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

To maintain quality control in cells, mechanisms distinguish among improperly folded peptides, mature and functional proteins, and proteins to be targeted for degradation. The molecular chaperones, including heat-shock protein Hsp90, have the ability to recognize misfolded proteins and assist in their conversion to a functional conformation. Disruption of Hsp90 heterocomplexes by the Hsp90 inhibitor geldanamycin leads to substrate degradation through the ubiquitin-proteasome pathway, implicating this system in protein triage decisions. We previously identified CHIP (carboxyl terminus of Hsc70-interacting protein) to be an interaction partner of Hsc70 (ref. 4). CHIP also interacts directly with a tetratricopeptide repeat acceptor site of Hsp90, incorporating into Hsp90 heterocomplexes and eliciting release of the regulatory cofactor p23. Here we show that CHIP abolishes the steroid-binding activity and transactivation potential of the glucocorticoid receptor, a well-characterized Hsp90 substrate, even though it has little effect on its synthesis. Instead, CHIP induces ubiquitylation of the glucocorticoid receptor and degradation through the proteasome. By remodelling Hsp90 heterocomplexes to favour substrate degradation, CHIP modulates protein triage decisions that regulate the balance between protein folding and degradation for chaperone substrates.

How are biological structures maintained in a cellular environment that constantly threatens protein integrity? Here we elucidate proteostasis mechanisms affecting the Z disk, a protein assembly essential for actin anchoring in striated muscles, which is subjected to mechanical, thermal, and oxidative stress during contraction [1]. Based on the characterization of the Drosophila melanogaster cochaperone Starvin (Stv), we define a conserved chaperone machinery required for Z disk maintenance. Instead of keeping Z disk proteins in a folded conformation, this machinery facilitates the degradation of damaged components, such as filamin, through chaperone-assisted selective autophagy (CASA). Stv and its mammalian ortholog BAG-3 coordinate the activity of Hsc70 and the small heat shock protein HspB8 during disposal that is initiated by the chaperone-associated ubiquitin ligase CHIP and the autophagic ubiquitin adaptor p62. CASA is thus distinct from chaperone-mediated autophagy, previously shown to facilitate the ubiquitin-independent, direct translocation of a client across the lysosomal membrane [2]. Impaired CASA results in Z disk disintegration and progressive muscle weakness in flies, mice, and men. Our findings reveal the importance of chaperone-assisted degradation for the preservation of cellular structures and identify muscle as a tissue that highly relies on an intact proteostasis network, thereby shedding light on diverse myopathies and aging.

Therapeutic efforts to restore biosynthetic processing of the cystic fibrosis transmembrane conductance regulator lacking the F508 residue (ΔF508CFTR) are hampered by ubiquitin-dependent lysosomal degradation of nonnative, rescued ΔF508CFTR from the plasma membrane. Here, functional small interfering RNA screens revealed the contribution of chaperones, cochaperones, and ubiquitin-conjugating and -ligating enzymes to the elimination of unfolded CFTR from the cell surface, as part of a peripheral protein quality-control system. Ubiquitination of nonnative CFTR was required for efficient internalization and lysosomal degradation. This peripheral protein quality-control mechanism probably participates in the preservation of cellular homeostasis by degrading damaged plasma membrane proteins that have escaped from the endoplasmic reticulum quality control or are generated by environmental stresses in situ.

Bag (Bcl2-associated athanogene) domains occur in a class of cofactors of the eukaryotic chaperone 70-kilodalton heat shock protein (Hsp70) family. Binding of the Bag domain to the Hsp70 adenosine triphosphatase (ATPase) domain promotes adenosine 5'-triphosphate-dependent release of substrate from Hsp70 in vitro. In a 1.9 angstrom crystal structure of a complex with the ATPase of the 70-kilodalton heat shock cognate protein (Hsc70), the Bag domain forms a three-helix bundle, inducing a conformational switch in the ATPase that is incompatible with nucleotide binding. The same switch is observed in the bacterial Hsp70 homolog DnaK upon binding of the structurally unrelated nucleotide exchange factor GrpE. Thus, functional convergence has allowed proteins with different architectures to trigger a conserved conformational shift in Hsp70 that leads to nucleotide exchange.

The Hsc70-interacting protein Hip, a tetratricopeptide repeat protein, participates in the regulation of the eukaryotic 70 kDa heat shock cognate Hsc70. One Hip oligomer binds the ATPase domains of at least two Hsc70 molecules dependent on activation of the Hsc70 ATPase by Hsp40. While hydrolysis remains the rate-limiting step in the ATPase cycle, Hip stabilizes the ADP state of Hsc70 that has a high affinity for substrate protein. Through its own chaperone activity, Hip may contribute to the interaction of Hsc70 with various target proteins. We propose a mechanism for the regulation of eukaryotic Hsc70 that is distinct from that of bacterial Hsp70. The Hsc70/Hsp40/Hip system is apparently independent of a GrpE-like nucleotide exchange factor.

The ubiquitin domain protein BAG-1 and the CHIP ubiquitin ligase can cooperate to shift the activity of the Hsc/Hsp70 chaperone system from protein folding to degradation. The chaperone cofactors thus act as key regulators to influence protein quality control.