From the Departments of Genetic Engineering and
Biochemistry, Kyungpook National University, Taegu 702-701, ¶ TG Biotech Co. Ltd., Kyungpook National University,
Taegu 702-701, Korea, the ** Department of Anatomy, College of Medicine,
Yeungnam University, Taegu 705-717, Korea, the
Laboratory of Membrane Biochemistry and
Biophysics, National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism,
Rockville, Maryland 20852, the §§ Research
Laboratory, Dong-A Pharmacia Co. Ltd., Youngin, Kyungi-Do 449-900, Korea
Received for publication, November 7, 2000, and in revised form, January 19, 2001
![]() |
ABSTRACT |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
Mitochondria are the major organelles that
produce reactive oxygen species (ROS) and the main target of
ROS-induced damage as observed in various pathological states including
aging. Production of NADPH required for the regeneration of glutathione
in the mitochondria is critical for scavenging mitochondrial ROS
through glutathione reductase and peroxidase systems. We investigated
the role of mitochondrial NADP+-dependent
isocitrate dehydrogenase (IDPm) in controlling the mitochondrial redox
balance and subsequent cellular defense against oxidative damage. We
demonstrate in this report that IDPm is induced by ROS and that
decreased expression of IDPm markedly elevates the ROS generation, DNA
fragmentation, lipid peroxidation, and concurrent mitochondrial damage
with a significant reduction in ATP level. Conversely, overproduction
of IDPm protein efficiently protected the cells from ROS-induced
damage. The protective role of IDPm against oxidative damage may be
attributed to increased levels of a reducing equivalent, NADPH, needed
for regeneration of glutathione in the mitochondria. Our results
strongly indicate that IDPm is a major NADPH producer in the
mitochondria and thus plays a key role in cellular defense against
oxidative stress-induced damage.
Cell damage induced by oxidative stress and reactive oxygen
species (ROS)1 has been
implicated in several human diseases including aging, alcohol-mediated
organ damage, neurodegenerative diseases, many types of cancers,
cardiovascular diseases, and UV-mediated skin disorders (1). As one of
the major sources of ROS (2), mitochondria are highly susceptible to
oxidative damage. ROS can damage mitochondrial enzymes directly (3),
and they can cause mutation in mitochondrial DNAs (4). At the same
time, ROS can change the mitochondrial transmembrane potential
( Recent reports indicate that mitochondrial ROS cause apoptosis (7,
8) by activating various apoptotic effectors such as cytochrome
c release, procaspase-2, procaspase-9, procaspase-3, and
latent apoptosis-inducing factor, which is released from the mitochondria during apoptosis (9-11). Another report also suggested that mitochondrial ROS directly caused apoptosis of T cells (12). It
was also reported that tumor necrosis factor During aerobic respiration to generate ATP in mitochondria, leakage of
electrons frequently produces mitochondrial superoxide anions that are
rapidly reduced to H2O2 by manganese superoxide dismutase. Because catalase, which metabolizes
H2O2, is absent in the mitochondria of most
animal cells (18), mitochondrial glutathione peroxidase plays a
key role in metabolizing H2O2. Therefore,
reduced glutathione (GSH), an efficient antioxidant and free
radical scavenger by itself and required for the activity of
mitochondrial glutathione peroxidase, becomes the best defense available against the potential toxicity of
H2O2 in the mitochondria. Nevertheless, GSH is
known to be synthesized in the cytosol and transported into the
mitochondria (19) through rapid exchange of GSH between the cytosol
and mitochondria (20). In contrast, oxidized glutathione disulfide
(GSSG) in the mitochondria cannot be exported into the cytosol (21) for
reconversion into GSH. These facts underscore the importance of
mitochondrial NADPH as a necessary reducing equivalent for the
regeneration of GSH from GSSG by the activity of mitochondrial
glutathione reductase.
Until now, glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase (Glu-6-P dehydrogenase)
was regarded as the major source of cellular NADPH because it reduces
cellular oxidative stress by increasing the GSH concentration (22).
Because Glu-6-P dehydrogenase is absent in the mitochondria, the
mechanism for maintaining the mitochondrial NADPH pool, crucial to the
control of mitochondrial redox balance, remains to be elucidated.
In mammals, three classes of isocitrate dehydrogenase (ICDH)
isoenzymes exist: mitochondrial NAD+-dependent
ICDH (IDH), mitochondrial NADP+-dependent ICDH
(IDPm) and cytosolic NADP+-dependent ICDH
(IDPc) (23). Among the eukaryotic ICDH isoenzymes, IDH has been assumed
to play a major role in the oxidative decarboxylation of isocitrate in
the tricarboxylic acid cycle (24). However, the exact roles of IDPm and
IDPc, which catalyze decarboxylation of isocitrate into
We have reported previously the isolation and molecular
characterization of cDNA clones for bovine IDPm (25) and other IDH subunits (26). In this study, we investigated the potential role of
IDPm in the defense against ROS-induced oxidative damage and cell
death. Our study was performed by overproducing the coding region of a
cDNA for mouse IDPm followed by measurement of cell death and
various indicators of oxidative stress. Reduced expression of IDPm by
transfecting the antisense cDNA increased spontaneous production of
ROS and lipid peroxidation accompanied by significantly more
mitochondrial injury compared with the control cells transfected with
vector alone. In contrast, increased expression of IDPm derived from
the sense cDNA effectively prevented or reduced ROS-related damage.
Our results further provide evidence that ROS-inducible IDPm is a major
producer of mitochondrial NADPH, subsequently leading to an increased
mitochondrial GSH pool needed for the defense against ROS-mediated
oxidative injury.
Molecular Cloning and Construction of Cell Lines--
Bovine
IDPm cDNA (25) was used as a probe to screen mouse IDPm cDNA
from a Antibody Preparation and Immunoblot Analysis--
To prepare
IDPm polyclonal antibody, a peptide representing the N-terminal 16 amino acids of mouse IDPm (ADKRIKVAKPVVEMDG) was synthesized with a
peptide synthesizer (Excell, Milligene Bioresearch) and purified
according to the protocol suggested by the manufacturer. The purified
peptide (5 mg) was conjugated by rabbit serum albumin (1 mg) using a
kit (Imject, Pierce Chemical Co.) and used to prepare polyclonal
anti-peptide antibodies in rabbit. The mitochondrial homogenates from
cultured cells were separated on 10% SDS-polyacrylamide gel,
transferred to nitrocellulose membranes (Schleicher & Shuell), and
subsequently subjected to immunoblot analysis using anti-peptide
antibodies. Immunoreactive antigen was then recognized by using
horseradish peroxidase-labeled anti-rabbit IgG and an enhanced
chemiluminescence detection kit (Amersham Pharmacia Biotech).
Northern Blot Analysis--
Total RNAs from cultured cells were
prepared using RNAzol (Tel-Test Inc., Friendswood, TX) according to the
manufacturer's protocol. Total RNA from cultured cells was separated
by electrophoresis on 0.66 M formamide, 1% agarose gels,
transferred to GeneScreen membranes, and hybridized with
32P-labeled mouse IDPm cDNA as a probe. A membrane for
human or mouse multiple tissue Northern blot
(CLONTECH) was hybridized with
32P-labeled DNA probe. Hybridization and subsequent
procedures were the same as those described previously (26).
