A mitochondrial superoxide theory for oxidative stress diseases and aging
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Fridovich identified CuZnSOD in 1969 and manganese superoxide dismutase (MnSOD) in 1973, and proposed "the Superoxide Theory," which postulates that superoxide (O2 (•-)) is the origin of most reactive oxygen species (ROS) and that it undergoes a chain reaction in a cell, playing a central role in the ROS producing system. Increased oxidative stress on an organism causes damage to cells, the smallest constituent unit of an organism, which can lead to the onset of a variety of chronic diseases, such as Alzheimer's, Parkinson's, amyotrophic lateral sclerosis and other neurological diseases caused by abnormalities in biological defenses or increased intracellular reactive oxygen levels. Oxidative stress also plays a role in aging. Antioxidant systems, including non-enzyme low-molecular-weight antioxidants (such as, vitamins A, C and E, polyphenols, glutathione, and coenzyme Q10) and antioxidant enzymes, fight against oxidants in cells. Superoxide is considered to be a major factor in oxidant toxicity, and mitochondrial MnSOD enzymes constitute an essential defense against superoxide. Mitochondria are the major source of superoxide. The reaction of superoxide generated from mitochondria with nitric oxide is faster than SOD catalyzed reaction, and produces peroxynitrite. Thus, based on research conducted after Fridovich's seminal studies, we now propose a modified superoxide theory; i.e., superoxide is the origin of reactive oxygen and nitrogen species (RONS) and, as such, causes various redox related diseases and aging.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
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".