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

Identification of protein phosphorylation sites with their cognate protein kinases (PKs) is a key step to delineate molecular dynamics and plasticity underlying a variety of cellular processes. Although nearly 10 kinase-specific prediction programs have been developed, numerous PKs have been casually classified into subgroups without a standard rule. For large scale predictions, the false positive rate has also never been addressed. In this work, we adopted a well established rule to classify PKs into a hierarchical structure with four levels, including group, family, subfamily, and single PK. In addition, we developed a simple approach to estimate the theoretically maximal false positive rates. The on-line service and local packages of the GPS (Group-based Prediction System) 2.0 were implemented in Java with the modified version of the Group-based Phosphorylation Scoring algorithm. As the first stand alone software for predicting phosphorylation, GPS 2.0 can predict kinase-specific phosphorylation sites for 408 human PKs in hierarchy. A large scale prediction of more than 13,000 mammalian phosphorylation sites by GPS 2.0 was exhibited with great performance and remarkable accuracy. Using Aurora-B as an example, we also conducted a proteome-wide search and provided systematic prediction of Aurora-B-specific substrates including protein-protein interaction information. Thus, the GPS 2.0 is a useful tool for predicting protein phosphorylation sites and their cognate kinases and is freely available on line. Molecular & Cellular Proteomics 7:1598 -1608, 2008.Post-translational modification of proteins provides reversible means to regulate the function of a protein in space and time. Recently computational studies of post-translational modifications (PTMs) 1 of proteins have attracted much attention. Various PTMs regulate the functions and dynamics of proteins through specific modifications and are implicated in almost all cellular processes. In contrast to the labor-intensive and expensive experimental methods, in silico prediction of PTM-specific substrates with their sites has emerged as a popular alternative approach. To date, more than 32 computational prediction tools have been developed (1). In the field of computational PTMs, protein phosphorylation is the most studied example. To predict general phosphorylation sites, several tools have been developed, such as DISPHOS (2), NetPhos (3), NetPhosYeast (4), and GANNPhos (5). As the need for performing large scale predictions and constructing reliable phosphorylation networks evolves, robust prediction of kinase-specific phosphorylation sites has become necessary and challenging. For example, Neuberger et al. ) developed NetworKIN and constructed a human phosphorylation network, which has gained diversified interest not only for human phosphorylation network prediction but also for general implication in cell biology. To predict kinase-specific phosphorylation sites, several on-line Web services have been implemented using various algorithms, including our previ...

Protein palmitoylation is an essential post-translational lipid modification of proteins, and reversibly orchestrates a variety of cellular processes. Identification of palmitoylated proteins with their sites is the foundation for understanding molecular mechanisms and regulatory roles of palmitoylation. Contrasting to the labor-intensive and time-consuming experimental approaches, in silico prediction of palmitoylation sites has attracted much attention as a popular strategy. In this work, we updated our previous CSS-Palm into version 2.0. An updated clustering and scoring strategy (CSS) algorithm was employed with great improvement. The leave-one-out validation and 4-, 6-, 8- and 10-fold cross-validations were adopted to evaluate the prediction performance of CSS-Palm 2.0. Also, an additional new data set not included in training was used to test the robustness of CSS-Palm 2.0. By comparison, the performance of CSS-Palm was much better than previous tools. As an application, we performed a small-scale annotation of palmitoylated proteins in budding yeast. The online service and local packages of CSS-Palm 2.0 were freely available at: http://bioinformatics.lcd-ustc.org/css_palm.