Measurement of Enzyme Activities--
Mitochondrial pellets (25)
prepared from cultured cells were resuspended in 1 × phosphate-buffered saline containing 0.1% Triton X-100, disrupted by
sonication (4710 series, Cole-Palmer) twice at 40% of the maximum
setting for 10 s, and centrifuged at 15,000 × g
for 30 min. The supernatants were used to measure the activities of
several mitochondrial enzymes. Activities of IDH and IDPm were measured
by the production of NADH (26) and NADPH (29), respectively, at 340 nm
at 25 °C. 1 unit of IDPm activity is defined as the amount of enzyme
catalyzing the production of 1 µmol of NADPH/min. Activities for
manganese superoxide dismutase, mitochondrial glutathione reductase,
and mitochondrial glutathione peroxidase were determined by published
methods (30, 31). Activities for Glu-6-P dehydrogenase and catalase
were analyzed by the methods described (22, 32).
Measurement of Cell Viability and DNA Fragmentation--
Cells
(2 × 104) were grown until 80% confluence in 96-well
plates, and cell viability after treatment with
H2O2 was assessed by
3-(4,5-dimethylthiazol-2-yl)-2,5-diphenyltetrazolium bromide (MTT) assay (33). After the cells were treated for 48 h with various concentrations of H2O2, 50 µl of MTT
(2 mg/ml, Sigma) solution was added and incubated for another 4 h
at 37 °C. The MTT solution was discarded by aspiration, and the
resulting formazan product converted by the viable cells was dissolved
in 150 µl of dimethyl sulfoxide. The absorbance at 540 nm with a 620 nm reference was read with an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay plate reader. Cell viability was expressed as a percentage of untreated control cells. For analyses of DNA fragmentation, cells exposed to
different concentrations of H2O2 for 1 h
were lysed in NTE buffer, pH 8.0 (100 mM NaCl, 10 mM Tris, 1 mM EDTA) containing 1% SDS and
proteinase K (0.2 mg/ml). DNA extraction and purification were
performed by the method described by Bernhard et al. (34). To analyze the degree of DNA fragmentation, 5 µg of each DNA sample was resolved on 1% agarose gel and visualized under UV illumination.
Calculation of Peroxides--
Total peroxide
concentrations were calculated by the rate of oxidation of ferrous
(Fe2+) to ferric ion (Fe3+) (35). Cells (2 × 106) were either untreated or pretreated with 0.1 mM H2O2 for 1 h. Cell extracts
were incubated with the reaction mixture (0.1 mM xylenol
orange, 0.25 mM ammonium ferrous sulfate, 100 mM sorbitol, and 25 mM
H2SO4) at 22 °C for 30 min prior to
measurement of the absorbance at 560 nm. H2O2
(0-5 µM) was used to produce a standard curve.
Measurement of ROS--
Cells (1 × 106) were
grown on poly-L-lysine-coated slide glasses and untreated
or treated with 1.0 mM H2O2 for 5 min. Intracellular ROS generation was monitored by the fluorescence
produced from 2',7'-dichlorofluorescein (DCF) after oxidation of 10 µM dichlorodihydrofluorescein diacetate (Molecular
Probes, Eugene, OR) (36). Images of DCF fluorescence (excitation, 488 nm; emission, 520 nm) were acquired using a laser confocal scanning
microscope (DM/R-TCS, Leica) coupled to a microscope (Leitz DM RBE). To
measure the fluorescence intensity, 20 cells from each image were
picked randomly, and their averages of fluorescence intensity were
calculated as described (15). For FACS analyses, cells (2 × 106) were pretreated with 5 µM
dichlorodihydrofluorescein diacetate and followed by exposure to 30 µM C2-ceramide
(N-acetyl-D-sphingosine, Sigma) for 15 min. Measurements of
DCF fluorescence in trypsin-treated cells were made at least 10,000 events/test using a FACS Calibar flow cytometer (Becton Dickinson) with
a fluorescein isothiocyanate filter. For measuring lipid peroxidation,
cells (2 × 106) were either untreated or pretreated
with 0.1 mM H2O2 for 1 h and
analyzed by measuring of the concentration of malondialdehyde (MDA).
Measurement of Lipid Peroxidation--
The concentration of MDA
in different cells was measured by a spectrophotometric assay (37).
Cells (2 × 106) were either untreated or pretreated
with 0.1 mM H2O2 for 1 h. Then
cell extracts (500 µl) were mixed with 1 ml of thiobarbituric acid-trichloroacetic acid-HCl solution (0.375% thiobarbituric acid,
trichloroacetic acid in 0.25 N HCl, pH 2.0) and heated at 100 °C for 15 min. The absorbance of thiobarbituric acid-reactive substance was determined at 535 nm.
Transmission Electron Microscopy--
Cells grown to 80%
confluence were either untreated or pretreated with 0.1 mM
H2O2 for 2 h, rinsed twice with
phosphate-buffered saline, pH 7.3, and centrifuged at 50 × g for 5 min. Cell pellets were fixed immediately in 2.5%
(v/v) glutaraldehyde in 0.1 M phosphate buffer for 2 h
at 4 °C. Cells were postfixed in 1% osmium tetroxide for 30 min,
washed with water, and then subjected to a dehydration procedure using
graded ethanol series. For preparing the specimen, cells were embedded
in Epon 812 (Electron Microscopy Sciences, Fort Washington, PA), and
two random areas were cut and processed. The sections (60-70 nm) were
cut with an ultramicrotome (Soya MT-7000), transferred to copper grids,
and stained with uranyl acetate and lead citrate. At least 40 cells of
each sample were examined and photographed using Hitachi H-7100
transmission electron microscope (Hitachi Co., Japan) at 75 kV.
Measurement of ATP Level--
Intracellular ATP levels were
determined by using luciferin-luciferase (38). Cells (5 × 106) either untreated or treated with 0.1 mM
H2O2 for 2 h were collected by
centrifugation, resuspended in 250 µl of extraction solution (10 mM KH2PO4, 4 mM
MgSO4, pH 7.4), heated at 98 °C for 4 min, and placed on
ice. For ATP measurement, an aliquot of a 50-µl sample was added to
100 µl of reaction solution (50 mM NaAsO2, 20 mM MgSO4, pH 7.4) containing 800 µg of
luciferin/luciferase (Sigma). Light emission was quantified in a Turner
Designs TD 20/20 luminometer (Stratec Biomedical Systems, Germany). For
all experiments, ATP standard curves were run and were linear in the range of 5-2500 nM. Concentrations of ATP stock solution
were calculated from spectrophotometric absorbance at 259 nm using an
extinction coefficient of 15,400.
Measurement of NADPH and GSH--
NADPH values were determined
by the method of Zerez et al. (39) and expressed as the
ratio of NADPH to the total NADP pool [NADPH]/[NADP+ + NADPH]. The GSH level was analyzed by producing of
5-thio-2-nitrobenzoate at 412 nm ( Isolation and Characterization of Mouse IDPm cDNA--
To
isolate cDNAs for mouse IDPm, a cDNA library of NIH3T3 cells
(Stratagene) was screened with the cDNA for bovine IDPm (25) as a
probe. 11 positive cDNA clones for mouse IDPm were isolated from
about two million phage plaques screened. From these clones, one clone
with the largest DNA insert (1.7 kilobase pairs) was purified,
subcloned into plasmid pGEM7(+), and its nucleotide sequence was
determined. Mouse IDPm cDNA was 1,679 base pairs long (data not
shown) with an open reading frame (1,356 base pairs) for the entire
protein coding region of IDPm (Fig. 1).
