Skip to main content
EMBO Reports logoLink to EMBO Reports
. 2023 Oct 12;24(11):e57092. doi: 10.15252/embr.202357092

The functional significance of mitochondrial respiratory chain supercomplexes

Andreas Kohler 1,2, Antoni Barrientos 3,4, Flavia Fontanesi 4, Martin Ott 1,5,
PMCID: PMC10626428  PMID: 37828827

Abstract

The mitochondrial respiratory chain (MRC) is a key energy transducer in eukaryotic cells. Four respiratory chain complexes cooperate in the transfer of electrons derived from various metabolic pathways to molecular oxygen, thereby establishing an electrochemical gradient over the inner mitochondrial membrane that powers ATP synthesis. This electron transport relies on mobile electron carries that functionally connect the complexes. While the individual complexes can operate independently, they are in situ organized into large assemblies termed respiratory supercomplexes. Recent structural and functional studies have provided some answers to the question of whether the supercomplex organization confers an advantage for cellular energy conversion. However, the jury is still out, regarding the universality of these claims. In this review, we discuss the current knowledge on the functional significance of MRC supercomplexes, highlight experimental limitations, and suggest potential new strategies to overcome these obstacles.

Keywords: bioenergetics, electron transfer, Mitochondria, respiratory chain, supercomplexes

Subject Categories: Metabolism, Organelles


Mitochondrial respiratory chain complexes can associate into supramolecular structures termed respiratory supercomplexes. This review discusses their structure, assembly and potential physiological functions.

graphic file with name EMBR-24-e57092-g001.jpg

The mitochondrial respiratory chain

As the most versatile form of chemical energy in cells, ATP is synthesized in large quantities by mitochondrial activity. Biochemical reactions, many occurring in the cytoplasm, convert carbohydrates and lipids to mitochondrial acetyl‐CoA. This central metabolite is processed in the mitochondrial matrix by the tricarboxylic acid cycle (TCA; Fig 1). Electrons originating from these TCA reactions are passed over to the typically four multiprotein complexes (CI‐CIV) of the electron transport chain. In a process termed oxidative phosphorylation (OXPHOS), the electrons are transported through the mitochondrial respiratory chain (MRC), where they finally reduce molecular oxygen to form water (Fig 1). The energy of this reaction is converted into an electrochemical gradient across the inner mitochondrial membrane (IMM). In a subsequent step, protons flow from the mitochondrial intermembrane space (IMS) back into the matrix, powering the ATP synthase (CV), which condenses ADP and phosphate to form ATP (Fig 1).

Figure 1. The tricarboxylic acid cycle (TCA) and mitochondrial respiratory chain.

Figure 1

Upper Panel: Acetyl‐CoA is a central metabolite produced via various metabolic reaction pathways. It can subsequently be utilized in the TCA, were among others several molecules of NADH and FADH2 are generated. Lower Panel: Electrons from these metabolites can be subsequently utilized by the mitochondrial respiratory chain to convert energy in the form of ATP. Structures of the individual respiratory chain complexes and the electron carrier cytochrome c are shown, as well as respective redox reactions (PDB CI: 6ZKC; PDB CII: 1ZP0; PDB CIII: 6Q9E; PDB CIV and CytC: 5IY5; PDB CV: 5ARA). IMM, inner mitochondrial membrane; IMS, intermembrane space; OMM, outer mitochondrial membrane.

NADH feeds two electrons into the NADH dehydrogenase (CI), the first and largest of the MRC multiprotein complexes in mammals, consisting of 45 subunits and comprising a mass of approx. 1 MDa (Kampjut & Sazanov, 2020; Fig 1). Electrons from NADH are thereby transferred to oxidized quinone (Q), a reaction coupled to proton extrusion from the matrix into the IMS via CI's antiporter subunits (Jones et al2017; Fig 1). Q is an abundant mitochondrial lipid that can be reversibly reduced and oxidized, respectively, and freely diffuses in the IMM. Interestingly, some species, including the model organism Saccharomyces cerevisiae, do not contain a conventional CI, but rather possess non‐proton‐translocating peripheral membrane NADH dehydrogenases (Nde1, Nde2, and Ndi1; Joseph‐Horne et al2001). In addition, electrons extracted from succinate can reduce Q via the succinate dehydrogenase (CII; Fig 1). Whereas CI pumps protons, no H+ is translocated by CII. Of note, Q can also be reduced by several other membrane‐bound dehydrogenases (e.g., glycerol 3‐phosphate dehydrogenase). The reduced quinone (QH2) subsequently transfers two electrons to cytochrome bc 1 reductase (CIII), which exists as an obligate homodimer (CIII2; Fig 1) in all species (Stephan & Ott, 2020). CIII couples electron transfer from QH2 to cytochrome c (Cytc) with the shuttling of H+ into the IMS via a mechanism called Q‐cycle (Mitchell, 1975; Osyczka et al2005). In one such Q‐cycle, two QH2 molecules are oxidized to Q, releasing 4 H+ into the IMS and reducing two Cytc molecules (Fig 1). Of note, another Q is reduced to QH2 in this process, which can subsequently be used for another round of the Q‐cycle. The protein Cytc acts as a mobile electron carrier, with a central, covalently attached heme group that can reversibly bind one electron. Cytc transfers electrons from CIII to Cytc oxidase (CIV), where molecular oxygen is reduced to water (Fig 1). In this last step of the electron transport chain, another 4 H+ are pumped into the IMS by oxidizing 4 Cytc molecules (Wikstrom, 1977). Finally, the electrochemical gradient across the IMM formed by the transfer of protons from the mitochondrial matrix into the IMS is used by the ATP synthase (CV), which phosphorylates ADP with inorganic phosphate to ATP, whereby the flow of protons back into the matrix powers ATP synthesis (Mitchell, 1975) by a rotary mechanism of the ATP synthase (Fig 1).

Connectivity of mitochondrial respiratory chain complexes

Despite detailed insights into the fundamental structural and catalytic properties of the individual MRC complexes, available since last century, their overall structural organization and physiological implications of that organization have been extensively revisited over the last 20 years and are still debated today (Milenkovic et al, 2017). Historically, two opposing models for how the complexes are functionally connected were proposed early on, namely, the “solid‐state” and the “liquid‐state” (also referred to as “fluid‐state”) models. The solid‐state model postulates that all components of the MRC (including Q and Cytc) form a single unit, which can catalyze the entire process of mitochondrial respiration. Thereby, Q and Cytc mediate electron transfer via enclosed pathways, never exchanging with the exterior of the unit (Ragan & Heron, 1978). On the contrary, the liquid‐state model proposes that individual complexes reside independently in the IMM. Likewise, Q and Cytc diffuse freely and randomly to transfer electrons between the individual complexes (Hochli & Hackenbrock, 1976; Hackenbrock et al1986). The liquid‐state model received extensive experimental support, mostly owing to the observation that individual MRC complexes could be purified in active forms and that the small mobile electron carriers are freely diffusing and in large stoichiometric excess over MRC complexes. However, the solid‐state model gained new experimental support. Through the use of mild detergents for mitochondrial membrane solubilization and the establishment of blue native polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis, it was demonstrated that MRC complexes form supramolecular assemblies, termed respiratory chain supercomplexes (SCs) (Cruciat et al2000; Schägger & Pfeiffer, 2000). SCs were shown to exist in varying stoichiometry in different species, ranging from bacteria to plants, fungi, and animals. Because they exist widely in multiple life forms, they must confer specific, selectable advantages to organisms. In this review, we provide a comprehensive overview of the various forms of mitochondrial SCs, their biogenesis, and their structure and discuss the current understanding of the functional roles of SCs.

Structures and assembly of different respiratory chain complexes

Overview of different supercomplex configurations

Only a small fraction of CI is present as a free complex in bovine heart mitochondria, and in some studies using cell cultures, the free form of CI is even undetectable (Lobo‐Jarne et al2018), whereas the rest is found in various SC assemblies with varying stoichiometry (Schägger & Pfeiffer, 2001) (Fig 2A). The most prevalent of these assemblies in human cells is the respirasome, consisting of CI + CIII2 + CIV and a size of approx. 1.7 MDa, accounting for approximately half of CI in SCs (Schägger & Pfeiffer, 2001; Gu et al2016; Letts et al2016; Wu et al2016; Lobo‐Jarne & Ugalde, 2018; Fig 2A). Other variants of the respirasome, which have been proposed to contain further copies of CIV (CI + CIII2 + CIV2‐4), present only minor amounts of CI‐containing SCs. The second most prevalent assembly of CI is the CI + CIII2 configuration (Schägger & Pfeiffer, 2001; Fig 2A). Of note, although the stoichiometry of these assemblies is the same between yeasts, plants, and mammals, the structures and frequencies differ (Davies et al2018). Evidence for the existence of even larger assemblies than the CI + CIII2 + CIV4 respirasome comes from cryo‐EM studies in HEK293T cells, reporting a symmetrical respiratory megacomplex with the stoichiometry CI2 + CIII2 + CIV2 (Guo et al2017). Although the authors also speculate that two units of CII could potentially bind to this megacomplex, a corresponding unassigned density could not be observed in their data, and so far, no direct experimental evidence for the participation of CII in supercomplex assembly of metazoa or plants was reported (Caruana & Stroud, 2020). However, a recent study using the ciliate protist Tetrahymena thermophila reports a CI + CII + CIII2 + CIV2 SC, which has important implications in the curvature of the IMM in this organism (Mühleip et al2023). Of note, this arrangement shows significant differences compared to known mammalian SCs.

