Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-t5tsf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-09T15:37:25.948Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Evidence that mitochondrial isozymes are genetically less variable than cytoplasmic isozymes

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 April 2009

Robert D. Ward  and
David O. F. Skibinski
Robert D. Ward*
Affiliation:
Department of Human Sciences, Environmental Biology Unit, University of Technology, Loughborough, Leicestershire, LE11 3TU, UK
David O. F. Skibinski
Affiliation:
Biomedical and Physiological Research Group, University College of Swansea, Singleton Park, Swansea, SA2 8PP, UK
*
* Corresponding author.
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

It has been proposed that isoenzymes functioning within cell organelles (chloroplasts, mitochondria) are genetically less variable than their cytoplasmic counterparts, as a result either of constraints imposed by the need to cross organelle membranes or from the different and specialized nature of organelle metabolism. However, some recent findings concerning chloroplast and cytoplasmic isozyme variability are not consistent with this thesis. We have analyzed a number of surveys of electrophoretically detectable enzyme variation in vertebrates, and show that for each of the four tested enzymes (malate dehydrogenase, isocitrate dehydrogenase, malic enzyme, and aspartate aminotransferase), the mitochondrial isozymes are less variable than their corresponding cytosplasmic forms. The mean heterozygosities across the four enzymes are 0·083 and 0·038 for the cytoplasmic and mitochondrial forms respectively. We conclude that mitochondrial isozymes are indeed subject to greater constraints than cytoplasmic forms and have fewer sites able to accept neutral or slightly deleterious mutations. It is also noted that of the enzymes analyzed, that with the smallest subunit molecular weight (MDH) has the least variable cytoplasmic and mitochondrial isozymes, whereas the enzyme with the largest subunits (ME) has the most variable isozymes.

Type
Research Article
Information
Genetics Research , Volume 51 , Issue 2 , April 1988 , pp. 121 - 127
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1988

