In 2008 we published the first set of guidelines for standardizing research in autophagy. Since then, research on this topic has continued to accelerate, and many new scientists have entered the field. Our knowledge base and relevant new technologies have also been expanding. Accordingly, it is important to update these guidelines for monitoring autophagy in different organisms. Various reviews have described the range of assays that have been used for this purpose. Nevertheless, there continues to be confusion regarding acceptable methods to measure autophagy, especially in multicellular eukaryotes. A key point that needs to be emphasized is that there is a difference between measurements that monitor the numbers or volume of autophagic elements (e.g., autophagosomes or autolysosomes) at any stage of the autophagic process vs. those that measure flux through the autophagy pathway (i.e., the complete process); thus, a block in macroautophagy that results in autophagosome accumulation needs to be differentiated from stimuli that result in increased autophagic activity, defined as increased autophagy induction coupled with increased delivery to, and degradation within, lysosomes (in most higher eukaryotes and some protists such as Dictyostelium) or the vacuole (in plants and fungi). In other words, it is especially important that investigators new to the field understand that the appearance of more autophagosomes does not necessarily equate with more autophagy. In fact, in many cases, autophagosomes accumulate because of a block in trafficking to lysosomes without a concomitant change in autophagosome biogenesis, whereas an increase in autolysosomes may reflect a reduction in degradative activity. Here, we present a set of guidelines for the selection and interpretation of methods for use by investigators who aim to examine macroautophagy and related processes, as well as for reviewers who need to provide realistic and reasonable critiques of papers that are focused on these processes. These guidelines are not meant to be a formulaic set of rules, because the appropriate assays depend in part on the question being asked and the system being used. In addition, we emphasize that no individual assay is guaranteed to be the most appropriate one in every situation, and we strongly recommend the use of multiple assays to monitor autophagy. In these guidelines, we consider these various methods of assessing autophagy and what information can, or cannot, be obtained from them. Finally, by discussing the merits and limits of particular autophagy assays, we hope to encourage technical innovation in the field

[Abstract unavailable

Research in autophagy continues to accelerate,(1) and as a result many new scientists are entering the field. Accordingly, it is important to establish a standard set of criteria for monitoring macroautophagy in different organisms. Recent reviews have described the range of assays that have been used for this purpose.(2,3) There are many useful and convenient methods that can be used to monitor macroautophagy in yeast, but relatively few in other model systems, and there is much confusion regarding acceptable methods to measure macroautophagy in higher eukaryotes. A key point that needs to be emphasized is that there is a difference between measurements that monitor the numbers of autophagosomes versus those that measure flux through the autophagy pathway; thus, a block in macroautophagy that results in autophagosome accumulation needs to be differentiated from fully functional autophagy that includes delivery to, and degradation within, lysosomes (in most higher eukaryotes) or the vacuole (in plants and fungi). Here, we present a set of guidelines for the selection and interpretation of the methods that can be used by investigators who are attempting to examine macroautophagy and related processes, as well as by reviewers who need to provide realistic and reasonable critiques of papers that investigate these processes. This set of guidelines is not meant to be a formulaic set of rules, because the appropriate assays depend in part on the question being asked and the system being used. In addition, we emphasize that no individual assay is guaranteed to be the most appropriate one in every situation, and we strongly recommend the use of multiple assays to verify an autophagic response.

No abstract

No abstract

Autophagy is a core molecular pathway for the preservation of cellular and organismal homeostasis. Pharmacological and genetic interventions impairing autophagy responses promote or aggravate disease in a plethora of experimental models. Consistently, mutations in autophagy-related processes cause severe human pathologies. Here, we review and discuss preclinical data linking autophagy dysfunction to the pathogenesis of major human disorders including cancer as well as cardiovascular, neurodegenerative, metabolic, pulmonary, renal, infectious, musculoskeletal, and ocular disorders.

induce mitophagy to a degree comparable with that elicited by 6-OHDA, while constitutively active ERK2 (ERK2-CA) had a greater effect. We developed green fluorescent protein (GFP) fusion constructs of WT, CA, and kinase-deficient (KD) ERK2 to study the role of ERK2 localization in regulating mitophagy and cell death. Under basal conditions, cells transfected with GFP-ERK2-WT or GFP-ERK2-CA, but not GFP-ERK2-KD, displayed discrete cytoplasmic ERK2 granules of which a significant fraction colocalized with mitochondria and markers of autophagolysosomal maturation. The colocalizing GFP-ERK2/mitochondria granules are further increased by 6-OHDA and undergo autophagic degradation, as bafilomycin-A, an inhibitor of autolysosomal degradation, robustly increased their detection. Interestingly, increasing ERK2-WT or ERK2-CA expression was sufficient to promote comparable levels of macroautophagy as assessed by analysis of the autophagy marker microtubule-associated protein 1 light chain 3 (LC3). In contrast, the level of mitophagy was more tightly correlated with ERK activity levels, potentially explained by the greater localization of ERK2-CA to mitochondria compared to ERK2-WT. These data indicate that mitochondrial localization of ERK2 activity is sufficient to recapitulate the effects of 6-OHDA on mitophagy and autophagic cell death.

Reactive oxygen species, including superoxide, generally are considered neurotoxic molecules whose effects can be alleviated by antioxidants. Different from this view, we show that scavenging of superoxide with an antioxidant enzyme is associated with deficits in hippocampal long-term potentiation (LTP), a putative neural substrate of memory, and hippocampal-mediated memory function. Using transgenic mice that overexpress extracellular superoxide dismutase (EC-SOD), a superoxide scavenger, we found that LTP was impaired in hippocampal area CA1 despite normal LTP in area CA3. The LTP impairment in area CA1 could be reversed by inhibition of EC-SOD. In addition, we found that EC-SOD transgenic mice exhibited impaired long-term memory of fear conditioning to contextual cues despite exhibiting normal short-term memory of the conditioning experience. These findings strongly suggest that superoxide, rather than being considered exclusively a neurotoxic molecule, should also be considered a signaling molecule necessary for normal neuronal function.