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

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.

Aberrant activation of the mammalian target of rapamycin complex 1 (mTORC1) is a common molecular event in a variety of pathological settings, including genetic tumor syndromes, cancer, and obesity. However, the cell intrinsic consequences of mTORC1 activation remain poorly defined. Through a combination of unbiased genomic, metabolomic, and bioinformatic approaches, we demonstrate that mTORC1 activation is sufficient to stimulate specific metabolic pathways, including glycolysis, the oxidative arm of the pentose phosphate pathway, and de novo lipid biosynthesis. This is achieved through the activation of a transcriptional program affecting metabolic gene targets of hypoxia-inducible factor (HIF1α) and sterol regulatory element-binding protein (SREBP1 and SREBP2). We find that SREBP1 and 2 promote proliferation downstream of mTORC1, and the activation of these transcription factors is mediated by S6K1. Therefore, in addition to promoting protein synthesis, mTORC1 activates specific bioenergetic and anabolic cellular processes that are likely to contribute to human physiology and disease.

SUMMARY Amino acids are required for activation of the mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) kinase which regulates protein translation, cell growth, and autophagy. Cell surface transporters that allow amino acids to enter the cell and signal to mTOR are unknown. We show that cellular uptake of L-glutamine and its subsequent rapid efflux in the presence of essential amino acids (EAA) is the rate-limiting step that activates mTOR. L-glutamine uptake is regulated by SLC1A5 and loss of SLC1A5 function inhibits cell growth and activates autophagy. The molecular basis for L-glutamine sensitivity is due to SLC7A5/SLC3A2, a bidirectional transporter that regulates the simultaneous efflux of L-glutamine out of cells and transport of L-leucine/EAA into cells. Certain tumor cell lines with high basal cellular levels of L-glutamine bypass the need for L-glutamine uptake and are primed for mTOR activation. Thus, L-glutamine flux regulates mTOR, translation and autophagy to coordinate cell growth and proliferation.

Over the past two decades, the molecular machinery that underlies autophagic responses has been characterized with ever increasing precision in multiple model organisms. Moreover, it has become clear that autophagy and autophagy-related processes have profound implications for human pathophysiology. However, considerable confusion persists about the use of appropriate terms to indicate specific types of autophagy and some components of the autophagy machinery, which may have detrimental effects on the expansion of the field. Driven by the overt recognition of such a potential obstacle, a panel of leading experts in the field attempts here to define several autophagy-related terms based on specific biochemical features. The ultimate objective of this collaborative exchange is to formulate recommendations that facilitate the dissemination of knowledge within and outside the field of autophagy research.