig

PT

3B). Taken together, liver mitochondria contain catalase which plays a part in quenching

RI

H2O2 formed during substrate oxidation.

SC

Liver mitochondria utilize all three antioxidant systems to quench H2O2 in the

NU

surrounding medium

To examine the capacity of the different antioxidant systems in clearing

MA

exogenous H2O2 mitochondria were treated with CDNB, AF, or triazole. Figure 4A

D

demonstrates that all three systems play a role in quenching exogenous H2O2. After a 2.5

TE

minute incubation H2O2 levels in control samples were ~20% relative to time zero (Fig

AC CE P

4A). Inclusion of either CDNB, AF, or triazole significantly diminished mitochondrial H2O2 clearance. However, triazole was the most effective at inhibiting H2O2 elimination. Indeed, after 2.5 min only ~55% of the external H2O2 was removed by mitochondria treated with triazole (Fig 4A). By contrast ~67%, and ~70% of the external H2O2 was scavenged after an incubation period of 2.5 minutes by mitochondria treated with CDNB or AF. At 3.5 minutes, only ~28% of the H2O2 remained in the external medium following triazole treatment (Figure 4). By contrast, after 3.5 minutes ~41% and ~33% external H2O2 remained in the surrounding medium in CDNB and AF treated mitochondria. Longer incubations resulted in the quenching of H2O2 to ~20% of its original concentration in all samples. Next mitochondria were treated with a combination of different inhibitors. As shown in Figure 4B, the catalase system plays a central role in 14

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT the immediate clearance of H2O2 from the surrounding medium. Triazole in combination with either CDNB or AF diminished mitochondrial H2O2 consumption by ~70% (Fig

PT

4B). By contrast mitochondria were still able to clear ~60% of the H2O2 following CDNB

RI

+ AF treatment. Inclusion of all three inhibitors (Triazole + AF + CDNB) induced a

SC

~90% inhibition of mitochondrial H2O2 scavenging. Collectively these results demonstrate that all three antioxidant systems eliminate extramitochondrial H2O2.

NU

Catalase is required to for immediate clearance of H2O2 at higher than normal

MA

concentrations whereas GSH and PRX systems are utilized to maintain steady state H2O2 levels.

TE

D

Assessment of the effect of 3-methyl-2-oxovaleric acid on O2●-/H2O2 production

AC CE P

3-methyl-2-oxovaleric acid (KMV) is a structural analog of α-ketoglutarate and a competitive inhibitor for KGDHC. KMV has been documented to serve as a strong inhibitor for O2●-/H2O2 production by KGDHC [6]. It has also been shown that 10 mM KMV can decrease ROS production by KGDHC by ~90% in skeletal muscle and liver mitochondria [3, 6]. However, to our knowledge the amount of KMV required to lower ROS emission from KGDHC by ~90% has not been tested in liver mitochondria. Figure 5A demonstrates that 0.1 mM KMV induced a ~40% decrease in α-ketoglutarate driven ROS production. At 0.5 mM KMV, O2●-/H2O2 production was inhibited by ~70%. At higher concentrations KMV diminished O2●-/H2O2 production further reaching saturation at 1 mM (Fig 5A). Our group has shown that 10 mM KMV can also lower pyruvate/malate-driven ROS production by ~90% [3]. Thus, we decided to examine how 15

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT much KMV is required to fully inhibit ROS production in liver mitochondria oxidizing pyruvate and malate. At 0.1 mM KMV elicited no significant change in O2●-/H2O2

PT

formation (Fig 5B). However, increasing the concentration of KMV to 0.5 mM induced

RI

an ~60% decrease in ROS production. At a concentration of 10 mM, KMV was able to

SC

inhibit pyruvate driven ROS production by ~90% (Fig 5B). We decided to compare the KMV effect between mitochondria metabolizing α-ketoglutarate versus pyruvate. KMV

NU

was slightly more effective at inhibiting ROS production when α-ketoglutarate was the

MA

substrate (Fig 5C). In the presence of pyruvate slightly more ROS was formed in comparison to α-ketoglutarate up to 1 mM KMV. However, at 5 mM and 10 mM KMV

D

no differences were apparent between mitochondria metabolizing α-ketoglutarate or

TE

pyruvate (Fig 5C). Collectively these results indicate that KGDHC is a more significant

AC CE P

source of ROS than PDHC even when pyruvate is the substrate.

Assessment of the effect of CPI-613 on O2●-/H2O2 production CPI-613 is a lipoic acid analog and putative anti-cancer agent [31]. Lipoic acid is found in the E2 subunit of PDHC and KGDHC and is required to drive the catalytic activity of both enzymes. CPI-613 has been shown to inhibit PDHC and KGDHC likely through the replacement of lipoic acid in the E2 subunit. We decided to follow up the observations in Figure 5 by testing the effect of CPI-613 on α-ketoglutarate and pyruvate-induced ROS production. It had been previously shown that 150 µM CPI-613 is effective at inhibiting PDHC and KGDHC [31, 32]. It is important to emphasize that 16

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT albumin needs to be excluded from reaction mixtures since it can interfere with the CPI613 mediated inhibition of PDHC or KGDHC. Five micromolar CPI-613 induced a

PT

significant decrease in O2●-/H2O2 production by α-ketoglutarate (Fig 6A). At higher

RI

concentrations, CPI-613 decreased ROS production further reaching ~87% inhibition at

SC

150 µM. Similar observations were made with pyruvate. Five micromolar CPI-613 induced a ~40% decrease in O2●-/H2O2 production (Fig 6B). In addition, CPI-613

NU

mediated inhibition of ROS production reached saturation at 50 µM (Fig 6B). Next, we

MA

compared the effect of CPI-613 on α-ketoglutarate and pyruvate-induced ROS production. Overall, no differences were observed between the two different substrates

D

(Fig 6C). To our knowledge this is the first study to examine the effectiveness of CPI-

TE

613 at limiting mitochondrial ROS formation. Taken together, CPI-613 is a good pan-

AC CE P

inhibitor for O2●-/H2O2 production by lipoic acid containing enzymes.

