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

No abstract

Vacuole membrane protein 1 (Vmp1) is membrane protein of unknown molecular function that has been associated with pancreatitis and cancer. The social amoeba Dictyostelium discoideum has a vmp1-related gene that we identified previously in a functional genomic study. Loss-of-function of this gene leads to a severe phenotype that compromises Dictyostelium growth and development. The expression of mammalian Vmp1 in a vmp1؊ Dictyostelium mutant complemented the phenotype, suggesting a functional conservation of the protein among evolutionarily distant species and highlights Dictyostelium as a valid experimental system to address the function of this gene. Dictyostelium Vmp1 is an endoplasmic reticulum protein necessary for the integrity of this organelle. Cells deficient in Vmp1 display pleiotropic defects in the secretory pathway and organelle biogenesis. The contractile vacuole, which is necessary to survive under hypoosmotic conditions, is not functional in the mutant. The structure of the Golgi apparatus, the function of the endocytic pathway and conventional protein secretion are also affected in these cells. Transmission electron microscopy of vmp1 ؊ cells showed the accumulation of autophagic features that suggests a role of Vmp1 in macroautophagy. In addition to these defects observed at the vegetative stage, the onset of multicellular development and early developmental gene expression are also compromised.