Response to Ghiselli F et al. (2018).

Abstract

I thank the authors (Ghiselli et al . [1]) for their interesting comments regarding my article [2]. They indeed further clarified some important points regarding both uniparental organelle inheritance (UPI), which we encounter almost exclusively as strictly maternal inheritance (SMI) and doubly uniparental inheritance (DUI) as well as ‘role-reversal' of F-type mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA). Their data again illustrate the fascinating variety in mitochondrial inheritance. The authors critically discuss their data to ask whether these support John Allen's ‘division of labour' hypothesis [3], where male gametes maximize energy production for competitive advantages in motility, thus damaging mtDNA by mutagenic reactive oxygen species (ROS), coming from oxidative phosphorylation (OXPHOS). Non-motile female gametes, on the other hand, repress OXPHOS, keeping their mtDNA pristine. They ‘clarify two discussion points: (i) the exceptions to the strictly maternal inheritance (SMI) of mitochondria and (ii) the claim that mtDNA is highly mutated in sperm and the supposed causal relationship between such damage and OXPHOS.' Before responding to their arguments, it is worthwhile to very briefly summarize a possible …