Structural analysis of the pig (42), bovine, and mouse IDPm (25)
revealed that the precursor mouse IDPm protein contains 452 amino acids (50,934 Da), and the complete protein consists of 413 amino acids (46,575 Da) with the first 39 amino acids as the mitochondrial signal
peptide. The deduced protein sequence of mouse IDPm showed 94.5 and
95% identity to that of bovine and porcine IDPm, respectively. However, the mitochondrial leader sequence of the mouse IDPm was quite
different from the previously reported mouse IDPm (mNADP-IDH) (43). The
mNADP-IDH contained an extremely long mitochondrial leader peptide (111 amino acids), and its mature protein sequence (412 amino acids) was 1 amino acid shorter than that of our clone for mouse IDPm. In addition,
11 amino acids in its mature protein sequence are different from that
of our mouse IDPm (Fig. 1).
Tissue-specific Expression of IDPm--
To investigate the
expression pattern of IDPm in different human and mouse tissues,
Northern analyses were performed. One major IDPm transcript (2.2 kilobase pairs) was observed in both human and mouse tissues and
expressed in a tissue-specific manner (Fig.
2A). The levels of IDPm
expressed in human and mouse tissues were highest in heart, one of the
most O2-consuming tissues, whereas liver and kidney
contained considerable levels of IDPm transcript but significantly less
than that in heart. In contrast, other tissues including brain and
lung, which are vulnerable to oxidative injury, contained very low
levels of IDPm message. Interestingly, the levels of IDPm expression in
human and mouse skeletal muscles were strikingly different.
Stable Transfection of IDPm Constructs--
To investigate the
role of IDPm directly, two different transformants for each recombinant
IDPm construct were isolated after stable transfection of the sense
IDPm (S1 and S2) and antisense IDPm (AS1 and AS2) or LNCX-vector alone
(control) (Fig. 2B). Chromosomal integration of the
transfected IDPm constructs was confirmed by polymerase chain reaction
(data not shown). The level of IDPm transcript (2.2 kilobase pairs) in
control cells was very low (Fig. 2C). S1 cells contained
much less viral IDPm transcript (2.8 kilobase pairs) than S2 cells.
Both AS1 and AS2 cells contained substantially less IDPm transcript
than S1 cells (Fig. 2C). S1 and S2 cells exhibited 52.6 ± 5.1 and 66.7 ± 5.5 units of IDPm activities, respectively.
These values are 3.5- and 4.5-fold higher, respectively, than that of
control cells with the vector alone. In contrast, AS1 and AS2 cells
exhibited 39 and 47% less IDPm activities, respectively, compared with
that of control (Table I). To demonstrate
any differences in ROS-mediated damage between cells with sense or
antisense IDPm, we intentionally chose to use S1 and AS1 cells as a
comparison pair because of less difference in IDPm activity in this
pair than in the paired S2 and AS2 cells. Immunoblot analysis using
anti-IDPm antibody further confirmed the increased expression of IDPm
in S1 cells compared with the control cells and AS1 cells that
contained significantly less expression of IDPm protein (Fig.
2D). However, immunoreactive IDPm was not detected in the
cytosol of S1, AS1, or control cells (data not shown). Activities of
mitochondrial IDH and other major antioxidant enzymes such as
mitochondrial glutathione peroxidase, mitochondrial glutathione
reductase, and manganese superoxide dismutase, were all similar in each
group comparable to the control (Table I). In addition, there was less
difference in Glu-6-P dehydrogenase and catalase activities in the cell
lysates of S1, AS1, and control cells, suggesting that transfection of
IDPm cDNAs did not affect the activities of other enzymes involved
in antioxidation.
Pretranslational Induction of IDPm by ROS and Inverse Relationship
between IDPm Activity and ROS-induced Damage--
To study the
relationship between IDPm activity and ROS-induced damage, cells were
exposed to different concentrations of H2O2 for
48 h prior to measurement of cell viability. As shown in Fig.
3A, S1 cells were more
resistant to H2O2-mediated oxidative damage
than control and AS1 cells. More than 88% of S1 cells survived, whereas about 63 and 30% for control and AS1 cells survived,
respectively, in the presence of 1.0 mM
H2O2. A similar pattern of cell viability was
also noticed when these cells were exposed to 25 µM
menadione, a redox cycling agent, for 48 h (data not shown). In
accordance with cell viability, S1 cells with increased IDPm protein
became more resistant to oxidative damage with less DNA fragmentation compared with the control and AS1 cells (Fig. 3B). The
opposite was true in AS1 cells, which, with little amounts of IDPm
protein, became more sensitive to ROS treatment with more DNA
fragmentation than the control and S1 cells.
To verify the protective mechanism of IDPm against cell death induced
by oxidative stress, we studied the time-dependent changes in IDPm activity, protein, and its mRNA expression. For this
particular study, untransfected NIH3T3 cells were exposed to 0.2 mM H2O2 for 1 h prior to
determination of IDPm levels because treatment with 0.1 mM
H2O2 for 1 h did not increase the IDPm
level in NIH3T3 cells (data not shown). As shown in Fig. 3C,
IDPm activity was increased in a time-dependent manner with
a peak activity (2.3-fold) observed at 3 h post-treatment. The
IDPm activity returned to control level at 5 h after exposure to
0.2 mM H2O2 (Fig. 3C). In contrast, IDPm activity in human acute myeloid leukemia HL60 cells
was also increased in a time-dependent manner by the
treatment of 0.1 mM H2O2 for 1 h. At 2 h post-treatment, IDPm activity reached its peak (1.9-fold
increased) and returned to control level at 6 h after exposure to
0.1 mM H2O2 (data not shown). The
increased IDPm activity in both mouse fibroblasts and human myeloid
cells by H2O2 may imply a possible
physiological role of IDPm in defense against oxidative damage. The
elevation of IDPm activity in untransfected NIH3T3 cells was
accompanied by corresponding increases in its protein and mRNA
levels (Fig. 3D), suggesting a pretranslational induction
mechanism, similar to the elevation of catalase under stressful
conditions (44).
To investigate the role of IDPm in cellular defense against oxidative
damage, we also determined the level of intracellular peroxides in
different cells before and after treatment with 0.1 mM
H2O2, where cell injury was minimal, as shown
in Fig. 3A. In the absence of 0.1 mM
H2O2, the peroxide level in S1 cells was decreased by 28% compared with that in control cells, whereas it was
increased by 35% in AS1 cells (Fig.
4A). The prominent inverse
relationship between the levels of transduced IDPm and intracellular
peroxides was observed in the presence of 0.1 mM H2O2. The level of peroxide in AS1 cells was
increased 2.6-fold compared with that of S1 cells in the presence of
0.1 mM H2O2.
The effect of IDPm on ROS production was demonstrated further by the
relative intensity of DCF (36). DCF fluorescence intensity, in the
absence of exogenous H2O2 (1 mM for
a 5-min treatment), increased markedly in AS1 cells but decreased
significantly in S1 cells compared with the control cells (Fig.
4B). Similarly, the fluorescence intensity markedly was
increased in AS1 and control cells, whereas it was increased slightly
in S1 cells after treatment with 1 mM
H2O2 (Fig. 4C).
It has been shown that C2-ceramide mediates tumor necrosis
factor-induced ROS generation in mitochondria (14) as well as induces
cytochrome c release from mitochondria directly (45). Therefore, we tested whether IDPm can protect intracellular ROS generation induced by C2-ceramide. As shown in Fig.
4D, DCF fluorescence in AS1 cells was increased markedly
after C2-ceramide treatment, whereas S1 and control cells
exhibited slight increases in DCF fluorescence. These results, taken
together the data in Fig. 3, indicate that intracellular ROS production
and concomitant cell death rate are inversely related to the levels of
transduced IDPm protein, thus supporting a protective role of IDPm
against ROS-induced cell death.
Effect of IDPm on Lipid Peroxidation--
It is well established
that oxidative stress in various cells usually leads to accumulation of
potent, cytotoxic lipid peroxides such as MDA (46). We therefore
studied the effect of IDPm on the accumulation of MDA as an indicator
of lipid peroxidation. The level of MDA in AS1 cells was higher than in
control or S1 cells in the absence and presence of 0.1 mM
H2O2 (Fig. 4E). For instance,
treatment of AS1 cells with 0.1 mM
H2O2 increased the level of MDA 1.6-fold more
than in S1 cells. However, the MDA level in S1 cells did not change
even after H2O2 treatment. These results
provide direct evidence that IDPm is involved in regulating the level
of lipid peroxides caused by oxidative stress.
Protective Role of IDPm in Mitochondrial Damage Induced by
Oxidative Stress--
Mitochondrial damage is very important in cell
death (9). Therefore we investigated further the protective role of
IDPm in oxidative stress-induced mitochondrial damage. As shown in Fig.
5, in S1 and control cells, normal shapes
of mitochondrial cristae were observed, whereas abnormal or
substantially damaged mitochondrial cristae were evident in AS1 cells
even in the absence of exogenous H2O2. More
prominent changes in mitochondrial morphologies were observed in the
cells treated with 0.1 mM H2O2. In
S1 cells, mitochondria contained normal cristae, despite a slightly
swollen and pale matrix. In contrast, abnormal mitochondrial shapes
were noticed in control and AS1 cells. In control cells, small remnants of cristae with considerable swelling were evident. Mitochondria of AS1
cells were extremely swollen and frequently lacked typical cristae but
contained vesicular remnants and severely collapsed membranes. These
results suggest that reduced expression of IDPm most likely leads to
increased mitochondrial injury, whereas elevated IDPm protects
mitochondria from oxidative damage.
Effect of IDPm on Intracellular ATP Level--
Mitochondrial
injury is often followed by the depletion of intracellular ATP level.
As shown in Fig. 6, AS1 cells contained ~30% less ATP level than those of S1 and control cells without H2O2 treatment. The reduction in the ATP level
after 0.1 mM H2O2 treatment was
more prominent than in the absence of H2O2
treatment; for instance, the ATP level was decreased only by 13% in S1
cells, whereas it was reduced by 78 and 61% in AS1 and control cells, respectively, after H2O2 treatment, suggesting
a protective role of IDPm against the loss of intracellular ATP levels.
These data in Figs. 5 and 6 are consistent with the role of IDPm in
preventing the loss of mitochondrial membrane integrity (5), which was measured by the uptake of rhodamine 123 in this laboratory (data not
shown).
Role of IDPm in Regulating Mitochondrial Redox Balance for GSH
Recycling--
To investigate a potential mechanism by which IDPm
protects cells from oxidative injury, we measured the cellular levels
of NADPH and GSH. In S1 cells, the ratio for mitochondrial
[NADPH]/[NADP+ + NADPH] was 0.98 ± 0.06, whereas
that of control cells and AS1 cells was 0.71 ± 0.08 and 0.51 ± 0.09, respectively (Fig.
7A). In other words, more
NADPH is present in the mitochondria of S1 cells than in control and
AS1 cells. However, the ratio for the cytosolic
[NADPH]/[NADP+ + NADPH] in all three cells was between
0.52 ± 0.08 and 0. 49 ± 0.06. These data show that
transfected IDPm in S1 and transfected antisense IDPm in AS1 cells did
not alter the cytosolic NADPH level and that IDPm is, therefore, the
major factor that influences the production of mitochondrial NADPH.
In mitochondria, removal of H2O2 is catalyzed
primarily by mitochondrial glutathione peroxidase at the expense of the
reduced GSH, producing the oxidized glutathione, GSSG. Therefore NADPH, required for GSH regeneration by mitochondrial glutathione peroxidase, is a critical factor for the mitochondrial defense against oxidative damage. The ratio for mitochondrial [GSSG]/[GSSG + GSH] in S1 cells
was 0.148 ± 0.009, whereas that of control and AS1 cells was
0.270 ± 0.035 and 0.420 ± 0.007, respectively (Fig.
7B). These data establish that more reduced GSH exists in
the mitochondria of S1 cells than in control and AS1 cells. However,
the cytoplasmic ratio of [GSSG]/[GSH + GSSG] in S1, control, and
AS1 cells was almost comparable. These results confirm that increased
IDPm activity only contributes to enhancement of the mitochondrial
production of a reducing equivalent, NADPH, which, in turn, increases
the level of mitochondrial GSH.
The presence of a distinct gene for IDPm has been demonstrated by
the biochemical characterization, chromosomal location, and molecular
cloning and sequence analyses of IDPm genes in different species
(26, 47-49). Deduced IDPm proteins in various species including human IDPm (GenBank accession number
X69433)2 share highly
conserved sequences. The function of IDPm has been proposed either to
catalyze the decarboxylation of isocitrate into It is well established that mitochondrial dysfunction is directly and
indirectly involved in a variety of pathological states caused by
genetic mutations as well as exogenous compounds or agents. Potential
benefits of IDPm and subsequent elevation of mitochondrial NADPH and
GSH against oxidative damage could be explained by the following facts.
First, catalase, a major enzyme for breakdown of
H2O2, is absent in the mitochondria of
mammalian cells (18). Second, mitochondrial GSH becomes critically
important against ROS-mediated damage because it not only functions as
a potent antioxidant but is also required for the activities of mitochondrial glutathione peroxidase and mitochondrial phospholipid hydroperoxide glutathione peroxidase (52), which removes mitochondrial peroxides. Third, depletion of mitochondrial, but not cytosolic, GSH
potentiated the oxidative cell death after treatment with tert-butyl hydroperoxide (53). Fourth, GSH, not synthesized in mitochondria, must be synthesized in the cytosol and transported into mitochondria by a specific transporter (19, 54). Fifth, the
oxidized GSSG is not retransported into the cytosol for its reduction
to GSH (21). Sixth, NADPH is a major source of reducing equivalents and
cofactor for mitochondrial thioredoxin peroxidase family/peroxiredoxin
family including peroxiredoxin III/protein SP-22 (55-57) and
peroxiredoxin V/AOEB166 (58). Finally, NADPH can prevent the formation
of tocopheroxyl radical derived from the oxidation of vitamin E at
mitochondrial membranes (59). All of these facts underscore a key role
of mitochondrial GSH against ROS-induced injury and suggest a possible
mechanism to regenerate GSH from GSSG by supplying NADPH within the
mitochondria, independent from the cytosolic NADPH producer (22).