Assessment of the effect of myxothiazol on O2●-/H2O2 production Several studies have demonstrated that myxothiazol is an effective inhibitor for ROS production by Complex III [33, 34]. Our group has found that myxothiazol can induce a significant decrease in pyruvate and succinate driven ROS production in liver mitochondria [3, 11]. Myxothiazol selectively binds to the ubiquinone binding pocket that is close to the positive side of the inner mitochondrial membrane (Qp site) which inhibits ROS emission from Complex III [33]. The results collected above indicate that KGDHC can be a significant source of ROS. However, inhibition of KGDHC (or PDHC) 17

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT also curtails NADH production which would also limit O2●-/H2O2 production by Complex I or Complex III. Thus, we decided to study the impact of myxothiazol on ROS

PT

production. Figure 7A shows that 0.1 µM myxothiazol was sufficient to induce a

RI

significant decrease in O2●-/H2O2 production induced by α-ketoglutarate oxidation. In

SC

addition, 5 µM myxothiazol was found to be the point for full inhibition of ROS production by Complex III (Fig 7A). Similar observations were made with pyruvate. At

NU

0.1 µM, myxothiazol significantly lowered mitochondrial O2●-/H2O2 formation reaching

MA

saturation at 5 µM (Fig 7B). In addition, the percent inhibition at 5 µM was ~48% (Fig 7B). No differences in the inhibition of O2●-/H2O2 production by myxothiazol between

TE

D

mitochondria metabolizing either pyruvate or α-ketoglutarate were observed (Fig 7C).

AC CE P

Complex III and KGDHC are high capacity ROS forming sites in liver mitochondria The maximum inhibition of ROS production by myxothiazol in liver mitochondria was recorded to be ~45% for α-ketoglutarate ant ~48% for pyruvate. This would mean that ~52-55% of the ROS produced in a system exclusively metabolizing pyruvate or αketoglutarate is originating from KGDHC and PDHC and potentially Complex I. Furthermore, between the two enzymes it is likely that KGDHC is the more potent ROS generator (Figure 5). We decided to utilize the results collected in Figures 5-7 to graph the mean of the percent inhibition of ROS formation for each inhibitor (Figure 8). Based on our calculations, regardless of whether pyruvate or α-ketoglutarate served as the substrate, Complex III accounted for around 46% of the ROS formed. In the presence of α-ketoglutarate, KMV and CPI-613 induced ~87% inhibition in ROS formation at 18

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT saturation (Figure 8). In pyruvate treated mitochondria, the highest amounts of KMV and CPI-613 elicited a similar effect. Taken together this would mean that PDHC and

PT

KGDHC account for ~41% of the ROS formed by mitochondria. The other ~13% can be

RI

attributed to other sources. Based on our experimental model, it is difficult to ascertain

SC

precisely how much ROS is being emitted from PDHC and KGDHC. However, based on the effect of KMV in mitochondria metabolizing pyruvate or α-ketoglutarate it can be

NU

inferred that KGDHC is a far more potent site for production than PDHC. Figure 8

MA

demonstrates that 10 mM KMV suppressed pyruvate-induced O2●-/H2O2 production by ~89%. At lower concentrations, KMV was not as effective as CPI-613 at suppressing

D

ROS formed by pyruvate metabolism. This is in contrast to mitochondria oxidizing α-

TE

ketoglutarate where KMV and CPI-613 elicited similar effects (Fig 8). Although KMV

AC CE P

was not as effective at CPI-613 at inhibiting O2●-/H2O2 production, the difference between the two was small during pyruvate catabolism (at point 3 in the pyruvate graph, which corresponds to 500 µM KMV and 10 µM CPI-613 the difference was ~7% whereas at point 4 it was ~13%). Therefore, KGDHC is a higher capacity site for ROS generation than PDHC and Complex III produces the most O2●-/H2O2 in liver mitochondria. The results collected above indicate that Complex III and KGDHC are high capacity ROS forming sites in liver mitochondria. However, it is also important to discern if Complex I also generates ROS during pyruvate or α-ketoglutarate oxidation. Thus, we decided to examine if Complex I can be a significant source ROS under our

19

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT experimental conditions by testing the effect of rotenone in combination with ATP or KMV on overall O2●-/H2O2 emission during pyruvate and α-ketoglutarate oxidation. First,

PT

we permeabilized mitochondria with alamethicin to test the effect of ATP in combination

RI

with rotenone on ROS emission. For these experimental conditions malate was omitted to

SC

avoid the priming of the Krebs cycle and the condensation of acetyl-CoA with oxaloacetate. ATP has been documented to impede ROS production by KGDHC and is a

NU

known inhibitor for PDHC activity [6]. Alpha-ketoglutarate was more effective than

MA

pyruvate at driving O2●-/H2O2 production confirming observations made in a previous study (Fig 9A) [3]. Surprisingly the inclusion of rotenone induced a significant decrease

D

in ROS production in mitochondria oxidizing α-ketoglutarate or pyruvate (Fig 9A). ATP

TE

also inhibited ROS production in mitochondria oxidizing pyruvate (Fig 9A). Next, to

