The Role of Phospholipids in Mitochondrial Dynamics and Associated Diseases
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The bioenergetic machinery of the cell is protected and structured within two layers of mitochondrial membranes. The mitochondrial inner membrane is extremely rich in proteins, including respiratory chain complexes, substrate transport proteins, ion exchangers, and structural fusion proteins. These proteins participate directly or indirectly in shaping the membrane's curvature and facilitating its folding, as well as promoting the formation of nanotubes, and proton-rich pockets known as cristae. Recent fluorescent super-resolution images have demonstrated the strong dynamics of these events, with constant remodeling processes. The mitochondrial outer membrane itself is also highly dynamic, interacting with the endoplasmic reticulum and its environment to ensure a rapid diffusion of surface components throughout the mitochondrial networks. All these movements occur besides migration, fusion, and fission of the mitochondria themselves. These dynamic events at the level of mitochondrial membranes are primarily dependent on their unique lipid composition. In this review, we discuss the latest advances in phospholipid research, focusing on their metabolism and role in mitochondrial dynamics. This process emphasizes the importance of interactions with the endoplasmic reticulum and mitochondrial matrix enzymes, extending its relevance to lipid sources, in particular, cardiolipins and phosphatidylethanolamines at the cellular, tissue and even whole-organism level. Given the expanding array of characterized mitochondrial functions, ranging from calcium homeostasis to inflammation and cellular senescence, research in the field of mitochondrial lipids is particularly significant. As mitochondria play a central role in various pathological processes, including cancer and neurodegenerative disorders, lipid metabolism may offer promising therapeutic approaches.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".