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

No abstract

Neuropeptides are small protein molecules (composed of 3-100 amino-acid residues) that have been localized to discrete cell populations of central and peripheral neurons. In most instances, they coexist with low-molecular-weight neurotransmitters within the same neurons. At the subcellular level, neuropeptides are selectively stored, singularly or more frequently in combinations, within large granular vesicles. Release occurs through mechanisms different from classical calcium-dependent exocytosis at the synaptic cleft, and thus they account for slow synaptic and/or non-synaptic communication in neurons. Neuropeptide co-storage and coexistence can be observed throughout the central nervous system and are responsible for a series of functional interactions that occur at both pre- and post-synaptic levels. Thus, the subcellular site(s) of storage and sorting mechanisms into different neuronal compartments are crucial to the mode of release and the function of neuropeptides as neuronal messengers.

Ghrelin, an orexigenic peptide synthesized by endocrine cells of the gastric mucosa, is released in the bloodstream in response to a negative energetic status. Since discovery, the hypothalamus was identified as the main source of ghrelin in the CNS, and effects of the peptide have been mainly observed in this area of the brain. In recent years, an increasing number of studies have reported ghrelin synthesis and effects in specific populations of neurons also outside the hypothalamus. Thus, ghrelin activity has been described in midbrain, hindbrain, hippocampus, and spinal cord. The spectrum of functions and biological effects produced by the peptide on central neurons is remarkably wide and complex. It ranges from modulation of membrane excitability, to control of neurotransmitter release, neuronal gene expression, and neuronal survival and proliferation. There is not at present a general consensus concerning the source of ghrelin acting on central neurons. Whereas it is widely accepted that the hypothalamus represents the most important endogenous source of the hormone in CNS, the existence of extra-hypothalamic ghrelin-synthesizing neurons is still controversial. In addition, circulating ghrelin can theoretically be another natural ligand for central ghrelin receptors. This paper gives an overview on the distribution of ghrelin and its receptor across the CNS and critically analyses the data available so far as regarding the effects of ghrelin on central neurotransmission.