Stoichiometric expression of mtHsp40 and mtHsp70 modulates mitochondrial morphology and cristae structure via Opa1<sub>L</sub> cleavage
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Deregulation of mitochondrial heat-shock protein 40 (mtHsp40) and dysfunction of mtHsp70 are associated with mitochondrial fragmentation, suggesting that mtHsp40 and mtHsp70 may play roles in modulating mitochondrial morphology. However, the mechanism of mitochondrial fragmentation induced by mtHsp40 deregulation and mtHsp70 dysfunction remains unclear. In addition, the functional link between mitochondrial morphology change upon deregulated mtHsp40/mtHsp70 and mitochondrial function has been unexplored. Our coimmunoprecipitation and protein aggregation analysis showed that both overexpression and depletion of mtHsp40 accumulated aggregated proteins in fragmented mitochondria. Moreover, mtHsp70 loss and expression of a mtHsp70 mutant lacking the client-binding domain caused mitochondrial fragmentation. Together the data suggest that the molecular ratio of mtHsp40 to mtHsp70 is important for their chaperone function and mitochondrial morphology. Whereas mitochondrial translocation of Drp1 was not altered, optic atrophy 1 (Opa1) short isoform accumulated in fragmented mitochondria, suggesting that mitochondrial fragmentation in this study results from aberration of mitochondrial inner membrane fusion. Finally, we found that fragmented mitochondria were defective in cristae development, OXPHOS, and ATP production. Taken together, our data suggest that impaired stoichiometry between mtHsp40 and mtHsp70 promotes Opa1L cleavage, leading to cristae opening, decreased OXPHOS, and triggering of mitochondrial fragmentation after reduction in their chaperone function.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".