AC CE P

establish that KGDHC and Complex III are high capacity ROS forming sites and Complex I is not significant source of O2●-/H2O2, intact mitochondria oxidizing pyruvate or α-ketoglutarate with malate were treated with KMV and rotenone. As expected KMV (10 mM) decreased mitochondrial ROS production by ~88% in mitochondria oxidizing pyruvate or α-ketoglutarate in the presence of malate (Fig 9B). The inclusion of rotenone also decreased ROS production by ~32% and ~40% in mitochondria oxidizing either substrate. KMV in combination with rotenone decreased ROS production by almost 90% regardless of which substrate was being oxidized (Fig 9B). These results demonstrate that Complex I is not a significant source of ROS during forward electron flow in liver mitochondria, KGDHC produces more O2●-/H2O2 than PDHC, and that Complex III is likely the highest capacity ROS forming site. Collectively, it can be inferred that 20

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT KGDHC is a more potent source of ROS than PDHC in liver mitochondria. Based on this the hierarchy for ROS production in the presence of pyruvate or α-ketoglutarate in liver

RI

PT

mitochondria is Complex III > KGDHC >> PDHC > other sites (e.g. Complex I).

NU

SC

Discussion

MA

Mitochondrial O2●-/H2O2 production was first documented half a century ago and is now being intensely researched more than ever due to its relationship with health and

D

disease. However, considerable gaps in our knowledge still exist in terms of how

TE

mitochondria maintain overall cellular ROS balance. For instance, it has now become

AC CE P

evident that mitochondria can contain up to 11 potential ROS forming sites with some enzymes producing more than others [5]. Identification of which metabolic enzymes in mitochondria serve as high capacity sites has mostly been carried out in skeletal muscle [5]. These studies have found that high capacity sites for ROS production include KGDHC, PDHC, Complex I (during reverse electron flow from succinate or fatty acids), Complex II, and III [5]. Recent work has also shown that KGDHC and PDHC can serve as important sources of ROS and that Complex III is likely the highest capacity O2●/H2O2 producing site in cardiac and liver mitochondria [3]. Formation of supercomplexes, mitochondrial shape, respiratory complex assembly, post-translational modifications, and redox signals have been implicated in controlling mitochondrial ROS formation [35-37]. However, since mitochondria can contain up to 11 potential sites for production it 21

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT complicates our capacity to understand 1) how mitochondrial O2●-/H2O2 production is regulated, 2) which sites are the most potent sources in different tissues, and 3) which

PT

sites make contributions to intramitochondrial and cellular signaling. The complexities

RI

surrounding understanding mitochondrial ROS homeostasis are compounded by

SC

observations that mitochondria also quench exogenous H2O2. Indeed, muscle, brain, heart, and liver mitochondria play a significant role in the decomposition of exogenous

NU

H2O2 [17, 21, 22]. Moreover, Dey et al recently demonstrated that cytosolic ROS

MA

handling is dependent on respiring mitochondria [17]. Thus, the capacity of mitochondria to control cellular H2O2 levels depends on several factors including 1) mitochondrial

D

number, 2) the metabolic and bioenergetic state of a population of mitochondria, 3) H2O2

TE

concentration outside of the mitochondrion, 4) the redox state of the mitochondrial matrix

AC CE P

(e.g. mitochondrial redox buffering networks and NADPH pools), and 5) the ROS forming potential of different sites of production in the presence of different O2●-/H2O2 forming substrates. Collectively, mitochondria play a dynamic role in controlling overall cellular ROS levels via the production and degradation of O2●- and H2O2. In the present study, we characterized the O2●-/H2O2 degrading properties of mouse liver mitochondria. First, we focused on examining the importance of different antioxidant systems in quenching H2O2 formed during substrate oxidation. Several important observations were made in this regard; 1) GSH and catalase are integral for quenching H2O2 formed during carbon metabolism, 2) the PRX system does not degrade H2O2 formed during carbon oxidation, 3) all three antioxidant systems are required to

22

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT quench H2O2 from the surrounding medium. Treberg et al showed that selective inhibition of TR2 with AF induced a robust increase in O2●-/H2O2 production in

PT

mitochondria metabolizing glutamate/malate or succinate [23]. The capacity of AF to

RI

increase H2O2 efflux from mitochondria oxidizing glutamate or succinate was confirmed

SC

in a later study by the same group [22]. In addition, it has been documented in several other studies that TR2 is vital for H2O2 quenching in brain mitochondria [18, 38].

NU

However, in our hands we found no evidence that the PRX system is required to remove

MA

O2●-/H2O2 formed during substrate oxidation. Indeed, Figures 1 and 2 demonstrate that inclusion of AF (up to 10 µM) did not alter mitochondrial O2●-/H2O2 production. Notably

D

this concentration is 5-10 times higher than what is normally used to deactivate TR2 [18,

TE

23]. Although this result may seem surprising, similar observations had been made with

AC CE P

intact liver mitochondria in a previous study. Rigobello et al found that AF does not alter O2●-/H2O2 emission from rat liver mitochondria oxidizing several different substrates [38]. However, mitochondria treated with AF displayed a much higher ROS forming profile after antimycin A treatment in comparison to samples treated with antimycin A alone [38]. Intriguingly we also found that triazole, which selectively disables catalase, induced a robust increase in O2●-/H2O2 production. Initially we were skeptical of this observation since the presence of catalase in mitochondria is often attributed to peroxisomal contamination. However, immunoblot analysis revealed very little peroxisomal contamination and that catalase displayed a higher protein expression profile than GPX1 or TRX2. Liver mitochondria can be exposed to high amounts of ROS due to the physiological function of hepatocytes (e.g. detoxification reactions which form ROS). 23

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT In addition, during substrate oxidation liver mitochondria can form high amounts of O2●/H2O2. Thus, catalase likely serves as an additional line of defense to ensure mitochondria

PT

are not exposed to high ROS formed during normal liver function. It is also possible that

RI

skeletal muscle and brain do not express mitochondrial catalase since both tissues do

SC

form as much ROS as hepatocytes. Thus, only the GSH and PRX systems are required in

NU

these two tissues.