References

Brown, A. J. L. & Langley, C. H. (1979). Correlation between heterozygosity and subunit molecular weight. Nature 211, 649–651.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cerff, R. (1982). Evolutionary divergence of chloroplast and cytosolic glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenase from angiosperms. European Journal of Biochemistry 126, 513–515.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cerff, R. & Chambers, S. E. (1979). Subunit structure of higher plant glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenases (EC 1.2.1.12 and EC 1.2.1.1). Journal of Biological Chemistry 254, 6094–6098.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cerff, R. & Kloppstech, K. (1982). Structural diversity and differential light control of mRNAs coding for angiosperm glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenases. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science, USA 79, 7624–7628.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dixon, M. & Webb, E. C. (1979). Enzymes. Longman, London.Google Scholar
Doonan, S., Barra, D. & Bossa, F. (1984). Structural and genetic relationships between cytosolic and mitochondrial isoenzymes. International Journal of Biochemistry 16, 1193–1199.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Eanes, W. F. & Koehn, R. K. (1978). Subunit size and the number of electrophoretic variants in human enzymes. Biochemical Genetics 16, 971–985.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eilers, M. & Schatz, G. (1986). Binding of a specific ligand inhibits import of a purified precursor protein into mitochondria. Nature 322, 228–232.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gillespie, J. H. & Kojima, K. (1968). The degree of polymorphisms in enzymes involved in energy production compared to that in nonspecific enzymes in two Drosophila ananassae populations. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science, USA 61, 582–585.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gottlieb, L. D. (1982). Conservation and duplication of isozymes in plants. Science 216, 373–379.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gottlieb, L. D. & Weeden, N. F. (1981). Correlation between subcellular location and phosphoglucose isomerase variability. Evolution 35, 1019–1022.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Graf-Hausner, U., Wilson, K. J. & Christen, P. (1983). The covalent structure of mitochondrial aspartate aminotransferase from chicken: identification of segments of the polypeptide chain invariant specifically in the mitochondrial isoenzyme. Journal of Biological Chemistry 258, 8813–8826.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Harris, H., Hopkinson, D. A. & Edwards, Y. E. (1977). Polymorphism and the subunit structure of enzymes: a contribution to the neutralist–selectionist controversy. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science, USA 74, 698–701.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hinkle, P. C. & McCarty, R. E. (1978). How cells make ATP. Scientific American 238, 104–123.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hopkinson, D. A., Edwards, Y. H. & Harris, H. (1976). The distribution of subunit numbers and subunit sizes of enzymes: a study of the products of 100 human gene loci. Annals of Human Genetics 39, 383–411.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hurt, E. C. & Van Loon, A. P. G. M. (1986). How proteins find mitochondria and intramitochondrial compartments. Trends in Biochemical Science 11, 204–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hurt, E. C. & Schatz, G. (1987). A cytosolic protein contains a cryptic mitochondrial targeting signal. Nature 325, 499–503.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Johnson, G. B. (1974). Enzyme polymorphism and metabolism. Science 184, 28–37.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kimura, M. (1983). The Neutral Theory of Molecular Evolutuion. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Klose, J. & Feller, M. (1981). Genetic variability of proteins from plasma membranes and cytosols of mouse organs. Biochemical Genetics 19, 859–870.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Koehn, R. K. & Eanes, W. F. (1978). Molecular structure and protein variation within and among populations. Evolutionary Biology 11, 39–100.Google Scholar
Kojima, K., Gillespie, J. & Tobari, Y. N. (1970). A profile of Drosophila species' enzymes assayed by electrophoresis. 1. Number of alleles, heterozygosities and linkage disequilibrium in glucose-metabolizing systems and some other enzymes. Biochemical Genetics 4, 627–637.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nei, M., Fuerst, P. A. & Chakraborty, R. (1978). Subunit molecular weight and genetic variability of proteins in natural populations. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science, USA 75, 3359–3362.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ohta, T. (1976). Role of very slightly deleterious mutations in molecular evolution and polymorphism. Theoretical Population Biology 10, 254–275.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ohta, T. & Kimura, M. (1973). A model of mutation appropriate to estimate the number of electrophoretically detectable alleles in a finite population. Genetical Research 22, 201–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pichersky, E. & Gottlieb, L. D. (1983). Evidence for duplication of the structural genes coding plastid and cytosolic isozymes of triose phosphate isomerase in diploid species of Clarkia. Genetics 105, 421–436.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Selander, R. K. (1976). Genic variation in natural populations. In Molecular Evolution (ed. Ayala, F. J.). Sinauer Ass., Massachusetts.Google Scholar
Selander, R. K. & Johnson, W. E. (1973). Genetic variation among vertebrate species. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 4, 75–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Skibinski, D. O. F. & Ward, R. D. (1981). Relationship between allozyme heterozygosity and rates of divergence. Genetical Research 38, 71–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sokal, R. R. & Rohlf, F. J. (1981). Biometry, 2nd edn. Freeman, New York.Google Scholar
Sonderegger, P. & Christen, P. (1983). Comparison of the evolution rate of cytosolic and mitochondrial aspartate aminotransferase. Nature 275, 157–159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Heyningen, V., Craig, I. & Bodmer, W. (1973). Genetic control of mitochondrial enzymes in human–mouse somatic cell hybrids. Nature 242, 509–512.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ward, R. D. (1977). Relationship between enzyme heterozygosity and quaternary structure. Biochemical Genetics 15, 123–135.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ward, R. D. (1978). Subunit size of enzymes and genetic heterozygosity in vertebrates. Biochemical Genetics 16, 799–810.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ward, R. D. & Skibinski, D. O. F. (1985). Observed relationships between protein heterozygosity and protein genetic distance and comparisons with neutral expectations. Genetical Research 45, 315–340.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wickner, W. T. & Lodish, H. F. (1985). Multiple mechanisms of protein insertion into and across membranes. Science 230, 400–407.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed