Structural rather than catalytic role for mitochondrial respiratory chain supercomplexes

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

In their manuscript, Brischigliaro et al. show that the disruption of respiratory complex assembly results in Drosophila melanogaster results in the accumulation of respiratory supercomplexes. Further, they show that the change in the supercomplex abundance does not impact respiratory function suggesting that the main role of supercomplex formation is structural. Overall, the manuscript is well written and the results and conclusion are supported. The D. melanogaster system, in which the abundance of supercomplexes can be altered through the genetic disruption of the assembly of the individual complexes, will be important for the field to discover the role of the supercomplexes. This manuscript will be of broad interest to the field of mitochondrial bioenergetics. The findings are valuable and the evidence is convincing.

Strengths:

The system developed in which the relative levels of SCs can be varied will be extremely useful for studying SC physiology.

The experiments are clearly described and interpreted.

Weaknesses:

The statement in the abstract regarding low amounts of SCs in "insect tissues" needs further support or should be narrowed. I am only aware of detailed characterization of the mitochondrial SC composition from D. melanogaster, which is insufficient to make a broad statement about the large and diverse category of insects. This should be rewritten.

In the introduction (line 76) and discussion (line 283), the authors reference the CoQ binding sites in CI and CIII2 being "too far apart" to allow for substrate channeling. The distance between the active sites, though significant, is insufficient to rule out substrate channeling. A stronger argument arises from the fact that the CoQ sites of both CI and CIII2 are open to the membrane and that there are no clear barriers for the free exchange of CoQ with the membrane pool.

Line 195, the slight elevation in CI amounts referred to here, does not appear to be statistically significant and therefore should not be discussed a being altered relative to the control.

Figure 4H, the assignments of the observed larger bands seem incorrect. The largest band (currently assigned as SC I1+III2+IV1) represents too large of a shift for only the addition of CIV and the band currently assigned at SC I1+III2 appears to also contain CIV. The identity of these bands should be reevaluated and additional experiments are needed to definitively prove their identity. This uncertainty should be addressed experimentally or made more explicit in the text.

Line 302, the authors state that the structural basis for less SC in D. melanogaster is "due to a more stable association of the NDUFA11 subunit..." However, this would not result is a less stable SC association and only explains why NDUFA11 is more stably associated with CI in the absence of CIII2. The more likely structural reason for the observation of less SC in D. melanogaster is the N-terminal truncation of Dm-NDUFB4 relative to mammalian NDUFB4. This truncation results in the loss of a major SC interaction site between CI and CIII2 in the matrix.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

Respiratory chain complexes assemble in higher-ordered structures termed supercomplexes or respirasomes. The functional significance of these assemblies is currently investigated, there are two main hypothesis tested, namely that supercomplexes provide kinetic advantages or structural stability. Here, the authors use the fruitfly to reveal that, while the respiratoy chain in the organism normally does not form higher-order assemblies, it does so under conditions when their assembly is impaired. Because the rather moderate increase in supercomplex formation does not change oxygen consumption stimulated by CI or CII substrate, the authors conclude that supercomplex formation has more a structural than a functional role. The main strength of this work is that the technical quality of the experiments is high and that the authors induced defects in respiratory chain assembly through sets of well-controlled genetic models. The obtained data are mostly descriptive using standard approaches and are very well executed. The authors claim that their experiments allow to conclude that the role of supercomplex formation is restricted to a structural role and, hence, exclude a function directly related to electron transport efficiency. However, while the authors can show convincingly that supercomplexes form in the mutants, but not in the wild type, their main claim is not well supported by data and both the structural mechanism of supercompelx formation and their significance remain unknown. While the supercomplex formation observed only in mitochondrial mutants per se is interesting, it would be good to great to define structural aspects of supercomplex formation and their potential impact on the stability of the respiratory chain complexes in these mutants.