Hepatocytes are armed with a battery of O2●- and H2O2-forming cytosolic enzymes

MA

that are required to eliminate toxins, metabolic waste products, and activate different signaling pathways. Overproduction of ROS by these cytosolic sites of formation is also

TE

D

associated with mitochondrial dysfunction and oxidative stress, which has been suggested to cause a number of liver disorders. Thus, it is likely that liver mitochondria serve as

AC CE P

cellular ROS stabilizers. In the present study we found that control samples quenched ~80% of the external H2O2 within 2.5 minutes which based on our knowledge is a faster rate of clearance than brain or muscle mitochondria [21, 22]. This rapid quenching is likely associated with the high enrichment of H2O2 clearing enzymes in liver mitochondria which includes catalase. Hydrogen peroxide levels remained at ~20% relative to time 0 for the rest of the experiment which may represent the steady-state level for H2O2 in liver mitochondria. We found that all three enzyme systems were involved in quenching H2O2 from the surrounding medium. This is in contrast to a previous study that showed that only catalase was required to quench extramitochondrial H2O2 [18]. Here, inclusion of triazole resulted in the scavenging of ~55% of the external H2O2.

24

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT CDNB and AF were less effective after a 2.5 minute incubation but still induced a significant decrease in H2O2 clearance. At longer incubations (e.g. 3.5 minutes) external

PT

H2O2 was still significantly higher in mitochondrial preparations treated with CDNB or

RI

AF but not triazole. Considering that H2O2 quenching ceased when external levels were

SC

at ~20% it can be concluded that mitochondria reached a steady-state in terms of clearance and production. It important to point out that we utilized 2.5 µM H2O2 in our

NU

experiments which is high in terms concentrations normally found in the liver (usually in

MA

the low to mid-nanomolar range) [39]. Catalase was instrumental for the initial removal of H2O2 from the surrounding medium. However, once levels were low enough GSH and

D

PRX systems were responsible for quenching any remaining H2O2 until a steady-state

TE

was reached (~20% remaining in solution). It was also found that inclusion of all three

AC CE P

inhibitors (CDNB + AF + Triazole) induced a ~90% decrease in the clearance of exogenous H2O2. By contrast adding triazole in combination with CDNB or AF induced a ~65% decrease in H2O2 and AF with CDNB only resulted in about a 35% inhibition of clearance. First, this illustrates that catalase is the most important system for the initial clearance of H2O2 when it is at a higher than normal concentration. Second, since we obtained ~90% inhibition with all three inhibitors this would suggest there is a fourth H2O2 clearing system in mitochondria. One possibility is α-keto acids like pyruvate or αketoglutarate which have been implicated in H2O2 degradation [40]. However, both molecules exhibit very slow kinetics in terms of H2O2 clearance when compared to enzymatic systems (GSH, PRX, and catalase) and thus the role of α-keto acids in antioxidant defense is still questionable [41]. Overall these results demonstrate there may 25

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT be a “division of labor” in mitochondrial antioxidant defense where catalase is required to quench H2O2 when it is at a higher than normal concentration. This could be vital for

PT

situations when hepatocytes are forming higher than normal ROS levels during fat or

RI

toxin elimination. By contrast, GSH and PRX most likely serve as a buffer system

SC

maintaining H2O2 at low levels which may be required for mitochondrial redox signaling.

NU

In the second part of our study, we set out to characterize the O2●-/H2O2 forming potential of three potent sources of mitochondrial ROS; Complex III, KGDHC, and

MA

PDHC. Our choice to characterize these three sites further is rooted in observations we have made in previous studies. First, our group recently showed that KGDHC and PDHC

TE

D

are significant sources of ROS in liver mitochondria with the former producing more O2●/H2O2 than the latter [3]. Second, we found in the same study that Complex III is a

AC CE P

significant source of ROS in liver mitochondria metabolizing pyruvate or succinate and that Complexes I and II were not high capacity sites for production [3]. We have also found that KGDHC and PDHC are sites for S-glutathionylation, a redox modification which alters the amount of ROS formed by either complex which may play a critical role in controlling H2O2 signaling [11]. Thus, in the present study we conducted a detailed assessment of the ROS forming potential of Complex III, KGDHC, PDHC, and Complex I. Based on our analysis we found that the hierarchy for O2●-/H2O2 production was Complex III > KGDHC >> PDHC > Complex I from highest to lowest. This arrangement is in agreement with Quinlan et al where it was found that 1) KGDHC and PDHC form ~8x and ~4x more ROS than Complex I and 2) Complex III, is the most significant

26

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT source overall [6]. Other sources such as, proline dehydrogenase or dihydroorotate dehydrogenase form negligible amounts. The intriguing aspect about these observations

PT

is the role of Complex I in forming ROS. Traditionally, Complex I is often viewed as one

RI

of the most important ROS forming sites in mitochondria. However, this concept is now

SC

currently being challenged since enzymes like KGDHC, PDHC, and branched chain keto acid dehydrogenase have been found to produce more than Complex I in the presence of

NU

NADH [6]. To our surprise, it was found that Complex I is not a high capacity ROS

MA

forming site even when rotenone was added. Indeed, the addition of rotenone actually decreased O2●-/H2O2 production indicating that the principle site for ROS formation in

D

the electron transport chain is Complex III. This conclusion is supported by the

TE

observation that myxothiazol lowered ROS production by ~45%.