Therefore, any mitochondrial NADPH producer, if present, becomes
critically important for cellular defense against ROS-mediated damage.
In this study, we investigated the potential role of IDPm in cellular
defense, based on reasons stated above and our previous results that
the Escherichia coli mutant lacking
NADP+-specific ICDH is very sensitive to radiation-induced
oxidative damage (60). To achieve our goal, we prepared cells with
stable transfection of IDPm constructs in the sense (S1 cells) or
antisense (AS1 cells) direction. Under our experimental conditions
without apparent changes in the activities of other enzymes involved in antioxidation, cell viability showed a wide variation, depending on the
levels of transduced IDPm. A clear inverse relationship was observed
between the amount of IDPm expressed in target cells and their cell
death rate, DNA fragmentation, the levels of intracellular ROS
generation induced by H2O2 and
C2-ceramide, lipid peroxidation, and mitochondrial damage
with loss of intracellular ATP levels. In addition, the protective role
of IDPm against oxidative injury was directly supported by the
pretranslational induction of IDPm under a high concentration of ROS
and the relative levels of mitochondrial NADPH and GSH in three
different IDPm transfectant cells. Furthermore, our data suggest that
cytosolic NADPH does not play a role because of the little change in
its level in the three different cells. Higher levels of mitochondrial
NADPH and GSH in S1 cells conferred greater resistance to oxidative
injury than in control or AS1 cells, supporting the inverse
relationship between the levels of mitochondrial NADPH, GSH, and the
rate of cell death. These results not only establish a protective role
of IDPm in ROS-mediated oxidative damage but also address the
unresolved question about the major source of the mitochondrial NADPH
needed for GSH regeneration.
Northern analysis revealed that IDPm transcript is expressed in a
tissue-specific manner. In contrast to heart tissue, brain contains
very little IDPm transcript, consistent with the earlier reports that
IDPm activity is very low in the brain tissues (43, 61). The
tissue-specific expression and different IDPm activities may explain
why each tissue such as brain and heart may have a different
susceptibility to oxidative organ damage. The following factors, which
may be related to IDPm expression, may also contribute to the
differential susceptibility of each tissue to ROS-mediated damage.
First, GSH in rat brain mitochondria is oxidized more easily than in
liver (62). Second, brain is one of the most vulnerable organs to
oxidative stress and ischemic injury (63). Third, NADPH is produced at
different rates in certain tissues, indicating a possibility of
differential protection or injury in a tissue-specific manner (64, 65).
Therefore, our results of tissue-specific expression of IDPm transcript
suggest that certain tissues with higher levels of IDPm may be more
resistant to oxidative damage than those tissues with lower level of
IDPm expressed. However, our results raise an important question about a major protective mechanism against ROS-mediated damage in brain and
lung, although IDPm along with malic enzyme and nicotinamide nucleotide
transhydrogease has recently been reported to contribute to the
regeneration of mitochondrial NADPH required for the reduction of GSH
in rat forebrain mitochondria (66). Thus, this question remains to be answered.
It is known that some of the key enzymes involved in antioxidant
defense are elevated under stressful conditions in a compensatory manner. These enzymes include catalase, manganese superoxide dismutase, and glutathione peroxidase (44). These genes are elevated through activation of a transcription factor, nuclear factor- Our results, taken together, indicate that IDPm is a major component in
regulating mitochondrial redox balance by providing the NADPH.
Furthermore, we, for the first time, demonstrated that IDPm-mediated
NADPH production is critically important for cellular defense against
oxidative stress-induced cell death by increasing the mitochondrial GSH
concentration. In this regard, potential roles of IDPm could be
expanded to the therapeutic application for various ROS-mediated
cellular homeostasis and diseases including ischemic injuries and aging
process possibly through blockade of ROS production and prevention of
ROS-mediated specific mutations on the main control region for
replication of the mitochondrial genome (69), respectively.
INTRODUCTION
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
m), which is indicative of mitochondrial membrane integrity (5)
and precedes cell death induced by various toxic compounds and
cytokines (6).
causes a rapid production of mitochondrial ROS (13) and that ceramide, an apoptotic stimulus, also plays a crucial role in tumor necrosis factor
-induced mitochondrial ROS generation (14). Furthermore, several
other investigators demonstrated that ROS are involved in the signaling pathway of certain growth factors (15) and cytokines (16). In addition,
mitochondrial ROS, under hypoxic conditions, activate the transcription
of the genes for glycolytic enzymes as well as erythropoietin and
vascular endothelial growth factor by up-regulating a transcriptional
factor, hypoxia-inducible factor 1 (17), suggesting that mitochondrial
ROS mediate cross-talk between the nucleus and the mitochondria. These
reports suggest an important role of ROS in the regulation of cellular
homeostasis including cell death and signal transduction pathway after
treatments with various agents or growth factors.
-ketoglutarate with concurrent production of NADPH in the
mitochondria and cytosol, respectively, have not been elucidated.
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
-ZAP II cDNA library of NIH3T3 cells (Stratagene). The
largest IDPm cDNA was initially subcloned into the EcoRI
site of pGEM7 (Promega). The resultant DNA was digested by
ApaI, blunt-ended, and then digested further by either
HindIII or ClaI before the IDPm cDNA was
ligated into a LNCX-retroviral vector (27) in a sense or antisense
orientation, respectively. In the LNCX-retroviral vector, expression of
sense or antisense IDPm cDNA was directed by the cytomegalovirus
promoter. The respective two recombinant IDPm DNA constructs or
LNCX-vector alone was transfected into the BOSC23 retroviral packaging
cells (28) by the calcium phosphate method. The retrovirus particles
were separated from the packaging cells by filtration through a sterile
filter (0.4-µm diameter) and used to transfect into NIH3T3 cells.
Stable NIH3T3 transformants were identified in the presence of G418.
NIH3T3 cells were grown in Dulbecco's modified Eagle's medium
supplemented with 10% (v/v) fetal bovine serum (Hyclone Laboratories)
and 10 µg/ml gentamycin at 37 °C in an incubator under 5%
CO2.
= 1.36 × 104
M
1 cm
1)
by the method described previously (40). Total GSH level was measured in 0.1 M potassium phosphate buffer (pH 7.0)
containing 1 mM EDTA, 0.2 mg of NADPH, 30 µg of
5,5'-dithio-bis(2-nitrobenzoic acid), and 0.12 unit of glutathione
reductase (Sigma). The GSSG level was measured as the same as total the
GSH level after treatment with 1 µl of 2-vinylpyridine and 3 µl of
triethanolamine for 1 h (41).
RESULTS
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
View larger version (124K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 1.
Comparison of deduced amino acid sequences
for IDPm from different species. The putative N terminus of mature
IDPm protein is indicated by an arrow. Identical amino acid
residues among four IDPm sequences are indicated by shaded
boxes. MIDPm, BIDPm, and PIDPm represent IDPm from mouse, cow
(25), and pig (42), respectively. mNADP-IDH represents the previously
reported mouse IDPm (43). Amino acids that are different between mouse
IDPm and mNADP-IDH are indicated by bold letters. An
asterisk indicates an amino acid lacking in mNADP-IDH.
View larger version (63K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 2.
Expression of IDPm in various tissues and
cultured cells. Panel A, tissue-specific
expression of IDPm transcript in various human and mouse tissues. A
membrane for human or mouse multiple tissue Northern blot was used to
study the expression of the IDPm message. Each membrane was then
hybridized with 32P-labeled mouse IDPm cDNA
(upper panel) or actin cDNA (lower panel).
Panel B, structures of the recombinant retroviral
DNA constructs. IDPm constructs designed to express viral vector alone
(LNCX) and IDPm construct in sense (LNCX-sense IDPm) or antisense
(LNCX-antisense IDPm) direction under the cytomegalovirus
(CMV) promoter are shown. LTR, long terminal
repeat. Panel C, expression of IDPm in different
cells with stable transfection of IDPm constructs. Total RNAs (15 µg/lane) from cells expressing LNCX-vector alone (C,
control cells), LNCX-sense IDPm (S1 and S2 cells), and LNCX-antisense
IDPm (AS1 and AS2 cells) were subjected to Northern blot analysis.
V and I represent retroviral and intrinsic IDPm
mRNAs, respectively. Ethidium bromide staining of a typical gel is
shown at the bottom. Panel D,
immunoblot analysis of IDPm protein. Mitochondrial homogenates (20 µg/lane) from different cells were separated on 10%
SDS-polyacrylamide gel, transferred to nitrocellulose membrane, and
then subjected to immunoblot analysis using anti-peptide polyclonal
antibody.
Antioxidant enzyme activities in NIH3T3 transfectant cells
View larger version (27K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 3.
Effect of transduced IDPm on cell viability
and induction of IDPm by ROS. Panel A,
effect of IDPm on cell viability upon H2O2
treatment. Three different cells (2 × 104/well) were
grown in 96-well plates and then exposed to different concentrations of
H2O2 for 48 h as indicated prior to
measurement of cell viability in triplicates. S1, control, and AS cells
are indicated by open circles, closed rectangles,
and closed circles, respectively. Each value represents the
mean ± S.E. from three independent experiments. Panel
B, IDPm can protect ROS-induced DNA fragmentation. Control,
S1, and AS1 cells were exposed to different concentrations of
H2O2 for 1 h, and the degree of
ROS-induced DNA fragmentation was analyzed by 1% agarose gel
electrophoresis. Panel C, IDPm activity is
induced by ROS. Untransfected NIH3T3 cells (2 × 106)
were exposed to 0.2 mM H2O2 for
1 h and then incubated for different times as indicated in fresh
medium without H2O2. Relative activity was
calculated by comparing the IDPm activity at each time point after
exposure to H2O2 with that of unexposed cells.
Each value represents the mean ± S.D. from three separate
experiments. Panel D, pretranslational induction
of IDPm by ROS. Mitochondrial homogenates (20 µg/lane) of
untransfected NIH3T3 cells at each time point before and after exposure
to 0.2 mM H2O2 were separated on
10% SDS-polyacrylamide gel, transferred to nitrocellulose membrane,
and then subjected to immunoblot analysis using anti-peptide polyclonal
antibody (upper panel). Total RNAs (20 µg/lane) of
untransfected NIH3T3 cells before and at each time point after a 1-h
exposure to H2O2 were subjected to Northern
blot analysis with using the 32P-labeled probe of mouse
IDPm cDNA or glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenase
(GAPDH) cDNA (lower panel).
View larger version (25K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 4.
Effects of IDPm on peroxide level and
ROS generation. Panel A, effect of IDPm on
cellular peroxide generation. Production of total peroxides in S1,
control, and AS1 cells was determined by the method described under
"Experimental Procedures." Open and shaded
bars represent the levels of total peroxides produced in the
transfected cells untreated and treated with 0.1 mM
H2O2 for 1 h, respectively.
Panel B, DCF fluorescence in transfected cells.
Typical patterns of DCF fluorescence are presented for transfected
cells untreated or treated with 1 mM
H2O2 for 5 min. Fluorescent images were
obtained under laser confocal microscopy from three separate
experiments. Panel C, relative intensity of DCF
fluorescence in transfected cells. Open and shaded
bars represent the relative intensity of DCF fluorescence produced
in the cells untreated and treated with 1 mM
H2O2 for 5 min, respectively. Each value
represents the mean ± S.D. 20 cells from each image were picked
randomly, and the averages of their fluorescence intensity were
calculated as described under "Experimental Procedures."
Panel D, effect of IDPm on C2
-ceramide-induced ROS production. Cells were treated with 30 µM C2-ceramide for 15 min and subjected to
FACS analyses. CA and CA+ denote the absence
and presence of C2 -ceramide treatment, respectively.
Panel E, the levels of MDA in transfected cells
were determined in triplicates. Open and shaded
bars represent the level of MDA accumulated in the cells untreated
or treated with 0.1 mM H2O2,
respectively. Each value represents the mean ± S.D. from three
separate experiments.
View larger version (82K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 5.
Effect of transduced IDPm on
mitochondrial ultrastructure. Cells transfected with different DNA
vectors were untreated or treated with 0.1 mM
H2O2 for 2 h, and their mitochondrial
structures were then examined under transmission electron microscopy.
Arrows in AS1 cells indicate dirty debris or remnants of
cristae. The scale bar represents 1 µm.
View larger version (13K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 6.
Effect of IDPm on the levels of intracellular
ATP. Different cells as indicated were untreated or treated with
0.1 mM H2O2 for 2 h and
assayed for intracellular ATP content. Values are expressed as a
percentage of ATP content in control cells (0.78 ± 0.01 nmol of
ATP/106 cells) in the absence of
H2O2 treatment. Open and
shaded bars indicate the content of ATP in the cells
untreated and treated with H2O2, respectively.
Each value represents the mean ± S.D. from three separate
experiments.
View larger version (16K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 7.
Effect of transduced IDPm on the levels of
mitochondrial NADPH and GSH. Panel A, ratios
of NADPH versus total NADP pool. Open and
shaded bars represent the NADPH ratios in the cytosol and
mitochondria of transfected cells, respectively. Panel
B, ratios of GSSG versus total GSH pool.
Open and shaded bars represent the GSSG ratios in
the cytosol and mitochondria of transfected cells, respectively. Each
value represents the mean ± S.D. from three independent
experiments.
DISCUSSION
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
-ketoglutarate in
the tricarboxylic acid cycle or to mediate the reversal reaction for
the production of isocitrate from glutamic acid needed for
gluconeogenesis (50). However, these hypotheses could not be proven
because yeast NAD+-dependent IDH is a key
enzyme in the tricarboxylic acid cycle, and IDPm could not replace the
functional role of IDH (51). In addition, the level of IDPm expressed
in the liver is so low that it may not be involved in hepatic
gluconeogenesis. Therefore, the biological role of IDPm has been
unclear. The results presented in this report provide direct evidence
that IDPm is a key enzyme in cellular defense against oxidative damage
by supplying NADPH in the mitochondria, needed for the regeneration of
mitochondrial GSH or thioredoxin. Elevation of mitochondrial NADPH and
GSH by IDPm in turn suppressed the oxidative stress and concomitant
ROS-mediated damage.
