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

SUMMARY Ca2+ dynamics and oxidative signaling are fundamental mechanisms for mitochondrial bioenergetics and cell function. The MCU complex is the major pathway by which these signals are integrated in mitochondria. Whether and how these coactive elements interact with MCU has not been established. As an approach towards understanding the regulation of MCU channel by oxidative milieu, we adapted inflammatory and hypoxia models. We identified the conserved cysteine 97 to be the only reactive thiol in human MCU that undergoes S-glutathionylation. Furthermore, biochemical, structural and superresolution imaging analysis revealed that MCU oxidation promotes MCU higher-order oligomer formation. Both oxidation and mutation of MCU Cys-97 exhibited persistent MCU channel activity with higher [Ca2+]m uptake rate, elevated mROS and enhanced [Ca2+]m overload-induced cell death. In contrast, these effects were largely independent of MCU interaction with its regulators. These findings reveal a distinct functional role for Cys-97 in ROS sensing and regulation of MCU activity.

Oxidant stress induces constitutive calcium entry by tacking glutathiones onto the Orai CRAC channel activator STIM1.

We report the stoichiometric phosphorylation of an inositol 1,4,5-trisphosphate receptor-binding protein from rat brain by the cAMP-dependent protein kinase but not by protein kinase C or Ca2+/calmodulin-dependent protein kinase. This phosphorylation event does not markedly alter [3H]inositol 1,4,5-trisphosphate-binding characteristics. However, inositol 1,4,5-trisphosphate is only 10% as potent in releasing 45Ca2I from phosphorylated, as compared with native, cerebellar microsomes. Phosphorylation of the inositol 1,4,5-trisphosphate-binding protein by the cAMP-dependent protein kinase may provide a biochemical substrate for secondmessenger cross talk.The inositol phospholipid and adenosine 3',5'-cyclic monophosphate (cAMP) systems are major second messengers for effects of neurotransmitters, hormones, and growth factors (1-4). Several lines of evidence imply the existence of cross talk between these two second messengers (5-7). Many