It should be

AC CE P

emphasized that Complex I can produce high amounts of ROS during reverse electron flow from succinate [42]. However, it would appear that during forward electron flow Complex I is not a significant source of ROS. In the present study, we employed three different inhibitors, KMV, CPI-613, and ATP, to investigate the ROS forming potential of KGDHC and PDHC. To our knowledge this is the first study to use the lipoic acid analog, CPI-613, to examine mitochondrial ROS emission. Based on our findings, CPI613 is a good pan-inhibitor for ROS production from lipoic acid containing enzymes. KMV is a specific inhibitor for KGDHC and was highly effective at inhibiting O2●-/H2O2 production in mitochondria metabolizing pyruvate. Moreover, it was found that ATP is effective at limiting ROS production during pyruvate or α-ketoglutarate oxidation in permeabilized liver mitochondria. Collectively, we can conclude KGDHC is the chief site 27

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT for ROS production even when pyruvate is being oxidized in the presence of malate. This could have implications for groups invested in deciphering which mitochondrial sites

PT

produce the most ROS in cells metabolizing glucose or other carbon sources like amino

RI

acids or fatty acids in different physiological and pathological models (e.g. cancer).

SC

The emergence of new and sensitive technologies has allowed the identification of

NU

new sites for ROS production in mitochondria. This has strong implications for the signaling function of H2O2 and how it is used by mitochondria to communicate to the rest

MA

of the cell. Hydrogen peroxide is often referred to as a mitokine, a secondary messenger that serves as a superimposed co-signal that controls mitochondrial function(s) and cell

TE

D

physiology. However, it is also clear that mitochondria serve as a sink for cellular ROS. Thus, it is likely that the secondary messenger function of H2O2 is influenced by

AC CE P

production and clearance by mitochondria [43]. The concept that mitochondria can serve as a “ROS stabilizing device” was proposed by Starkov et al and since then several groups have shown that mitochondria are required to manage the cell’s ROS budget forming and quenching H2O2 in response to mitochondrial and cellular changes in redox state and ROS levels [21, 43]. Here, we have shown that this concept applies to liver mitochondria. It was found that liver mitochondria rely on the GSH, peroxiredoxin, and catalase systems to quench exogenous or H2O2 formed during substrate oxidation. We also show that KGDHC is an important ROS generator which could have strong implications for studies tracking the effect of glucose or other sources of carbon on mitochondrial O2●-/H2O2 production. We propose that ROS source/sink function in liver

28

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT cells is crucial for 1) maintaining cellular redox signaling networks and 2) buffering cellular ROS when hepatocytes are engaged in detoxification reactions or other activities,

RI

PT

which can potentially cause cellular and mitochondrial damage.

NU

SC

Acknowledgements

MA

This work was supported by an operating grant provided by the Natural Sciences and

AC CE P

TE

D

Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC # RGPIN-2016-04829).

29

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

PT

References

[1] J. Yun, T. Finkel, Mitohormesis, Cell Metab, 19 (2014) 757-766.

RI

[2] V. Massey, Activation of molecular oxygen by flavins and flavoproteins, J Biol Chem, 269

SC

(1994) 22459-22462.

NU

[3] R.J. Mailloux, D. Gardiner, M. O'Brien, 2-Oxoglutarate dehydrogenase is a more significant source of O2(.-)/H2O2 than pyruvate dehydrogenase in cardiac and liver tissue, Free Radic Biol

MA

Med, 97 (2016) 501-512.

[4] A.A. Starkov, G. Fiskum, C. Chinopoulos, B.J. Lorenzo, S.E. Browne, M.S. Patel, M.F. Beal,

TE

D

Mitochondrial alpha-ketoglutarate dehydrogenase complex generates reactive oxygen species,

7779-7788.

AC CE P

The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience, 24 (2004)

[5] M.D. Brand, Mitochondrial generation of superoxide and hydrogen peroxide as the source of mitochondrial redox signaling, Free Radic Biol Med, 100 (2016) 14-31. [6] C.L. Quinlan, R.L. Goncalves, M. Hey-Mogensen, N. Yadava, V.I. Bunik, M.D. Brand, The 2oxoacid dehydrogenase complexes in mitochondria can produce superoxide/hydrogen peroxide at much higher rates than complex I, J Biol Chem, 289 (2014) 8312-8325. [7] A. Ambrus, N.S. Nemeria, B. Torocsik, L. Tretter, M. Nilsson, F. Jordan, V. Adam-Vizi, Formation of reactive oxygen species by human and bacterial pyruvate and 2-oxoglutarate dehydrogenase multienzyme complexes reconstituted from recombinant components, Free Radic Biol Med, 89 (2015) 642-650.

30

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT [8] K.H. Fisher-Wellman, L.A. Gilliam, C.T. Lin, B.L. Cathey, D.S. Lark, P.D. Neufer, Mitochondrial glutathione depletion reveals a novel role for the pyruvate dehydrogenase complex as a key

PT

H2O2-emitting source under conditions of nutrient overload, Free Radic Biol Med, 65 (2013)

RI

1201-1208.

SC

[9] A.L. McLain, P.A. Szweda, L.I. Szweda, alpha-Ketoglutarate dehydrogenase: a mitochondrial redox sensor, Free Radic Res, 45 (2011) 29-36.

NU

[10] H. Sies, C. Berndt, D.P. Jones, Oxidative Stress, Annual review of biochemistry, (2017).

MA

[11] M. O'Brien, J. Chalker, L. Slade, D. Gardiner, R.J. Mailloux, Protein S-glutathionylation alters superoxide/hydrogen peroxide emission from pyruvate dehydrogenase complex, Free Radic

D

Biol Med, 106 (2017) 302-314.