B, activated upon exposure to ROS (67). The results shown in this study clearly establish that levels of IDPm activity, protein, and mRNA
transcript are elevated under stressful conditions, possibly in a
compensatory mechanism against elevated ROS. Although we do not know
the mechanism of the pretranslational activation of the IDPm gene
because of a lack of knowledge on its 5'-promoter region, it is
tempting to speculate that the IDPm gene may also be activated through the activation of nuclear factor-
B. Alternatively, the 5'-promoter region of the IDPm gene may contain the so-called "antioxidative responsive element" sequence, which is also responsive to exogenous stressors (68).
![]() |
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS |
---|
We are grateful to Dr. M. J. Park for electron microscopy; and Dr. R. L. Veech (National Institutes of Health), Dr. R. F. Colman (University of Delaware), and Dr. J. P. Hardwick (Northeastern Ohio Medical School) for critical reading of the manuscript.
![]() |
FOOTNOTES |
---|
* This work was supported by Grant 991473 from the Basic Research program of the Korea Science and Engineering Foundation.The costs of publication of this article were defrayed in part by the payment of page charges. The article must therefore be hereby marked "advertisement" in accordance with 18 U.S.C. Section 1734 solely to indicate this fact.
The nucleotide sequence(s) reported in this paper has been submitted to the GenBankTM/EMBL Data Bank with accession number(s) AF212319.
§ These authors contributed equally to this work.
¶¶ To whom correspondence should be addressed: Dept. of Genetic Engineering, College of Natural Sciences, Kyungpook National University, 1370 Sankyuk-dong, Puk-ku,Taegu 702-701, Korea. Tel.: 82-53-950-5387; Fax: 82-53-943-9755; E-mail: tlhuh@knu.ac.kr.
Published, JBC Papers in Press, February 13, 2001, DOI 10.1074/jbc.M010120200
2 S.-H. Jo, M.-K. Son, H.-J. Koh, S.-M. Lee, I.-H. Song, Y.-O. Kim, Y. S. Lee, K.-S. Jeong, W. B. Kim, J.-W. Park, B. J. Song, and T.-L. Huh, unpublished data.
![]() |
ABBREVIATIONS |
---|
The abbreviations used are: ROS, reactive oxygen species; Glu-6-P dehydrogenase, glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase; ICDH, isocitrate dehydrogenase; IDH, mitochondrial NAD+-dependent isocitrate dehydrogenase; IDPm, mitochondrial NADP+-dependent isocitrate dehydrogenase; IDPc, cytosolic NADP+-dependent isocitrate dehydrogenase; MTT, 3-(4,5-dimethylthiazol-2-yl)-2,5-diphenyltetrazolium bromide; DCF, 2',7'-dichlorofluorescein; FACS, fluorescence-activated cell sorter; MDA, malondialdehyde.
![]() |
REFERENCES |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
1. | Ames, B. N., Shigenaga, M. K., and Hagen, T. M. (1993) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 90, 7913-7922 |
2. |
Chance, B.,
Sies, H.,
and Boveris, A.
(1979)
Physiol. Rev.
59,
527-605 |
3. | Lenaz, G. (1998) Biochim. Biophys. Acta 1366, 53-67[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
4. |
Esposito, L. A.,
Melov, S.,
Panov, A.,
Cottrell, B. A.,
and Wallace, D. C.
(1999)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
96,
4820-4825 |
5. | Huang, P., Feng, L., Oldham, E. A., Keating, M. J., and Plunkett, W. (2000) Nature 407, 390-395[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
6. | Lemasters, J. J., Nieminen, A. L., Qian, T., Trost, L. C., Elmore, S. P., Nishimura, Y., Crowe, R. A., Cascio, W. E., Bradham, C. A., Brenner, D. A., and Herman, B. (1998) Biochim. Biophys. Acta 1366, 177-196[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
7. | Hockenbery, D. M., Oltvai, Z. N., Yin, X.-M., Milliman, C. L., and Korsmeyer, S. J. (1993) Cell 75, 241-251[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
8. |
Nomura, K.,
Imai, H.,
Koumura, T.,
Arai, M.,
and Nakagawa, Y.
(1999)
J. Biol. Chem.
274,
29294-29302 |
9. |
Green, D. R.,
and Reed, J. C.
(1998)
Science
281,
1309-1312 |
10. |
Susin, S. A.,
Lorenzo, H. K.,
Zamzami, N.,
Marzo, I.,
Brenner, C.,
Larochette, N.,
Prevost, M. C.,
Alzari, P. M.,
and Kroemer, G.
(1999)
J. Exp. Med.
189,
381-394 |
11. | Susin, S. A., Lorenzo, H. K., Zamzami, N., Marzo, I., Snow, B. E., Brothers, G. M., Mangion, J., Jacotot, E., Costantini, P., Loeffler, M., Larochette, N., Goodlett, D. R., Aebersold, R., Siderovski, D. P., Penninger, J. M., and Kroemer, G. (1999) Nature 397, 441-446[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
12. | Hildeman, D. A., Mitchell, T., Teague, T. K., Henson, P., Day, B. J., Kappler, J., and Marrack, P. C. (1999) Immunity 10, 735-744[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
13. | Goossens, V., Grooten, J., De Vos, K., and Fiers, W. (1995) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 92, 8115-8119[Abstract] |
14. |
Garcia-Ruiz, C.,
Colell, A.,
Mari, M.,
Morales, A.,
and Fernandez-Checa, J. C.
(1997)
J. Biol. Chem.
272,
11369-11377 |
15. | Sundaresan, M., Yu, Z.-X., Ferrans, C. J., Irani, K., and Finkel, T. (1995) Science 270, 296-299[Abstract] |
16. |
Lo, Y. Y. C.,
and Cruz, T. F.
(1995)
J. Biol. Chem.
270,
11727-11730 |
17. | Semenza, G. L. (1999) Cell 98, 281-284[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
18. | Esworthy, R, S., Ho, Y. S., and Chu, F. F. (1997) Arch. Biochem. Biophys. 340, 59-63[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
19. | Griffith, O. W., and Meister, A. (1985) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 82, 4668-4672[Abstract] |
20. | Martensson, J., Lai, J. C. K., and Meister, A. (1990) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 87, 7185-7189[Abstract] |
21. | Olafsdottier, K., and Reed, D. J. (1988) Biochim. Biophys. Acta 964, 377-382[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
22. |
Salvemini, F.,
Franze, A.,
Iervolino, A.,
Filosa, S.,
Salzano, S.,
and Ursini, M. V.
(1999)
J. Biol. Chem.
274,
2750-2757 |
23. | Plaut, G. W. E., and Gabriel, J. L. (1983) Biochemistry of Metabolic Process , pp. 285-301, Elsevier Science Publishing Co., Inc., New York |
24. |
Cupp, J. R.,
and McAlister-Henn, L.
(1991)
J. Biol. Chem.
266,
22199-22205 |
25. | Huh, T.-L., Ryu, J. H., Huh, J. W., Sung, H. C., Oh, I.-U., Song, B. J., and Veech, R. L. (1993) Biochem. J. 292, 705-710[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
26. |
Kim, Y.-O.,
Koh, H.-J.,
Kim, S.-H.,
Jo, S.-H.,
Huh, J.-W.,
Jeong, K.-S.,
Lee, J. I.,
Song, B. J.,
and Huh, T.-L.