Figure 2. Respiratory chain supercomplex assemblies.

Figure 2

(A) Stoichiometry of several mitochondrial respiratory chain supercomplexes. (B) Main interaction surfaces of mammalian respirasomes (CI + CIII2 + CIV, PDB: 5j4z). Close‐up of interactions between CI (green) and CIII (blue) subunits NDUFA11, UQCRB, UQCRQ, and UQCRH (left panel), as well as NDUFB4 and NDUFB9 with UQCRC1 (lower right panel) are shown, as well as the interaction surface between CIII and CIV (red), formed by the CI subunit ND5 and the CIV subunit COX7C (upper right panel). Visualization is adapted from (Letts et al2016). (C) Interaction surfaces of the Saccharomyces cerevisiae respiratory chain supercomplex CIII2 + CIV (PDB: 6YMX). The inner membrane protein–lipid–protein interaction between Rip1 (CIII, blue, cardiolipin (CL) and Cox5 (CIV, red) are shown (left panel), as well as the matrix‐situated protein–protein interaction between Cor1 and Cox5a). Visualization was modified from (Berndtsson et al2020). (D) Structure of the mammalian respiratory chain supercomplex CIII2 + CIV in the unlocked configuration (PDB: 7O3C, upper panel). The lower panel shows a transparent visualization of the same structure to display interactions between the CIII (blue) subunit Sub9 and the CIV (red) subunit SCAF1.

Supercomplexes are also formed between CIII and CIV without CI, with the stoichiometries CIII2 + CIV2 or CIII2 + CIV, respectively (Fig 2A). Whereas CIII forms an obligate homodimer (CIII2), CIV can occur in its monomeric, as well as in its dimeric (CIV2) form.

The respirasomes

A common feature of respirasomes is the curving of the membrane arm of CI around the CIII dimer, which can already be observed in the isolated CI + CIII2 complex (Letts et al2019). The overall structure of these SCs was similar to the respirasome configuration, but showed at least six open states (inactive form) of CI and one closed state (active form) (Letts et al2019). In structural studies for both ovine and bovine respirasomes, two different classes had significant variations of the CIV position (Letts et al2016; Sousa et al2016). For the ovine respirasome structure, “loose” (active) and “tight” (inactive) conformations were shown, where CIV contacts both CI and CIII in the tight variant but only CI in the loose form (Letts et al2016). Class 1 of the bovine respirasome is similar to the tight form and represents the most prevalent population and stable form of the respirasome (Gu et al2016; Letts et al2016; Letts & Sazanov, 2017). Two main interaction sites are found between CI and CIII2, namely, one in the membrane between NDUFA11 and the UQCRB, UQCRQ, and UQCRH subunits of CIII, and a second one in the matrix between NDUFB4, NDUFB9, and CIII subunit UQCRC1 (Fig 2B). Interestingly, the contacts formed between CI and CIII within the respirasome involve so‐called supernumerary subunits. Compared to the 14 conserved CI subunits of bacterial origin, these supernumerary subunits are assumed to be of eukaryotic origin (Gray, 2012). As no CI‐containing supercomplexes have been identified in bacteria so far (however, CIII2 + CIV2 supercomplexes were described, Kaila & Wikström, 2021), it is feasible that certain CI supernumerary subunits evolved to form respirasomes (Letts & Sazanov, 2017). On the contrary, the contacts between CI and CIV are formed by the evolutionarily conserved core subunit ND5 of CI and the CIV subunit COX7C (Gu et al2016; Letts et al2016; Fig 2B).

Different states of the respirasome can be observed when looking at the four major rotational axes of its structure, including the hinge between the matrix and membrane arms of CI, the pivot between CI and CIII2, the rotation along the two‐fold‐symmetry axis of CIII2, and the internal asymmetric rotation of CIV (Letts et al2016; Letts & Sazanov, 2017). Whereas the rotation between the matrix and membrane arms of CI may be associated with the regulation of enzymatic activity or may represent different stages in the catalytic cycle (Letts et al2016; Agip et al2018; Blaza et al2018; Kravchuk et al2022), physiological implications of other conformational states remain unknown. It might be that these different conformations present intermediate states of respirasome assembly or that some configurations (e.g., the loose form of the respirasome) are sample preparation artifacts (Letts et al2016).

The exact mechanism of respirasome formation, particularly involving SC assembly factors, is still a matter of debate. The CIV subunit COX7A has two tissue‐specific isoforms, namely, COX7A1 in the heart and skeletal muscles and COX7A2 in the liver. However, both isoforms can be found in heart‐derived mitochondria, whereas COX7A2 is found in liver mitochondria only. Further, a homolog of COX7A2, COX7A2L, or SCAF1 was described, initially thought to be essential for both respirasome and CIII2 + CIV SC formation (Ikeda et al2013; Lapuente‐Brun et al2013). It was postulated that SCAF1 is required to form respirasomes in all tissues except in the heart and skeletal muscle (Cogliati et al2016). However, overwhelming evidence shows that SCAF1 is only required for CIII2 + CIV SC formation but not for the respirasome (Davoudi et al2016; Jha et al2016; Pérez‐Pérez et al2016; Sun et al2016; Williams et al2016). Although SCAF1 is essential for the assembly of the CIII2 + CIV SC (as discussed in more detail below), it does not contribute to the assembly of the respirasome, as the formation of the CIII2 + CIV SC is not necessary for respirasome formation (Pérez‐Pérez et al2016). Likewise, SCAF1 was not detected in the structure of the respirasome. However, a recent analysis of human cells by complexome profiling has led to the identification of two distinct respirasome forms that present slightly different electrophoretic mobility and contain either SCAF1 or COX7A2 isoforms (Fernández‐Vizarra et al2022).

Supercomplex CI + CIII2 and CIII2  + CIV

Although the configuration of CI + CIII2 is observed much less frequently in mammalian cells as compared to the respirasome (approx. 17% of total complex I in mitochondria compared to approx. 54% for the respirasome) (Schägger & Pfeiffer, 2001), this arrangement is widely observed across kingdoms (Davies et al2018).

Recently, high‐resolution structures of T. thermophila respiratory chain complexes have been solved, including CI + CIII2 (Zhou et al2022). Interestingly, the overall arrangement is similar to that of mammalian CI + CIII2 SCs as discussed above. However, significant differences in the interaction sites were observed, with more contacts in both the matrix and the IMM, as well as an IMS bridge present in T. thermophila SCs. Thereby, these interactions cause structural and functional symmetry breaking in CIII2. The authors further suggested that no free CI is present in T. thermophila and that the CI + CIII2 represents the minimal organization of CI (Zhou et al2022). Moreover, very recent cryo‐EM structures of Arabidopsis thaliana CI + CIII2 showed a plant‐specific additional interaction site between the complexes compared to ovine CI + CIII2 structures, potentially contributing to the unusual stability of the plant SC (Klusch et al2023). Similar plant‐specific interaction surface between CI and CIII2 was also shown for Vigna radiata (Maldonado et al2023).

In the yeast S. cerevisiae that lacks a canonical CI, the ratio between the two SC species CIII2 + CIV2 or CIII2 + CIV reflects the cellular energy demands under different growth conditions (Schägger & Pfeiffer, 2000). In particular, the abundance of SC CIII2 + CIV2 is enhanced in cells propagating in respiratory media and is mainly controlled by the amount of CIV available (Schägger & Pfeiffer, 2000). The first elucidated high‐resolution structure for mitochondrial CIII2 + CIV came from Saccharomyces cerevisiae (Hartley et al2019; Rathore et al2019). The association between CIII2 and CIV occurs via protein–protein interactions between the CIII subunit Cor1 and the CIV subunit Cox5, stabilizing the complex from the matrix side, and a protein–lipid–protein interaction between Cor1, cardiolipin, and the CIV subunit Rip1 (Fig 2C). Whereas alanine substitutions in Cor1 abolished the formation of SCs, the reduction of cardiolipin content via deletion of the cardiolipin synthase Crd1 had no direct consequence on SC formation (Pfeiffer et al2003), showing that the protein–protein interaction between Cor1 and Cox5 is necessary and sufficient for the formation of CIII2 + CIV SCs in yeast (Berndtsson et al2020). However, the yeast and mammalian CIII2 + CIV differ substantially in their structure. In yeast, CIV binds to CIII2 at the same site as CI does in the respirasome, resulting in different binding modes between CIII and CIV in yeast and mammals (Rathore et al2019). CIII2 + CIV of mammals was observed in two different conformations, a locked and an unlocked state (Vercellino & Sazanov, 2021). In the unlocked state, CIV is peripherally attached to CIII2, and almost 180° rotated compared to the yeast form of this assembly. Whereas the unlocked conformation contained both fully mature CIII2 and CIV, the locked form harbors assembly intermediates of CIII2.