TE

[12] R.T. Hamilton, M.E. Walsh, H. Van Remmen, Mouse Models of Oxidative Stress Indicate a

AC CE P

Role for Modulating Healthy Aging, J Clin Exp Pathol, Suppl 4 (2012). [13] M.P. Murphy, Mitochondrial thiols in antioxidant protection and redox signaling: distinct roles for glutathionylation and other thiol modifications, Antioxid Redox Signal, 16 (2012) 476495.

[14] S.E. Yoo, L. Chen, R. Na, Y. Liu, C. Rios, H. Van Remmen, A. Richardson, Q. Ran, Gpx4 ablation in adult mice results in a lethal phenotype accompanied by neuronal loss in brain, Free Radic Biol Med, 52 (2012) 1820-1827. [15] N. Ardanaz, X.P. Yang, M.E. Cifuentes, M.J. Haurani, K.W. Jackson, T.D. Liao, O.A. Carretero, P.J. Pagano, Lack of glutathione peroxidase 1 accelerates cardiac-specific hypertrophy and dysfunction in angiotensin II hypertension, Hypertension, 55 (2010) 116-123.

31

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT [16] C.C. Winterbourn, M.B. Hampton, Redox biology: signaling via a peroxiredoxin sensor, Nat Chem Biol, 11 (2015) 5-6.

PT

[17] S. Dey, A. Sidor, B. O'Rourke, Compartment-specific Control of Reactive Oxygen Species

RI

Scavenging by Antioxidant Pathway Enzymes, J Biol Chem, 291 (2016) 11185-11197.

SC

[18] D.A. Drechsel, M. Patel, Respiration-dependent H2O2 removal in brain mitochondria via the thioredoxin/peroxiredoxin system, J Biol Chem, 285 (2010) 27850-27858.

NU

[19] M. Salvi, V. Battaglia, A.M. Brunati, N. La Rocca, E. Tibaldi, P. Pietrangeli, L. Marcocci, B.

MA

Mondovi, C.A. Rossi, A. Toninello, Catalase takes part in rat liver mitochondria oxidative stress defense, J Biol Chem, 282 (2007) 24407-24415.

D

[20] R. Radi, J.F. Turrens, L.Y. Chang, K.M. Bush, J.D. Crapo, B.A. Freeman, Detection of catalase

TE

in rat heart mitochondria, J Biol Chem, 266 (1991) 22028-22034.

AC CE P

[21] A.A. Starkov, A.Y. Andreyev, S.F. Zhang, N.N. Starkova, M. Korneeva, M. Syromyatnikov, V.N. Popov, Scavenging of H2O2 by mouse brain mitochondria, J Bioenerg Biomembr, 46 (2014) 471-477.

[22] D. Munro, S. Banh, E. Sotiri, N. Tamanna, J.R. Treberg, The thioredoxin and glutathionedependent H2O2 consumption pathways in muscle mitochondria: Involvement in H2O2 metabolism and consequence to H2O2 efflux assays, Free Radic Biol Med, 96 (2016) 334-346. [23] J.R. Treberg, D. Munro, S. Banh, P. Zacharias, E. Sotiri, Differentiating between apparent and actual rates of H2O2 metabolism by isolated rat muscle mitochondria to test a simple model of mitochondria as regulators of H2O2 concentration, Redox Biol, 5 (2015) 216-224.

32

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT [24] R.J. Mailloux, A. Young, J. Chalker, D. Gardiner, M. O'Brien, L. Slade, J.T. Brosnan, Choline and dimethylglycine produce superoxide/hydrogen peroxide from the electron transport chain

PT

in liver mitochondria, FEBS Lett, 590 (2016) 4318-4328.

RI

[25] A.P. Halestrap, The mitochondrial pyruvate carrier. Kinetics and specificity for substrates

SC

and inhibitors, Biochem J, 148 (1975) 85-96.

[26] F. Palmieri, G. Prezioso, E. Quagliariello, M. Klingenberg, Kinetic study of the dicarboxylate

NU

carrier in rat liver mitochondria, European journal of biochemistry, 22 (1971) 66-74.

MA

[27] F. Bisaccia, L. Capobianco, M. Mazzeo, F. Palmieri, The mitochondrial oxoglutarate carrier protein contains a disulfide bridge between intramembranous cysteines 221 and 224, FEBS Lett,

D

392 (1996) 54-58.

TE

[28] I. Siebels, S. Drose, Q-site inhibitor induced ROS production of mitochondrial complex II is

AC CE P

attenuated by TCA cycle dicarboxylates, Biochim Biophys Acta, 1827 (2013) 1156-1164. [29] W. He, F.J. Miao, D.C. Lin, R.T. Schwandner, Z. Wang, J. Gao, J.L. Chen, H. Tian, L. Ling, Citric acid cycle intermediates as ligands for orphan G-protein-coupled receptors, Nature, 429 (2004) 188-193.

[30] M.P. Rigobello, G. Scutari, A. Folda, A. Bindoli, Mitochondrial thioredoxin reductase inhibition by gold(I) compounds and concurrent stimulation of permeability transition and release of cytochrome c, Biochemical pharmacology, 67 (2004) 689-696. [31] Z. Zachar, J. Marecek, C. Maturo, S. Gupta, S.D. Stuart, K. Howell, A. Schauble, J. Lem, A. Piramzadian, S. Karnik, K. Lee, R. Rodriguez, R. Shorr, P.M. Bingham, Non-redox-active lipoate derivates disrupt cancer cell mitochondrial metabolism and are potent anticancer agents in vivo, J Mol Med (Berl), 89 (2011) 1137-1148.