(1999)
J. Biol. Chem.
274,
36866-36875 |
27. | Miller, A. D., and Rosman, G. T. (1989) BioTechniques 7, 980-990[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
28. |
Pear, W. S.,
Nolan, G. P.,
Scott, M. L.,
and Baltimore, D.
(1993)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
90,
8392-8396 |
29. | Loverde, A. W., and Lehrer, G. M. (1973) J. Neurochem. 20, 441-448[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
30. | Marklund, S. L., and Marklund, G. (1974) Eur. J. Biochem. 47, 469-474[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
31. | Pinto, R. E., and Bartley, W. (1969) Biochem. J. 112, 109-115[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
32. | Aebi, H. (1984) Method. Enzymol. 105, 121-126[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
33. | Matteo, M. A., Loweth, A. C., Thomas, S., and Mabley, J. G. (1997) Apoptosis 2, 164-177 |
34. | Bernhard, C. T., Klas, C., Peters, A. M. J., Matzku, S., Moller, P., Falk, W., Debatin, K.-M., and Krammer, P. H. (1989) Science 245, 301-304[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
35. | Jiang, Z. Y., Hunt, J. V., and Wolff, S. P. (1992) Anal. Biochem. 202, 384-389[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
36. |
Bass, D. A.,
Parce, J. W.,
Dechatelet, L. R.,
Szejda, P.,
Seeds, M. C.,
and Thomas, M.
(1983)
J. Immunol.
130,
1910-1917 |
37. | Buege, J. A., and Aust, S. D. (1978) Methods Enzymol. 52, 302-310[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
38. | Spragg, R. G., Hinshaw, D. B., Hyslop, P. A., Schraufstätter, I. U., and Cochrane, C. G. (1985) J. Clin. Invest. 76, 1471-1476[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
39. | Zerez, C. R., Lee, S. J., and Tanaka, K. R. (1987) Anal. Biochem. 1964, 367-373 |
40. | Akerboom, T. P. M., and Sies, H. (1981) Methods Enzymol. 77, 373-382[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
41. | Anderson, M. E. (1985) Methods Enzymol. 113, 548-555[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
42. | Haselbeck, R. J., Colman, R. F., and McAlister-Henn, L. (1992) Biochemistry 31, 6219-6223[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
43. | Yang, L., Luo, H., Vinay, P., and Wu, J. (1996) J. Cell. Biochem. 60, 400-410[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
44. |
Shull, S.,
Heintz, N. H.,
Periasamy, M.,
Manohar, M.,
Janssen, Y. M.,
Marsh, J. P.,
and Mossman, B. T.
(1991)
J. Biol. Chem.
266,
24398-24403 |
45. |
Cuvillier, O.,
Edsall, L.,
and Spiegel, S.
(2000)
J. Biol. Chem.
275,
15691-15700 |
46. | Esterbauer, H., Schaur, R. J., and Zollner, H. (1991) Free Radic. Biol. Med. 11, 81-128[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
47. | Oh, I.-L., Inazawa, J., Kim, Y.-O., Song, B. J., and Huh, T.-L. (1996) Genomics 38, 104-106[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
48. | Huh, T.-L., Kim, Y.-O., Oh, I.-U., Song, B. J., and Inazawa, J. (1996) Genomics 32, 295-296[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
49. | Kim, Y.-O., Park, S.-H., Kang, Y.-J., Koh, H.-J., Kim, S.-H., Park, S.-Y., Sohn, U., and Huh, T.-L. (1999) Cytogenet. Cell Genet. 86, 240-241[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
50. |
Des Rosiers, C.,
Di Donato, L.,
Comte, B.,
Laplante, A.,
Marcoux, C.,
David, F.,
Fernandez, C. A.,
and Brunengraber, H.
(1995)
J. Biol. Chem.
270,
10027-10036 |
51. |
Haselbeck, R. J.,
and McAlister-Henn, L.
(1993)
J. Biol. Chem.
268,
12116-12122 |
52. |
Arai, M.,
Imai, H.,
Koumura, T.,
Yoshida, M.,
Emoto, K.,
Umeda, M.,
Chiba, N.,
and Nakagawa, Y.
(1999)
J. Biol. Chem.
274,
4924-4933 |
53. | Shan, X., Jones, D. P., Hashmi, M., and Anders, M. W. (1993) Chem. Res. Toxicol. 6, 75-81[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
54. |
Garcia-Ruiz, C.,
Morales, A.,
Colell, A.,
Rodes, J.,
Yi, J. R.,
Kaplowitz, N.,
and Fernandez-Checa, J. C.
(1995)
J. Biol. Chem.
270,
15946-15949 |
55. |
Araki, M.,
Nanri, H.,
Ejima, K.,
Murasato, Y.,
Fujiwara, T.,
Nakashima, Y.,
and Ikeda, M.
(1999)
J. Biol. Chem.
274,
2271-2278 |
56. |
Kang, S. W.,
Chae, H. Z.,
Seo, M. S.,
Kim, K.,
Baines, I. C.,
and Rhee, S.
(1998)
J. Biol. Chem.
273,
6297-6302 |
57. | Watabe, S., Hasegawa, H., Takimoto, K., Yamamoto, Y., and Takahashi, S. Y. (1995) Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 213, 1010-1016[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
58. |
Knoops, B.,
Clippe, A.,
Bogard, C.,
Arsalane, K.,
Wattiez, R.,
Hermans, C.,
Duconseille, E.,
Falmagne, P.,
and Bernard, A.
(1999)
J. Biol. Chem.
274,
30451-30458 |
59. | Packer, L., Maguire, J. J., Mehlhorn, R. J., Serbinova, E., and Kagan, V. E. (1989) Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 159, 229-235[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
60. | Lee, S. M, Koh, H.-J., Huh, T.-L., and Park, J.-W. (1999) Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 254, 647-650[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
61. | Stein, A. M., Stein, J. H., and Kirkman, S. K. (1967) Biochemistry 6, 1370-1379[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
62. | Ravindranath, V., and Reed, D. J. (1990) Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 169, 1075-1079[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
63. |
Murakami, K.,
Kondo, T.,
Kawase, M.,
Li, Y.,
Sato, S.,
Chen, S. F.,
and Chan, P. H.
(1998)
J. Neurosci.
18,
205-213 |
64. | Kehrer, J. P., Paraidathathu, T., and Lund, L. G. (1993) Proc. West. Pharmacol. Soc. 36, 45-52[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
65. | Lund, L. G., Paraidathathu, T., and Kehrer, J. P. (1994) Toxicology 93, 249-262[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
66. | Vogel, R., Wiesinger, H., Hamprecht, B., and Dringen, R. (1999) Neurosci. Lett. 275, 97-100[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
67. | Schreck, R., Rieber, P., and Baeuerle, P. A. (1991) EMBO J. 10, 2247-2258[Abstract] |
68. |
Favreau, L. V.,
and Pickett, C. B.
(1995)
J. Biol. Chem.
270,
24468-24474 |
69. |
Michikawa, Y.,
Mazzucchelli, F.,
Bresolin, N.,
Scarlato, G.,
and Attardi, G.
(1999)
Science
286,
774-779 |