Mitochondrial respiratory states and rate

As the knowledge base and importance of mitochondrial physiology to human health expands, the necessity for harmonizing the terminologyconcerning mitochondrial respiratory states and rates has become increasingly apparent. Thechemiosmotic theoryestablishes the mechanism of energy transformationandcoupling in oxidative phosphorylation. Theunifying concept of the protonmotive force providestheframeworkfordeveloping a consistent theoretical foundation ofmitochondrial physiology and bioenergetics.We followguidelines of the International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry(IUPAC)onterminology inphysical chemistry, extended by considerationsofopen systems and thermodynamicsof irreversible processes.Theconcept-driven constructive terminology incorporates the meaning of each quantity and alignsconcepts and symbols withthe nomenclature of classicalbioenergetics. We endeavour to provide a balanced view ofmitochondrial respiratory control and a critical discussion on reporting data of mitochondrial respiration in terms of metabolic flows and fluxes.Uniform standards for evaluation of respiratory states and rates will ultimatelycontribute to reproducibility between laboratories and thussupport the development of databases of mitochondrial respiratory function in species, tissues, and cells.Clarity of concept and consistency of nomenclature facilitate effective transdisciplinary communication, education, and ultimately further discovery

Mitochondrial physiology

As the knowledge base and importance of mitochondrial physiology to evolution, health and disease expands, the necessity for harmonizing the terminology concerning mitochondrial respiratory states and rates has become increasingly apparent. The chemiosmotic theory establishes the mechanism of energy transformation and coupling in oxidative phosphorylation. The unifying concept of the protonmotive force provides the framework for developing a consistent theoretical foundation of mitochondrial physiology and bioenergetics. We follow the latest SI guidelines and those of the International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry (IUPAC) on terminology in physical chemistry, extended by considerations of open systems and thermodynamics of irreversible processes. The concept-driven constructive terminology incorporates the meaning of each quantity and aligns concepts and symbols with the nomenclature of classical bioenergetics. We endeavour to provide a balanced view of mitochondrial respiratory control and a critical discussion on reporting data of mitochondrial respiration in terms of metabolic flows and fluxes. Uniform standards for evaluation of respiratory states and rates will ultimately contribute to reproducibility between laboratories and thus support the development of data repositories of mitochondrial respiratory function in species, tissues, and cells. Clarity of concept and consistency of nomenclature facilitate effective transdisciplinary communication, education, and ultimately further discovery

Mitochondrial physiology

As the knowledge base and importance of mitochondrial physiology to evolution, health and disease expands, the necessity for harmonizing the terminology concerning mitochondrial respiratory states and rates has become increasingly apparent. The chemiosmotic theory establishes the mechanism of energy transformation and coupling in oxidative phosphorylation. The unifying concept of the protonmotive force provides the framework for developing a consistent theoretical foundation of mitochondrial physiology and bioenergetics. We follow the latest SI guidelines and those of the International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry (IUPAC) on terminology in physical chemistry, extended by considerations of open systems and thermodynamics of irreversible processes. The concept-driven constructive terminology incorporates the meaning of each quantity and aligns concepts and symbols with the nomenclature of classical bioenergetics. We endeavour to provide a balanced view of mitochondrial respiratory control and a critical discussion on reporting data of mitochondrial respiration in terms of metabolic flows and fluxes. Uniform standards for evaluation of respiratory states and rates will ultimately contribute to reproducibility between laboratories and thus support the development of data repositories of mitochondrial respiratory function in species, tissues, and cells. Clarity of concept and consistency of nomenclature facilitate effective transdisciplinary communication, education, and ultimately further discovery

Antigenic analysis of potato virus A particles and coat protein

Five monoclonal antibodies (MAbs) were prepared to particles of potato virus A (PVA), isolate B11. In immunoblots, MAbs A1D8 and A5B6 reacted only with full length molecules of PVA coat protein (CP). Pepscan tests with overlapping octapeptides representing the whole sequence of PVA CP showed that the epitope detected by MAb A5B6 is contained in its N‐terminal octapeptide. MAbs A9A4, A3H4 and A6B8 reacted with CP molecules that lacked about 5 kD of sequence at their end(s) and detected epitopes at residues 52 to 62, 64 to 73 and 75 to 82 respectively, all of which lie in the protease‐resistant core of the CP. The epitope which reacts with MAb A3H4 is in a region predicted to be hydrophobic and is not detected in intact virus particles, indicating it is a cryptotope. In contrast, MAbs A6B8 and A9A4 reacted with freshly purified PVA particles but more strongly with partially degraded ones. Pepscan tests with polyclonal antibodies to PVA isolate B11 identified five additional immunogenic sequences in PVA CP and showed that regions at the N‐termini of the intact and core molecules are immunodominant. PVA isolate B11 was not transmitted by aphids, and its CP N‐terminal octapeptide contains the sequence DAS, which is associated with aphid‐non‐transmissibility in other potyviruses. MAb A5B6, which detects this region, reacted strongly in ELISA with three out of four other aphid‐non‐transmissible PVA isolates but only weakly with three aphid‐transmissible ones, suggesting that differences in N‐terminal sequence may underlie most of the differences in aphid transmissibility.</p