33

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT [32] S.D. Stuart, A. Schauble, S. Gupta, A.D. Kennedy, B.R. Keppler, P.M. Bingham, Z. Zachar, A strategically designed small molecule attacks alpha-ketoglutarate dehydrogenase in tumor cells

PT

through a redox process, Cancer Metab, 2 (2014) 4.

RI

[33] J.F. Turrens, A. Alexandre, A.L. Lehninger, Ubisemiquinone is the electron donor for

SC

superoxide formation by complex III of heart mitochondria, Arch Biochem Biophys, 237 (1985) 408-414.

NU

[34] A.A. Starkov, G. Fiskum, Myxothiazol induces H(2)O(2) production from mitochondrial

MA

respiratory chain, Biochem Biophys Res Commun, 281 (2001) 645-650. [35] R. Moreno-Loshuertos, J.A. Enriquez, Respiratory supercomplexes and the functional

D

segmentation of the CoQ pool, Free Radic Biol Med, 100 (2016) 5-13.

TE

[36] L. Plecita-Hlavata, P. Jezek, Integration of superoxide formation and cristae morphology for

AC CE P

mitochondrial redox signaling, Int J Biochem Cell Biol, 80 (2016) 31-50. [37] R.J. Mailloux, J.R. Treberg, Protein S-glutathionlyation links energy metabolism to redox signaling in mitochondria, Redox biology, 8 (2016) 110-118. [38] M.P. Rigobello, A. Folda, M.C. Baldoin, G. Scutari, A. Bindoli, Effect of auranofin on the mitochondrial generation of hydrogen peroxide. Role of thioredoxin reductase, Free radical research, 39 (2005) 687-695. [39] H. Sies, Hydrogen peroxide as a central redox signaling molecule in physiological oxidative stress: Oxidative eustress, Redox biology, 11 (2017) 613-619. [40] N.I. Fedotcheva, A.P. Sokolov, M.N. Kondrashova, Nonezymatic formation of succinate in mitochondria under oxidative stress, Free Radic Biol Med, 41 (2006) 56-64.

34

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT [41] J. Vasquez-Vivar, A. Denicola, R. Radi, O. Augusto, Peroxynitrite-mediated decarboxylation of pyruvate to both carbon dioxide and carbon dioxide radical anion, Chem Res Toxicol, 10

PT

(1997) 786-794.

RI

[42] E.T. Chouchani, V.R. Pell, E. Gaude, D. Aksentijevic, S.Y. Sundier, E.L. Robb, A. Logan, S.M.

SC

Nadtochiy, E.N. Ord, A.C. Smith, F. Eyassu, R. Shirley, C.H. Hu, A.J. Dare, A.M. James, S. Rogatti, R.C. Hartley, S. Eaton, A.S. Costa, P.S. Brookes, S.M. Davidson, M.R. Duchen, K. Saeb-Parsy, M.J.

NU

Shattock, A.J. Robinson, L.M. Work, C. Frezza, T. Krieg, M.P. Murphy, Ischaemic accumulation of

MA

succinate controls reperfusion injury through mitochondrial ROS, Nature, 515 (2014) 431-435. [43] A.A. Starkov, The role of mitochondria in reactive oxygen species metabolism and signaling,

AC CE P

TE

D

Ann N Y Acad Sci, 1147 (2008) 37-52.

35

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

PT

Figure Captions

Figure 1: GSH and catalase systems quench O2●-/H2O2 formed by pyruvate

RI

oxidation. A. Mitochondria were treated with different concentrations of CDNB, which

SC

depletes glutathione, and then O2●-/H2O2 production was tracked following the addition

NU

of pyruvate (50 µM) and malate (50 µM). Results were expressed as a percentage of control (0 µM). B. Mitochondria were treated with different concentrations of thioredoxin

MA

reductase-2 inhibitor AF and then O2●-/H2O2 production was tracked following the

D

addition of pyruvate (50 µM) and malate (50 µM). Results were expressed as a

TE

percentage of control (0 µM). C. Mitochondria were treated with different concentrations

AC CE P

of catalase inhibitor triazole and then O2●-/H2O2 production was tracked following the addition of pyruvate (50 µM) and malate (50 µM). Results were expressed as a percentage of control (0 µM). n=4-6, mean ± SEM, one-way ANOVA with a Fisher’s LSD post-hoc test.

Figure 2: GSH and catalase systems quench O2●-/H2O2 formed by α-ketoglutarate oxidation. A. Mitochondria were treated with different concentrations of CDNB, which depletes glutathione, and then O2●-/H2O2 production was tracked following the addition of α-ketoglutarate (50 µM) and malate (50 µM). Results were expressed as a percentage of control (0 µM). B. Mitochondria were treated with different concentrations of thioredoxin reductase-2 inhibitor AF and then O2●-/H2O2 production was tracked following the addition of α-ketoglutarate (50 µM) and malate (50 µM). Results were 36

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT expressed as a percentage of control (0 µM). C. Mitochondria were treated with different concentrations of catalase inhibitor triazole and then O2●-/H2O2 production was tracked

PT

following the addition of α-ketoglutarate (50 µM) and malate (50 µM). Results were

RI

expressed as a percentage of control (0 µM). n=4, mean ± SEM, one-way ANOVA with a

SC

Fisher’s LSD post-hoc test.

NU

Figure 3: Detection of catalase in liver mitochondria. A. Examination of peroxisomal contamination in liver mitochondria preparations. Four individual mitochondrial

MA

preparations were electrophoresed and probed for peroxisomal marker ACOX1 and mitochondrial marker KGDHC E1 subunit. Sod2 served as the loading control B.