The assembly of mammalian CIII2 + CIV has been shown to follow a specific sequence. The assembly factor SCAF1 binds to a premature form of CIII2 and drives the docking of CIV to form an intermediate‐locked assembly. This is followed by the maturation of CIII2, forming the locked conformation. Subsequently, CIV shifts to the unlocked state, in which the newly added subunits of the mature CIII2 form contacts with CIV (Vercellino & Sazanov, 2021; Fig 2D).

The yeast proteins Rcf1 (and its mammalian homolog HIGD2A), as well as Rcf2 (yeast‐specific), were previously suggested to mediate assembly and stability of CIII2 + CIV SCs (Chen et al2012; Strogolova et al2012; Vukotic et al2012; Zhou et al2018). However, Rcf1 was later shown to interact with CIV, thereby regulating the late stages of its assembly (Su et al2014; Garlich et al2017). In addition, a recent study showed that Rcf1 and Rcf2 regulate respiration of yeast cells, without significantly affecting the assembly of SCs (Dawitz et al2020). It was also shown that Rcf1 and Rcf2 are not stoichiometric subunits of CIV, and thus, they were also not present in the cryo‐EM structure of yeast SCs under physiological conditions (Rathore et al2019). However, Rcf2 could be detected in SC structures under hypoxia‐mimicking conditions (Hartley et al, 2020). This is in line with the observation that Rcf1 and Rcf2 regulate CIV activity, in particular under energy‐demanding conditions (Dawitz et al2020). These results suggest that the primary functions of Rcf1 and Rcf2 are related to the assembly of individual complexes and regulating their function rather than specifically mediating SC formation. In mammals, other relevant HIGD family proteins are HIGD1A and HIGD1C. HIGD1A impacts the assembly of CIII (Timón‐Gómez et al2020), and in addition, it binds to Cytc and CIV in the respirasome to enhance electron transfer (Hayashi et al2015; Guerra‐Castellano et al2018). In agreement, HIGD1A overexpression improves cellular respiration in models of mitochondrial disorders (Nagao et al2020). Differently, HIGD1C is almost exclusively expressed in glomus cells, where it also interacts with CIV to negatively regulate its activity and facilitate oxygen sensing (Timón‐Gómez et al2022).

Physiological functions of supercomplexes

The physiological functions of SCs remain controversial, despite more than two decades of research (Schägger & Pfeiffer, 2000). Several hypotheses regarding their physiological significance were made and will be discussed in this section.

Free diffusion versus substrate channeling

The random collision model suggests that the electron transport within mitochondria is a diffusion‐based process. The mechanistic role of Q to transport electrons from NADH or succinate oxidation to CIII was established in the 1960s, when it was demonstrated that a surprisingly high concentration of Q was found in the IMM, where it behaves as a pool, binding electrons (and protons) to the Q headgroup, and thereby helps to connect electron flow in the MRC (Fig 3A). Because Q is a substantially hydrophobic molecule, owing to the attachment of varying numbers of isoprenyl moieties (Stefely & Pagliarini, 2017), the coenzyme is solved in the lipidic core of the membrane, where it diffuses in the plane of the lipid bilayer. In contrast, Cytc is a protein of roughly 15 kDa molecular weight that carries a covalently attached heme moiety enabling the transport of one electron at a time. Cytc belongs to the class of peripheral membrane proteins. In the absence of transmembrane segments, membrane association stems from its attachment to the IMM by electrostatic interactions with negatively charged phospholipids, particularly cardiolipin, the signature phospholipid of mitochondria (Kinnunen et al1994). Moreover, biophysical experiments suggested that in addition to electrostatic interactions, also an alternative form of membrane interaction could exist. In this model, an acyl chain of cardiolipin might get inserted into the folded Cytc, giving rise to a tight membrane‐bound form (Rytomaa & Kinnunen, 1995). However, Cytc release from mitochondria during apoptosis is a highly conserved and important event, necessitating that the protein is detached from the IMM (Ott et al2007). This propensity of Cytc, namely to interact with the IMM via various mechanisms and the well‐documented fact that it can be detached from the membrane to act as a signaling molecule during cell death execution (Garrido et al2006), complicates the interpretation of how the protein diffuses inside mitochondria. However, the general consent is that Cytc is freely moving in the IMS (Hochman et al1982), either moving in two dimensions at the level of the IMM, in three dimensions in the IMS, or a mixture of both, whereby the actual ionic strength might dictate the degree of membrane association (Fig 3B).

Figure 3. Physiological functions of respiratory chain supercomplexes.

Figure 3

(A) Comparison between the free diffusion and substrate channeling model for coenzyme Q (Q) within respiratory chain supercomplexes. Arrows indicate the free exchange with the Q pool (free diffusion model, left panel) or the direct Q transfer in the form of substrate channeling (right panel). (B) Comparison of various postulated models for cytochrome c shuttling between complex CIII and CIV in respiratory chain supercomplex configuration. Arrows indicate the modality of cytochrome c transfer/exchange with the free pool, similar as described for the Q pool above. (C) Potential physiological functions of different respiratory chain supercomplex assemblies. Several of these assigned functions are controversially discussed. Arrows indicate a respective increase or decrease of the indicated physiological functions and pathophysiological effects.

The discovery of SCs, however, led to the hypothesis that respirasomes might act as solid‐state units, with each respirasome carrying its own Q and Cytc molecules and catalyzing the transfer of electrons from NADH to O2 (Fig 3A and B). Flux control analyses take advantage of inhibitors to block a certain step in a reaction pathway. If the effect on the isolated step is equal to the effect on the overall pathway (and hence, the flux control coefficient is 1), this step has complete control over the pathway. Such an analysis has been performed for the NADH oxidation pathway with the inhibitors rotenone and mucidin, and it was shown that CI and CIII behave as a single functioning unit (Blanchi et al2004). In support of this model, Q and Cytc were found in respirasomes and shown to be able to transfer electrons from NADH to O2 (Acín‐Pérez et al2008). It was therefore proposed that neither Q nor Cytc form homogeneous pools, but instead, each respirasome contains a dedicated small pool of Q and Cytc, which are not exchanged and allow a localized electron transfer via substrate channeling (Lapuente‐Brun et al2013; Fig 3A and B). Substrate channeling in complexes of enzymes that act sequentially in a pathway is a process where a specific substrate is transferred from one enzymatic activity to the next without allowing free diffusion of the substrate into the bulk solution. For example, the large E1‐E2‐E3 enzymes like pyruvate dehydrogenase or alpha‐ketoglutarate dehydrogenase employ substrate channeling by transferring a covalently bound substrate between the complexes' three enzymatic entities using a highly flexible domain.

Although the substrate channeling hypothesis represents an attractive model for the physiological functions of SCs, experimental evidence against this hypothesis emerged. First, repetitions of flux control experiments showed that the outcome of these experiments strongly depended on the respective inhibitor used (Blaza et al2014). As certain inhibitors even resulted in a biological meaningless flux control coefficient of > 1, this approach is not a reliable method to analyze physiological functions of SCs (Blaza et al2014; Milenkovic et al2017). The authors also measured substrate oxidation using NADH, succinate, or both in submitochondrial particles containing supercomplexes, prepared with and without the addition of Cytc to alter the rate‐limiting step for substrate oxidation. The same system with the same set of supercomplexes showed both additive and non‐additive kinetics (Blaza et al2014). These results reject the hypothesis of a Q pool partitioning in SCs. Similarly, spectroscopic measurements in living cells also demonstrated that Cytc does not face any barriers to free diffusion (Trouillard et al2011). In an additional study, an alternative QH2 oxidase was inserted into mammalian heart mitochondrial membranes, which then presents a competing pathway for QH2 oxidation (Fedor & Hirst, 2018). In the case of substrate channeling, the flux through the competing pathway should be negligible. However, the rate of cyanide‐insensitive NADH:O2 oxidoreduction via the alternative QH2 oxidase was significantly higher, revealing that CIII/CIV catalysis is rate‐limiting for both, NADH and succinate oxidation, and that Q is not channeled in SCs. In addition, structures of the mammalian respirasomes (Gu et al2016; Letts et al2016) and CIII2 + CIV SCs (Vercellino & Sazanov, 2021), yeast CIII2 + CIV1‐2 SCs (Hartley et al2019; Rathore et al2019; Berndtsson et al2020), or plant CIII2 + CIV SCs (Maldonado et al2021) do not contain barriers restricting diffusion of Q or Cytc away from the complexes, features that would be necessary for substrate channeling. Direct tunneling of electrons between CIII2 + CIV in the MRC can also be excluded because of a too‐large distance (> 6 nm) between the respective Cytc binding sites (Rathore et al2019; Vercellino & Sazanov, 2021), allowing electron transfer only by a mobile pool of Cytc. However, bacterial SCs do contain covalently bound Cytc, clearly allowing substrate channeling to transfer electrons from CIII to CIV (Daldal et al2003; Gong et al2018; Kao et al2022).

Efficiency of electron transfer and competitive fitness

While substrate channeling in a strict definition can be excluded as a possibility to explain the occurrence of SC in mitochondria, it is still feasible that a bioenergetic advantage of SC formation can derive from an increased efficiency of electron transfer between the individual complexes (Fig 3C). One approach to test this hypothesis would be to delete factors essential for the formation of SCs and then determine electron transfer efficiencies. This has been performed for SCAF1, which, as stated above, does not affect the formation of respirasomes, but the assembly of CIII2 + CIV SCs. The ablation of SCAF1 did not affect bioenergetics, but rather provoked changes in nutrient sensing (Pérez‐Pérez et al2016; Lobo‐Jarne & Ugalde, 2018). In contrast, bioenergetic differences were observed in a zebrafish model, where absence of SCAF1 caused abnormal fat deposition and reduction in fertility (García‐Poyatos et al2020). As further discussed below, controversial results were reported in mouse models, showing either measurable or no effects on energy metabolism upon deletion of SCAF1 (Lapuente‐Brun et al2013; Mourier et al2014; Shiba et al2017).

Moreover, in many systems, including mammalian mitochondria, the respiratory chain complexes assemble in a variety of supercomplexes with varying degrees of stoichiometries, thereby complicating analyses of the bioenergetic efficiency of the different assemblies. Here, yeast offers a unique advantage by lacking CI and having CIII and CIV organized primarily in common supercomplexes. We recently used information from the cryo‐EM structure of S. cerevisiae CIII2 + CIV1‐2 (Rathore et al2019) to selectively disrupt SCs without affecting individual complexes. We genetically engineered mutants of Cor1, expressed under their endogenous promoter at physiological levels (Berndtsson et al2020). These point mutations caused the disruption of CIII2 + CIV1‐2 SCs as the only SC species present in S. cerevisiae, without affecting individual complexes. This selective disruption impaired electron transport by impacting the diffusion efficiency of Cytc between the individual complexes (Berndtsson et al2020). Increased concentrations of Cytc could correct for this defect. Interestingly, this decreased efficiency of electron transfer had no severe consequences on cellular physiology, including unaltered oxidative stress levels, cellular growth, and viability in isolated cultures. However, the disruption of SCs caused massively reduced competitive cellular fitness, which could be restored by the overexpression of Cytc. These results thus demonstrate that the formation of SCs in living aerobic cells increases the efficiency of cellular energy conversion, which promotes an evolutionary advantage that can be selected for (Berndtsson et al, 2020) (Fig 3C).

Results on increased electron transfer efficiency established by this work align well with recent mathematical modeling of this process (Stuchebrukhov et al2020). Interestingly, further work performed with yeast mitochondria in combination with cryo‐EM suggests that this kinetic advantage might be conferred by 2D diffusion of Cytc between CIII2 and CIV in SCs rather than 3D diffusion between separated, individual complexes (Moe et al2021) (Fig 3B). In line with a previous proposal (Pérez‐Mejías et al2019), it was suggested that CIII2 + CIV SC formation provides a negatively charged surface patch on top of this SC, on which the positively charged Cytc can “roll”. These structural properties can also be found in the mammalian version of this complex (Vercellino & Sazanov, 2021). Hence, this mechanisms might present an alternative to substrate channeling, for which diffusion of Cytc within the SC is favored by electrostatic interactions, but still allows a free exchange with the universal soluble Cytc pool (Moe et al2021; Vercellino & Sazanov, 2021, 2022; Fig 3B). However, the significance of an electrostatic interaction for 2D diffusion restricted to SCs depends on the ionic strength of the local environment and the lipid composition of the IMM. Currently, these aspects have not been firmly determined, but are essential to establish the relevance of such a 2D diffusion. Moreover, whether physiological or environmental factors could modulate the ratio of Cytc 2D versus 3D diffusion has not been investigated. In addition, limiting the 3D diffusion of Cytc impairs mitochondrial function and cellular viability (Toth et al2020). Of note, these results were obtained by reducing the mobility of the whole Cytc pool and not only a potential subpopulation interacting with SCs. In sum, current studies demonstrate that the formation of CIII2 + CIV SCs increases the efficiency of electron transport via Cytc. However, the exact modalities and biophysical properties establishing this advantage remain to be investigated.

Mitochondrial respiratory complex stability and assembly

The structural interdependence between MRC complexes was first observed in cells from patients with mitochondrial diseases, where mutations affecting CIII or CIV frequently lead to a combined CI deficiency (Lamantea et al2002; Fernandez‐Vizarra et al2007), suggesting that SCs may play roles in CI stability. The observation that, in a CIII mutant, CI levels could be restored by treatment with antioxidants, while SC‐associated CI is not affected by high ROS levels (Diaz et al2012), suggests that only free CI is highly sensitive to ROS‐induced damage and degradation.

Another hypothesis on the physiological significance of SCs suggested that these large assemblies are scaffolds for the late stages of CI biogenesis involving the incorporation of the NADH module to the CI peripheral arm (Moreno‐Lastres et al2012). However, this hypothesis has been challenged by kinetic studies of CI assembly, where a small amount of fully assembled CI could be detected before the formation of SCs (Guerrero‐Castillo et al2017). More recently, it was shown that the lack of CIII prevents the incorporation of CI NADH module from completing the functional enzyme (Protasoni et al2020). Moreover, the association of the late assembly CI precursor with CIII and/or CIV was detected in mutant cell lines and animal models (Alston et al2018; Adjobo‐Hermans et al2020; Fang et al2021). Additionally, data supporting the interaction of CIII and CIV subunits and assembly modules directly in the SCs have been reported (Lazarou et al2009; Lobo‐Jarne et al2020; Timón‐Gómez et al2020). Taken together, increasing evidence supports the existence of distinct but interconnected assembly pathways for free complexes and SCs, a model referred to as the cooperative assembly model (Fernández‐Vizarra & Ugalde, 2022).

Mitochondrial respiratory chain organization and metabolic adaptation

The plasticity model of mammalian MRC organization proposes that individual complexes assemble into SCs in a dynamic manner to adapt to changing cellular metabolic needs (Acín‐Pérez et al2008). However, despite the variety of MRC complexes distribution in free form and SCs observed in different cell types and tissues (Lapuente‐Brun et al2013), the data reflect steady‐state levels and the dynamic nature of the MRC organization has not been experimentally demonstrated. Alternatively, adaptation to the cellular energetic requirements could be provided by the existence of interconnected assembly pathways, where incorporation of late assembly catalytic modules into individual complex or SC pre‐assembled intermediates could modulate MRC organization (Fernández‐Vizarra & Ugalde, 2022). Although the mechanisms behind these models are yet to be fully disclosed, both scenarios suggest the involvement of SC assembly/disassembly factors acting as sensors or assembly checkpoints. As mentioned above, the only dedicated SC assembly factor identified to date is SCAF1 (Cogliati et al2016). There is a general agreement that in all cell lines and model organisms, the absence of or mutations in SCAF1 lead to the lack of SC CIII2 + CIV formation, while allowing the assembly of respirasomes (Cogliati et al2016; Pérez‐Pérez et al2016; Lobo‐Jarne & Ugalde, 2018). It is also established that the stability of respirasomes and, particularly, larger SC structures is compromised to different extents depending on the cell type and tissue (Cogliati et al2016; Pérez‐Pérez et al2016; Williams et al2016; Lobo‐Jarne & Ugalde, 2018). On the contrary, the question of whether the changes in SC organization promoted by the absence of SCAF1 ultimately lead to a metabolic adaptation remains to be fully answered. Some studies concluded that SCAF1‐dependent MRC remodeling is not essential, neither to maintain mitochondrial bioenergetics nor to cope with acute cellular stresses (hypoxia or oxidative stress) in HEK293T cells (Pérez‐Pérez et al2016; Lobo‐Jarne & Ugalde, 2018). Other studies showed that in U2OS cells, ER stress and glucose deprivation stimulate mitochondrial bioenergetics and SC formation through protein kinase R‐like ER kinase (PERK) by enhancing SCAF1 levels through the PERK‐eIF2α‐ATF4 axis (Balsa et al2019). Likewise, increased SC levels were associated with mitochondrial efficiency and growth in severely hypoxic pancreatic cancer (Hollinshead et al2020). An inconsistent picture was also obtained from the study of animal models. These studies have shown that SCAF1 promotes SC formation as well as metabolic efficiency in zebrafish (García‐Poyatos et al2020) and in some mouse models (Lapuente‐Brun et al2013; Shiba et al2017) but not others (Mourier et al2014). One of these studies showed that SCAF1 KO mice exhibit lower blood glucose levels after insulin or pyruvate injection, which suggested that the protein could be involved in the regulation of glucose homeostasis (Shiba et al2017). However, whether the physiological manifestations correlated with or were the cause of altered SC formation was not fully defined. Work in zebrafish models showed that SCAF1‐deficient animals were smaller in size and had abnormal fat deposition, phenotypes that were rescued by doubling the food supply (García‐Poyatos et al2020). This phenotype rescue correlated with improved bioenergetics; however, possible SC‐independent roles of SCAF1 in fat metabolism in fish were not fully discarded.

Two more recent studies have added support to the concept of MRC organization‐dependent metabolic remodeling. One study showed that two separate MRC organizations co‐exist in human cells and post‐mitotic tissues, which the authors called C‐MRC and S‐MRC. These are defined by the preferential expression of the CIV COX7A isoforms, COX7A2 and SCAF1 (Fernández‐Vizarra et al, 2022), respectively. The SCAF1‐dependent S‐MRC organization is characterized by the presence of the SCAF1‐containing respirasome, which accounts for approximately 50% of total CIII and CIV levels. At the same time, the remaining CIII and CIV are equally distributed between the CIII2 + CIV SC and free complexes. On the contrary, the COX7A2‐dependent C‐MRC organization displays a relatively low amount of the COX7A2‐containing respirasome, no CIII2 + CIV SC, and abundant free CIII (~ 60% of total CIII) and CIV (~ 80% of total CIV). The exclusive presence of one configuration or the other in knock‐out cells of the corresponding isoform led to some changes in mitochondrial bioenergetics. However, no differences in respiratory parameters were observed between SCAF1 or COX7A2 knock‐out and wild‐type cells, where the two MRC organizations co‐exist. The increment in respiratory rate supported by the addition of succinate (a CII substrate) to permeabilized cells already respiring CI substrates was shown to be lower in cells expressing the S‐MRC compared to C‐MRC, suggesting that the electrons from CI saturate the downstream MRC segment (Q to CIV) at a greater extent in the S configuration. Preferential utilization of the NADH versus FADH2 route parallels with the fraction of total CIII and CIV distributed in respirasomes. This suggests the existence of a kinetic advantage for electron transfer within SCs possibly linked to the proximity of electron carrier binding sites. However, NADH‐ and FADH2‐linked respiration are not fully additive in either configuration, arguing against Q pool partitioning. Moreover, the lack of COX7A2 causes a decrease in total CIV amount and enzymatic activity by 50%, which, although it does not affect endogenous and coupled respiration, reduces spare respiratory capacity. This relevant confounding variable can contribute to the observed decrease in CII minus CI‐ and ATP‐driven respiration in S‐MRC cells. Lastly, the authors showed that stimulation of pyruvate dehydrogenase (PDH) activity to promote a switch toward oxidative metabolism in human fibroblasts reduces SCAF1 steady‐state levels and favors the C‐MRC configuration. This observation establishes a direct link between the MRC organization and cellular metabolism, controlled by PDH activity. Intriguingly, while the study proposes that a metabolic shift toward oxidative metabolism destabilizes SCAF1, data from human and mouse tissues indicate that SCAF1 expression is induced by PGC1α and enhances respiratory capacity (Benegiamo et al2022).

A study in humans has shown significant genetic variation in SCAF1 in several tissues, most prominently in skeletal muscle (Benegiamo et al2022). The most significant variant was an insertion in the 3′ untranslated region of the gene that creates a short‐repeated sequence and enhances SCAF1 expression. Human myotubes carrying this genetic variant have enhanced SC levels and respiratory capacity. One would expect that the S‐MRC would accumulate in these myotubes, but this was not determined. Nevertheless, an important finding was that this variant is associated with lower body fat and improved cardiorespiratory fitness in humans (Benegiamo et al2022). This observation was reproduced in a mouse model, where it was also shown that SCAF1 and SCAF1‐containing SCs are induced upon exercise, specifically in the skeletal muscle, in a manner independent of PGC1α (Benegiamo et al, 2022). Taken together, these studies support the conclusion that SCAF1 and SC levels correlate with metabolic fitness (Fig 3C), although the cellular context may modulate the nuances of this correlation.

Other proposed functions of respiratory chain supercomplexes

Most studies on SCs mention that the limitation of oxidative stress could be a function of these assemblies. However, only very limited evidence for such a role was provided. CI and CIII are the main production sites of reactive oxygen species in mitochondria (Murphy, 2009), and hence, it was postulated that the formation of the respirasome somehow alleviates oxidative stress from these sites. Indeed, an in vitro study suggests that the dissociation of CI + CIII2 SCs increases oxidative stress (Maranzana et al2013). In line with these results, it was observed that the higher abundance of free CI in astrocytes compared to neurons correlates with higher oxidative stress found in astrocytes (Lopez‐Fabuel et al2016). Unfortunately, a molecular mechanism for such a potential reduction of reactive oxygen species by SC formation has not been demonstrated, and hence, this hypothesis is only based on correlations. A causative role of SC formation to limit oxidative stress remains to be determined.

Finally, it was also proposed that SCs prevent the aggregation of proteins in the IMM (Blaza et al2014). Although this is feasible, as the IMM presents one of the most protein‐dense regions of a cell, direct experimental evidence for this hypothesis is missing.

Summary

Since the discovery of SCs more than 20 years ago (Schägger & Pfeiffer, 2000), significant advances in our understanding of these gigantic assemblies have been made. In particular, the latest work on the structural characterization of SCs presented a giant leap in the field (Gu et al2016; Letts et al2016; Hartley et al2019; Rathore et al2019; Vercellino & Sazanov, 2021; Zhou et al2022; Klusch et al2023; Maldonado et al2023). Still, the physiological functions of SCs remain a matter of debate (Milenkovic et al2017). Recent reports have indicated that SC formation primarily enhances the efficiency of electron transport. The emerging picture favors a model in which SC formation, as such, does not modify the maximal activity of individual complexes (Mourier et al2014; Berndtsson et al2020), but optimizes their cooperation in the context of the overall pathway.

Supercomplex formation constitutes another example for a growing theme of gathering functionally related activities in common complexes or into proximal localization. This strategy, which is widely employed in life, is used extensively in mitochondria (Linden et al2020; Schulte et al2023) as exemplified by a supercomplex collecting enzymes mediating Q biosynthesis (Marbois et al2009), the establishment of membrane subdomains where early steps of MRC biogenesis are organized (Singh et al2020) and mitochondrial RNA granules (Antonicka et al2013; Jourdain et al2013), executing early steps of mtRNA maturation. However, while all these organizations might not be essential for these pathways to occur, they likely improve the overall biochemical efficiency, possibly only with a small, but nevertheless selectable, margin. While these small beneficial margins may be neglectable or even sometimes undetectable in experimental setups and under laboratory conditions, they have impacted selection during evolution and seem to affect performance in mammalian tissues. Particularly in the context of evolutionary pressure via competition in natural environments and in stress scenarios (e.g., high temperature, hypoxic conditions, limited nutrients), these subtle bioenergetic advantages of SC formation can be the basis for selection. Employing the recent structural insights into respiratory SCs should allow engineering of further sets of genetic mutants to fully unravel the intricacies and physiological impact of SC formation.

In need of answers.

  • To fully unravel the functional interplay of respiratory chain complexes in SCs and its mechanistic benefit, it might be necessary to reconstitute purified SCs into proteoliposomes to study their performance in a minimal system, free from confounding secondary variables.

  • The functional connectivity of the respiratory chain by mobile electron carriers is likely a key aspect of SC/respirasome formation. It would be important to determine the absolute and relative concentrations of Cytc or Q, and RCs in order to test how they might determine the dependency on SC/respirasome formation to achieve optimal electron transport rates.

  • While this manuscript was under editorial proof, an article was published where a more than 50% reduction in SC and respirasome formation was achieved in a mouse model, without overly perturbing respiration or physiology (Milenkovic et al2023). Hence, it would be desirable for future studies to generate mutants in higher organisms, where the formation of SCs and respirasomes is completely abolished.

  • Once these mutants are available, it would be very interesting to score how they impact stress tolerance and competitive fitness.

  • The interdependency of assembly of the different respiratory chain complexes has suggested that mature complexes might facilitate assembly of the partner complex through direct contacts. However, assembly also occurs in the absence of the partner complex. To unravel the contribution for the co‐assembly pathways for overall assembly, efficiency will be an important aspect of future research.

Author contributions

Andreas Kohler: Conceptualization; writing – original draft; writing – review and editing. Antoni Barrientos: Conceptualization; writing – original draft; writing – review and editing. Flavia Fontanesi: Conceptualization; writing – original draft; writing – review and editing. Martin Ott: Conceptualization; writing – original draft; writing – review and editing.

Disclosure and competing interests statement

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank the members of our laboratory for stimulating discussions. This work was supported by Austrian Science Fund FWF (J4398‐B to AK), the Swedish research council (2014‐4116 and 2018‐03694 to MO), the Knut and Alice Wallenberg foundation (2017.0091 and 2019.0319 to MO), the National Institutes of Health R35 grant GM118141 (to AB), and the US Army research office (W911NF‐21‐1‐0359 to FF).

EMBO reports (2023) 24: e57092

References

  1. Acín‐Pérez R, Fernández‐Silva P, Peleato ML, Pérez‐Martos A, Enriquez JA (2008) Respiratory active mitochondrial supercomplexes. Mol Cell 32: 529–539 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Adjobo‐Hermans MJW, de Haas R, Willems PHGM, Wojtala A, van Emst‐de Vries SE, Wagenaars JA, van den Brand M, Rodenburg RJ, Smeitink JAM, Nijtmans LG et al (2020) NDUFS4 deletion triggers loss of NDUFA12 in Ndufs4−/− mice and Leigh syndrome patients: a stabilizing role for NDUFAF2. Biochim Biophys Acta Bioenerg 1861: 148213 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Agip ANA, Blaza JN, Bridges HR, Viscomi C, Rawson S, Muench SP, Hirst J (2018) Cryo‐em structures of complex I from mouse heart mitochondria in two biochemically defined states. Nat Struct Mol Biol 25: 548–556 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Alston CL, Heidler J, Dibley MG, Kremer LS, Taylor LS, Fratter C, French CE, Glasgow RIC, Feichtinger RG, Delon I et al (2018) Bi‐allelic mutations in NDUFA6 establish its role in early‐onset isolated mitochondrial complex I deficiency. Am J Hum Genet 103: 592–601 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Antonicka H, Sasarman F, Nishimura T, Paupe V, Shoubridge EA (2013) The mitochondrial RNA‐binding protein GRSF1 localizes to RNA granules and is required for posttranscriptional mitochondrial gene expression. Cell Metab 17: 386–398 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Balsa E, Soustek MS, Thomas A, Cogliati S, García‐Poyatos C, Martín‐García E, Jedrychowski M, Gygi SP, Enriquez JA, Puigserver P (2019) ER and nutrient stress promote assembly of respiratory chain supercomplexes through the PERK‐eIF2α axis. Mol Cell 74: 877–890.e6 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Benegiamo G, Bou Sleiman M, Wohlwend M, Rodríguez‐López S, Goeminne LJE, Laurila PP, Klevjer M, Salonen MK, Lahti J, Jha P et al (2022) COX7A2L genetic variants determine cardiorespiratory fitness in mice and human. Nat Metab 4: 1336–1351 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Berndtsson J, Aufschnaiter A, Rathore S, Marin‐Buera L, Dawitz H, Diessl J, Kohler V, Barrientos A, Büttner S, Fontanesi F et al (2020) Respiratory supercomplexes enhance electron transport by decreasing cytochrome c diffusion distance. EMBO Rep 21: e51015 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Blanchi C, Genova ML, Castelli GP, Lenaz G (2004) The mitochondrial respiratory chain is partially organized in a supercomplex assembly: kinetic evidence using flux control analysis. J Biol Chem 279: 36562–36569 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Blaza JN, Serreli R, Jones AJY, Mohammed K, Hirst J (2014) Kinetic evidence against partitioning of the ubiquinone pool and the catalytic relevance of respiratory‐chain supercomplexes. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 111: 15735–15740 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Blaza JN, Vinothkumar KR, Hirst J (2018) Structure of the deactive state of mammalian respiratory complex I. Structure 26: 312–319.e3 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Caruana NJ, Stroud DA (2020) The road to the structure of the mitochondrial respiratory chain supercomplex. Biochem Soc Trans 48: 621–629 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Chen YC, Taylor EB, Dephoure N, Heo JM, Tonhato A, Papandreou I, Nath N, Denko NC, Gygi SP, Rutter J (2012) Identification of a protein mediating respiratory supercomplex stability. Cell Metab 15: 348–360 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Cogliati S, Calvo E, Loureiro M, Guaras AM, Nieto‐Arellano R, Garcia‐Poyatos C, Ezkurdia I, Mercader N, Vázquez J, Enriquez JA (2016) Mechanism of super‐assembly of respiratory complexes III and IV. Nature 539: 579–582 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Cruciat CM, Brunner S, Baumann F, Neupert W, Stuart RA (2000) The cytochrome bc 1 and cytochrome c oxidase complexes associate to form a single supracomplex in yeast mitochondria. J Biol Chem 275: 18093–18098 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Daldal F, Deshmukh M, Prince RC (2003) Membrane‐anchored cytochrome c as an electron carrier in photosynthesis and respiration: past, present and future of an unexpected discovery. Photosynth Res 76: 127–134 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Davies KM, Blum TB, Kühlbrandt W (2018) Conserved in situ arrangement of complex I and III2 in mitochondrial respiratory chain supercomplexes of mammals, yeast, and plants. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 115: 3024–3029 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Davoudi M, Kotarsky H, Hansson E, Kallijarvi J, Fellman V (2016) COX7A2L/SCAFI and pre‐complex III modify respiratory chain supercomplex formation in different mouse strains with a Bcs1l mutation. PLoS One 11: e0168774 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Dawitz H, Schäfer J, Schaart JM, Magits W, Brzezinski P, Ott M (2020) Rcf1 modulates cytochrome c oxidase activity especially under energy‐demanding conditions. Front Physiol 10: 1555 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. Diaz F, Enríquez JA, Moraes CT (2012) Cells lacking rieske iron‐sulfur protein have a reactive oxygen species‐associated decrease in respiratory complexes I and IV. Mol Cell Biol 32: 415–429 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. Fang H, Ye X, Xie J, Li Y, Li H, Bao X, Yang Y, Lin Z, Jia M, Han Q et al (2021) A membrane arm of mitochondrial complex I sufficient to promote respirasome formation. Cell Rep 35: 108963 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. Fedor JG, Hirst J (2018) Mitochondrial supercomplexes do not enhance catalysis by quinone channeling. Cell Metab 28: 525–531.e4 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  23. Fernández‐Vizarra E, Ugalde C (2022) Cooperative assembly of the mitochondrial respiratory chain. Trends Biochem Sci 47: 999–1008 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  24. Fernandez‐Vizarra E, Bugiani M, Goffrini P, Carrara F, Farina L, Procopio E, Donati A, Uziel G, Ferrero I, Zeviani M (2007) Impaired complex III assembly associated with BCS1L gene mutations in isolated mitochondrial encephalopathy. Hum Mol Genet 16: 1241–1252 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  25. Fernández‐Vizarra E, López‐Calcerrada S, Sierra‐Magro A, Pérez‐Pérez R, Formosa LE, Hock DH, Illescas M, Peñas A, Brischigliaro M, Ding S et al (2022) Two independent respiratory chains adapt OXPHOS performance to glycolytic switch. Cell Metab 34: 1792–1808.e6 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  26. García‐Poyatos C, Cogliati S, Calvo E, Hernansanz‐Agustín P, Lagarrigue S, Magni R, Botos M, Langa X, Amati F, Vázquez J et al (2020) Scaf1 promotes respiratory supercomplexes and metabolic efficiency in zebrafish. EMBO Rep 21: e50287 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  27. Garlich J, Strecker V, Wittig I, Stuart RA (2017) Mutational analysis of the QRRQ motif in the yeast hig1 type 2 protein Rcf1 reveals a regulatory role for the cytochrome c oxidase complex. J Biol Chem 292: 5216–5226 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  28. Garrido C, Galluzzi L, Brunet M, Puig PE, Didelot C, Kroemer G (2006) Mechanisms of cytochrome c release from mitochondria. Cell Death Differ 13: 1423–1433 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  29. Gong H, Li J, Xu A, Tang Y, Ji W, Gao R, Wang S, Yu L, Tian C, Li J et al (2018) An electron transfer path connects subunits of a mycobacterial respiratory supercomplex. Science 362: eaat8923 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  30. Gray MW (2012) Mitochondrial evolution. Cold Spring Harb Perspect Biol 4: a011403 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  31. Gu J, Wu M, Guo R, Yan K, Lei J, Gao N, Yang M (2016) The architecture of the mammalian respirasome. Nature 537: 639–643 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  32. Guerra‐Castellano A, Díaz‐Quintana A, Pérez‐Mejías G, Elena‐Real CA, González‐Arzola K, García‐Mauriño SM, De la Rosa MA, Díaz‐Moreno I (2018) Oxidative stress is tightly regulated by cytochrome c phosphorylation and respirasome factors in mitochondria. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 115: 7955–7960 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  33. Guerrero‐Castillo S, Baertling F, Kownatzki D, Wessels HJ, Arnold S, Brandt U, Nijtmans L (2017) The assembly pathway of mitochondrial respiratory chain complex I. Cell Metab 25: 128–139 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  34. Guo R, Zong S, Wu M, Gu J, Yang M (2017) Architecture of human mitochondrial respiratory megacomplex I2III2IV2. Cell 170: 1247–1257.e12 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  35. Hackenbrock CR, Chazotte B, Gupte SS (1986) The random collision model and a critical assessment of diffusion and collision in mitochondrial electron transport. J Bioenerg Biomembr 18: 331–368 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  36. Hartley AM, Lukoyanova N, Zhang Y, Cabrera‐Orefice A, Arnold S, Meunier B, Pinotsis N, Maréchal A (2019) Structure of yeast cytochrome c oxidase in a supercomplex with cytochrome bc 1 . Nat Struct Mol Biol 26: 78–83 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  37. Hartley AM, Meunier B, Pinotsis N, Maréchal A (2020) Rcf2 revealed in cryo‐EM structures of hypoxic isoforms of mature mitochondrial III‐IV supercomplexes. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 117: 9329–9337 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  38. Hayashi T, Asano Y, Shintani Y, Aoyama H, Kioka H, Tsukamoto O, Hikita M, Shinzawa‐Itoh K, Takafuji K, Higo S et al (2015) Higd1a is a positive regulator of cytochrome c oxidase. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 112: 1553–1558 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  39. Hochli M, Hackenbrock CR (1976) Fluidity in mitochondrial membranes: thermotropic lateral translational motion of intramembrane particles. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 73: 1636–1640 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  40. Hochman JH, Schindler M, Lee JG, Ferguson‐Miller S (1982) Lateral mobility of cytochrome c on intact mitochondrial membranes as determined by fluorescence redistribution after photobleaching. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 79: 6866–6870 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  41. Hollinshead KER, Parker SJ, Eapen VV, Encarnacion‐Rosado J, Sohn A, Oncu T, Cammer M, Mancias JD, Kimmelman AC (2020) Respiratory supercomplexes promote mitochondrial efficiency and growth in severely hypoxic pancreatic cancer. Cell Rep 33: 108231 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  42. Ikeda K, Shiba S, Horie‐Inoue K, Shimokata K, Inoue S (2013) A stabilizing factor for mitochondrial respiratory supercomplex assembly regulates energy metabolism in muscle. Nat Commun 4: 2147 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  43. Jha P, Wang X, Auwerx J (2016) Analysis of mitochondrial respiratory chain supercomplexes using blue native polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis (BN‐PAGE). Curr Protoc Mouse Biol 6: 1–14 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  44. Jones AJY, Blaza JN, Varghese F, Hirst J (2017) Respiratory complex I in Bos taurus and Paracoccus denitrificans pumps four protons across the membrane for every NADH oxidized. J Biol Chem 292: 4987–4995 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  45. Joseph‐Horne T, Hollomon DW, Wood PM (2001) Fungal respiration: a fusion of standard and alternative components. Biochim Biophys Acta Bioenerg 1504: 179–195 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  46. Jourdain AA, Koppen M, Wydro M, Rodley CD, Lightowlers RN, Chrzanowska‐Lightowlers ZM, Martinou JC (2013) GRSF1 regulates RNA processing in mitochondrial RNA granules. Cell Metab 17: 399–410 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  47. Kaila VRI, Wikström M (2021) Architecture of bacterial respiratory chains. Nat Rev Microbiol 19: 319–330 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  48. Kampjut D, Sazanov LA (2020) The coupling mechanism of mammalian respiratory complex I. Science 370: eabc4209 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  49. Kao WC, Ortmann de Percin Northumberland C, Cheng TC, Ortiz J, Durand A, von Loeffelholz O, Schilling O, Biniossek ML, Klaholz BP, Hunte C (2022) Structural basis for safe and efficient energy conversion in a respiratory supercomplex. Nat Commun 13: 545 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  50. Kinnunen PKJ, Kõiv A, Lehtonen JYA, Rytömaa M, Mustonen P (1994) Lipid dynamics and peripheral interactions of proteins with membrane surfaces. Chem Phys Lipids 73: 181–207 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  51. Klusch N, Dreimann M, Senkler J, Rugen N, Kühlbrandt W, Braun HP (2023) Cryo‐EM structure of the respiratory I + III2 supercomplex from Arabidopsis thaliana at 2 Å resolution. Nat Plants 9: 142–156 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  52. Kravchuk V, Petrova O, Kampjut D, Wojciechowska‐Bason A, Breese Z, Sazanov L (2022) A universal coupling mechanism of respiratory complex I. Nature 609: 808–814 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  53. Lamantea E, Carrara F, Mariotti C, Morandi L, Tiranti V, Zeviani M (2002) A novel nonsense mutation (Q352X) in the mitochondrial cytochrome b gene associated with a combined deficiency of complexes I and III. Neuromuscul Disord 12: 49–52 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  54. Lapuente‐Brun E, Moreno‐Loshuertos R, Aciń‐Pérez R, Latorre‐Pellicer A, Colaś C, Balsa E, Perales‐Clemente E, Quirós PM, Calvo E, Rodríguez‐Hernández MA et al (2013) Supercomplex assembly determines electron flux in the mitochondrial electron transport chain. Science 340: 1567–1570 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  55. Lazarou M, Smith SM, Thorburn DR, Ryan MT, McKenzie M (2009) Assembly of nuclear DNA‐encoded subunits into mitochondrial complex IV, and their preferential integration into supercomplex forms in patient mitochondria. FEBS J 276: 6701–6713 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  56. Letts JA, Sazanov LA (2017) Clarifying the supercomplex: the higher‐order organization of the mitochondrial electron transport chain. Nat Struct Mol Biol 24: 800–808 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  57. Letts JA, Fiedorczuk K, Sazanov LA (2016) The architecture of respiratory supercomplexes. Nature 537: 644–648 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  58. Letts JA, Fiedorczuk K, Degliesposti G, Skehel M, Sazanov LA (2019) Structures of respiratory supercomplex I+III2 reveal functional and conformational crosstalk. Mol Cell 75: 1131–1146.e6 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  59. Linden A, Deckers M, Parfentev I, Pflanz R, Homberg B, Neumann P, Ficner R, Rehling P, Urlaub H (2020) A cross‐linking mass spectrometry approach defines protein interactions in yeast mitochondria. Mol Cell Proteomics 19: 1161–1178 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  60. Lobo‐Jarne T, Ugalde C (2018) Respiratory chain supercomplexes: structures, function and biogenesis. Semin Cell Dev Biol 76: 179–190 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  61. Lobo‐Jarne T, Nývltová E, Pérez‐Pérez R, Timón‐Gómez A, Molinié T, Choi A, Mourier A, Fontanesi F, Ugalde C, Barrientos A (2018) Human COX7A2L regulates complex III biogenesis and promotes supercomplex organization remodeling without affecting mitochondrial bioenergetics. Cell Rep 25: 1786–1799.e4 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  62. Lobo‐Jarne T, Pérez‐Pérez R, Fontanesi F, Timón‐Gómez A, Wittig I, Peñas A, Serrano‐Lorenzo P, García‐Consuegra I, Arenas J, Martín MA et al (2020) Multiple pathways coordinate assembly of human mitochondrial complex IV and stabilization of respiratory supercomplexes. EMBO J 39: e103912 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  63. Lopez‐Fabuel I, Le Douce J, Logan A, James AM, Bonvento G, Murphy MP, Almeida A, Bolaños JP (2016) Complex I assembly into supercomplexes determines differential mitochondrial ROS production in neurons and astrocytes. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 113: 13063–13068 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  64. Maldonado M, Guo F, Letts JA, Carter AP (2021) Atomic structures of respiratory complex III2, complex IV, and supercomplex III2‐IV from vascular plants. Elife 10: 1–34 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  65. Maldonado M, Fan Z, Abe KM, Letts JA (2023) Plant‐specific features of respiratory supercomplex I + III2 from Vigna radiata. Nat Plants 9: 157–168 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  66. Maranzana E, Barbero G, Falasca AI, Lenaz G, Genova ML (2013) Mitochondrial respiratory supercomplex association limits production of reactive oxygen species from complex I. Antioxid Redox Signal 19: 1469–1480 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  67. Marbois B, Gin P, Gulmezian M, Clarke CF (2009) The yeast Coq4 polypeptide organizes a mitochondrial protein complex essential for coenzyme Q biosynthesis. Biochim Biophys Acta Mol Cell Biol Lipids 1791: 69–75 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  68. Milenkovic D, Blaza JN, Larsson NG, Hirst J (2017) The enigma of the respiratory chain supercomplex. Cell Metab 25: 765–776 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  69. Milenkovic D, Misic J, Hevler JF, Molinié T, Chung I, Atanassov I, Li X, Filograna R, Mesaros A, Mourier A et al (2023) Preserved respiratory chain capacity and physiology in mice with profoundly reduced levels of mitochondrial respirasomes. Cell Metab 10.1016/j.cmet.2023.07.015 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  70. Mitchell P (1975) Protonmotive redox mechanism of the cytochrome bc1 complex in the respiratory chain: protonmotive ubiquinone cycle. FEBS Lett 56: 1–6 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  71. Moe A, Di Trani J, Rubinstein JL, Brzezinski P (2021) Cryo‐EM structure and kinetics reveal electron transfer by 2D diffusion of cytochrome c in the yeast III‐IV respiratory supercomplex. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 118: e2021157118 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  72. Moreno‐Lastres D, Fontanesi F, García‐Consuegra I, Martín MA, Arenas J, Barrientos A, Ugalde C (2012) Mitochondrial complex I plays an essential role in human respirasome assembly. Cell Metab 15: 324–335 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  73. Mourier A, Matic S, Ruzzenente B, Larsson NG, Milenkovic D (2014) The respiratory chain supercomplex organization is independent of COX7A2L isoforms. Cell Metab 20: 1069–1075 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  74. Mühleip A, Flygaard RK, Baradaran R, Haapanen O, Gruhl T, Victor T, Maréchal A, Sharma V, Amunts A (2023) Structural basis of mitochondrial membrane bending by the I – II – III 2 – IV 2 supercomplex. Nature 615: 934–938 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  75. Murphy MP (2009) How mitochondria produce reactive oxygen species. Biochem J 417: 1–13 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  76. Nagao T, Shintani Y, Hayashi T, Kioka H, Kato H, Nishida Y, Yamazaki S, Tsukamoto O, Yashirogi S, Yazawa I et al (2020) Higd1a improves respiratory function in the models of mitochondrial disorder. FASEB J 34: 1859–1871 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  77. Osyczka A, Moser CC, Dutton PL (2005) Fixing the Q cycle. Trends Biochem Sci 30: 176–182 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  78. Ott M, Zhivotovsky B, Orrenius S (2007) Role of cardiolipin in cytochrome c release from mitochondria. Cell Death Differ 14: 1243–1247 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  79. Pérez‐Mejías G, Guerra‐Castellano A, Díaz‐Quintana A, De la Rosa MA, Díaz‐Moreno I (2019) Cytochrome c: surfing off of the mitochondrial membrane on the tops of complexes III and IV. Comput Struct Biotechnol J 17: 654–660 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  80. Pérez‐Pérez R, Lobo‐Jarne T, Milenkovic D, Mourier A, Bratic A, García‐Bartolomé A, Fernández‐Vizarra E, Cadenas S, Delmiro A, García‐Consuegra I et al (2016) COX7A2L is a mitochondrial complex III binding protein that stabilizes the III2+IV supercomplex without affecting respirasome formation. Cell Rep 16: 2387–2398 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  81. Pfeiffer K, Gohil V, Stuart RA, Hunte C, Brandt U, Greenberg ML, Schägger H (2003) Cardiolipin stabilizes respiratory chain supercomplexes. J Biol Chem 278: 52873–52880 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  82. Protasoni M, Pérez‐Pérez R, Lobo‐Jarne T, Harbour ME, Ding S, Peñas A, Diaz F, Moraes CT, Fearnley IM, Zeviani M et al (2020) Respiratory supercomplexes act as a platform for complex III‐mediated maturation of human mitochondrial complexes I and IV. EMBO J 39: e102817 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  83. Ragan CI, Heron C (1978) The interaction between mitochondrial NADH‐ubiquinone oxidoreductase and ubiquinol‐cytochrome c oxidoreductase. Evidence for stoicheiometric association. Biochem J 174: 783–790 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  84. Rathore S, Berndtsson J, Marin‐Buera L, Conrad J, Carroni M, Brzezinski P, Ott M (2019) Cryo‐EM structure of the yeast respiratory supercomplex. Nat Struct Mol Biol 26: 50–57 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  85. Rytomaa M, Kinnunen PKJ (1995) Reversibility of the binding of cytochrome c to liposomes. Implications for lipid‐protein interactions. J Biol Chem 270: 3197–3202 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  86. Schägger H, Pfeiffer K (2000) Supercomplexes in the respiratory chains of yeast and mammalian mitochondria. EMBO J 19: 1777–1783 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  87. Schägger H, Pfeiffer K (2001) The ratio of oxidative phosphorylation complexes I–V in bovine heart mitochondria and the composition of respiratory chain supercomplexes. J Biol Chem 276: 37861–37867 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  88. Schulte U, den Brave F, Haupt A, Gupta A, Song J, Müller CS, Engelke J, Mishra S, Mårtensson C, Ellenrieder L et al (2023) Mitochondrial complexome reveals quality‐control pathways of protein import. Nature 614: 153–159 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  89. Shiba S, Ikeda K, Horie‐Inoue K, Nakayama A, Tanaka T, Inoue S (2017) Deficiency of COX7RP, a mitochondrial supercomplex assembly promoting factor, lowers blood glucose level in mice. Sci Rep 7: 7606 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  90. Singh AP, Salvatori R, Aftab W, Aufschnaiter A, Carlström A, Forne I, Imhof A, Ott M (2020) Molecular connectivity of mitochondrial gene expression and OXPHOS biogenesis. Mol Cell 79: 1051–1065.e10 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  91. Sousa JS, Mills DJ, Vonck J, Kühlbrandt W (2016) Functional asymmetry and electron flow in the bovine respirasome. Elife 5: e21290 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  92. Stefely JA, Pagliarini DJ (2017) Biochemistry of mitochondrial coenzyme Q biosynthesis. Trends Biochem Sci 42: 824–843 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  93. Stephan K, Ott M (2020) Timing of dimerization of the bc1 complex during mitochondrial respiratory chain assembly. Biochim Biophys Acta Bioenerg 1861: 148177 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  94. Strogolova V, Furness A, Robb‐McGrath M, Garlich J, Stuart RA (2012) Rcf1 and Rcf2, members of the hypoxia‐induced gene 1 protein family, are critical components of the mitochondrial cytochrome bc 1 ‐cytochrome c oxidase supercomplex. Mol Cell Biol 32: 1363–1373 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  95. Stuchebrukhov A, Schäfer J, Berg J, Brzezinski P (2020) Kinetic advantage of forming respiratory supercomplexes. Biochim Biophys Acta Bioenerg 1861: 148193 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  96. Su CH, McStay GP, Tzagoloff A (2014) The Cox3p assembly module of yeast cytochrome oxidase. Mol Biol Cell 25: 965–976 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  97. Sun D, Li B, Qiu R, Fang H, Lyu J (2016) Cell type‐specific modulation of respiratory chain supercomplex organization. Int J Mol Sci 17: 926 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  98. Timón‐Gómez A, Garlich J, Stuart RA, Ugalde C, Barrientos A (2020) Distinct roles of mitochondrial HIGD1A and HIGD2A in respiratory complex and supercomplex biogenesis. Cell Rep 31: 107607 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  99. Timón‐Gómez A, Scharr AL, Wong NY, Ni E, Roy A, Liu M, Chau J, Lampert JL, Hireed H, Kim NS et al (2022) Tissue‐specific mitochondrial HIGD1C promotes oxygen sensitivity in carotid body chemoreceptors. Elife 11: e78915 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  100. Toth A, Aufschnaiter A, Fedotovskaya O, Dawitz H, Ädelroth P, Büttner S, Ott M (2020) Membrane‐tethering of cytochrome c accelerates regulated cell death in yeast. Cell Death Dis 11: 1–16 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  101. Trouillard M, Meunier B, Rappaport F (2011) Questioning the functional relevance of mitochondrial supercomplexes by time‐resolved analysis of the respiratory chain. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 108: E1027 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  102. Vercellino I, Sazanov LA (2021) Structure and assembly of the mammalian mitochondrial supercomplex CIII2CIV. Nature 598: 364–367 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  103. Vercellino I, Sazanov LA (2022) The assembly, regulation and function of the mitochondrial respiratory chain. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol 23: 141–161 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  104. Vukotic M, Oeljeklaus S, Wiese S, Vögtle FN, Meisinger C, Meyer HE, Zieseniss A, Katschinski DM, Jans DC, Jakobs S et al (2012) Rcf1 mediates cytochrome oxidase assembly and respirasome formation, revealing heterogeneity of the enzyme complex. Cell Metab 15: 336–347 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  105. Wikstrom MKF (1977) Proton pump coupled to cytochrome c oxidase in mitochondria. Nature 266: 271–273 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  106. Williams EG, Wu Y, Jha P, Dubuis S, Blattmann P, Argmann CA, Houten SM, Amariuta T, Wolski W, Zamboni N et al (2016) Systems proteomics of liver mitochondria function. Science 352: aad0189 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  107. Wu M, Gu J, Guo R, Huang Y, Yang M (2016) Structure of mammalian respiratory supercomplex I1III2IV1. Cell 167: 1598–1609.e10 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  108. Zhou S, Pettersson P, Huang J, Sjöholm J, Sjöstrand D, Pomès R, Högbom M, Brzezinski P, Mäler L, Ädelroth P (2018) Solution NMR structure of yeast Rcf1, a protein involved in respiratory supercomplex formation. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 115: 3048–3053 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  109. Zhou L, Maldonado M, Padavannil A, Guo F, Letts JA (2022) Structures of Tetrahymena's respiratory chain reveal the diversity of eukaryotic core metabolism. Science 376: 831–839 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from EMBO Reports are provided here courtesy of Nature Publishing Group

RESOURCES