TE

D

Assessment of the GPX1, TRX2, and catalase levels. Three individual mitochondrial preparations were electrophoresed and then tested for the presence of GPX1, TRX2, and

AC CE P

catalase. The E1 subunit for KGDHC served as the loading control. n=3, mean ± SEM, one-way ANOVA with a Fisher’s LSD post-hoc test. Figure 4: The GSH, peroxiredoxin, and catalase systems are required to clear exogenous H2O2. A. Mitochondria were treated with CDNB (0.5 µM), AF (1 µM), and triazole (0.1 mM) and the quenching of exogenously added H2O2 was measured at different intervals over 5 minutes. n=4, mean ± SEM, one-way ANOVA with a Fisher’s LSD post-hoc test. B. To discern the overall contribution of each system to H2O2, mitochondria were treated with a combination of CDNB, AF, or triazole and then the detoxification of exogenously added H2O2 (2.5 µM) was tracked for 2.5 minutes. n=4, mean ± SEM, two-way ANOVA with a Fisher’s LSD post-hoc test. * refers to statistical 37

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT comparison between the control and treatment groups at 2.5 minutes. # refers to statistical comparison between time 0 and time 2.5 minutes for the different treatment groups.

PT

Figure 5: α-ketoglutarate analog KMV is effective at curtailing O2●-/H2O2 formed

RI

during α-ketoglutarate and pyruvate oxidation. A. Mitochondria were treated with

SC

different concentrations of KMV and then α-ketoglutarate (50 µM) and malate (50 µM) Mitochondria were treated with

NU

mediated O2●-/H2O2 production was examined. B.

different concentrations of KMV and then pyruvate (50 µM) and malate (50 µM)

MA

mediated O2●-/H2O2 production was examined. C. Comparison of O2●-/H2O2 production during pyruvate and α-ketoglutarate metabolism at different KMV concenetrations. n=4,

TE

D

mean ± SEM, one-way ANOVA with a Fisher’s LSD post-hoc test. Figure 6: Effect of lipoic acid analogy CPI-613 on pyruvate and 2-oxoglutarate-

AC CE P

induced mitochondrial O2●-/H2O2 production. A. Mitochondria were treated with different concentrations of CPI-613 and then α-ketoglutarate (50 µM) and malate (50 µM) mediated O2●-/H2O2 production was examined. B. Mitochondria were treated with different concentrations of CPI-613 and then pyruvate (50 µM) and malate (50 µM) mediated O2●-/H2O2 production was examined. C. Comparison of O2●-/H2O2 production during pyruvate and α-ketoglutarate metabolism at different CPI-613 concenetrations. n=4, mean ± SEM, one-way ANOVA with a Fisher’s LSD post-hoc test. Figure 7: Impact of myxothiazol on O2●-/H2O2 production in mitochondria metabolizing pyruvate and 2-oxoglutarate. A. Mitochondria were treated with different concentrations of myxothiazol and then α-ketoglutarate (50 µM) and malate (50 µM) 38

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT mediated O2●-/H2O2 production was examined. B.

Mitochondria were treated with

different concentrations of myxothiazol and then pyruvate (50 µM) and malate (50 µM)

PT

mediated O2●-/H2O2 production was examined. C. Comparison of O2●-/H2O2 production

RI

during pyruvate and α-ketoglutarate metabolism at different CPI-613 concenetrations.

SC

n=4, mean ± SEM, one-way ANOVA with a Fisher’s LSD post-hoc test.

NU

Figure 8: Overall assessment of the effectiveness of each inhibitor at limiting O2●/H2O2 production. The mean for the percent inhibition was calculated from results

MA

collected in Figures 5-7. For the pyruvate graph, ~7% and ~13% at points three and four represent the % inhibition difference between KMV and CPI-613. n=4, mean ± SEM,

TE

D

one-way ANOVA with a Fisher’s LSD post-hoc test.

AC CE P

Figure 9: KGDHC and Complex III are important sources of ROS in liver mitochondria. A. Permeabilized mitochondria were treated with ATP (2.5 mM), an KGDHC and PDHC allosteric inhibitor, in combination with rotenone (4 µM). The rate of O2●-/H2O2 production was then tracked following the addition of pyruvate (50 µM) or α-ketoglutarate (50 µM). B. Mitochondria were treated with KMV (10 mM) and/or rotenone (4 µM). ROS production was then monitored over 5 minutes following the addition of pyruvate (50 µM) or α-ketoglutarate (50 µM) and malate (50 µM). n=4, mean ± SEM, one-way ANOVA with a Fisher’s LSD post-hoc test.

39

AC CE P

TE

D

MA

NU

SC

RI

PT

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

40

AC CE P

TE

D

MA

NU

SC

RI

PT

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

41

AC CE P

TE

D

MA

NU

SC

RI

PT

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

42

AC CE P

TE

D

MA

NU

SC

RI

PT

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

43

AC CE P

TE

D

MA

NU

SC

RI

PT

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

44

AC CE P

TE

D

MA

NU

SC

RI

PT

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

45

AC CE P

TE

D

MA

NU

SC

RI

PT

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

46

AC CE P

TE

D

MA

NU

SC

RI

PT

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

47

AC CE P

TE

D

MA

NU

SC

RI

PT

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

48

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT Highlights

TE

D

MA

NU

SC

RI

PT

GSH and Catalase clear H2O2 formed during substrate metabolism GSH, PRX, and catalase quench exogenous H2O2 in liver mitochondria OGDH is high capacity ROS forming sites in liver mitochondria Complex III is the highest capacity site in liver mitochondria

AC CE P

   

49