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

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.

No abstract

Systems for protein degradation are essential for tight control of the inflammatory immune response. Autophagy, a bulk degradation system that delivers cytoplasmic constituents into autolysosomes, controls degradation of long-lived proteins, insoluble protein aggregates and invading microbes, and is suggested to be involved in the regulation of inflammation. However, the mechanism underlying the regulation of inflammatory response by autophagy is poorly understood. Here we show that Atg16L1 (autophagy-related 16-like 1), which is implicated in Crohn's disease, regulates endotoxin-induced inflammasome activation in mice. Atg16L1-deficiency disrupts the recruitment of the Atg12-Atg5 conjugate to the isolation membrane, resulting in a loss of microtubule-associated protein 1 light chain 3 (LC3) conjugation to phosphatidylethanolamine. Consequently, both autophagosome formation and degradation of long-lived proteins are severely impaired in Atg16L1-deficient cells. Following stimulation with lipopolysaccharide, a ligand for Toll-like receptor 4 (refs 8, 9), Atg16L1-deficient macrophages produce high amounts of the inflammatory cytokines IL-1beta and IL-18. In lipopolysaccharide-stimulated macrophages, Atg16L1-deficiency causes Toll/IL-1 receptor domain-containing adaptor inducing IFN-beta (TRIF)-dependent activation of caspase-1, leading to increased production of IL-1beta. Mice lacking Atg16L1 in haematopoietic cells are highly susceptible to dextran sulphate sodium-induced acute colitis, which is alleviated by injection of anti-IL-1beta and IL-18 antibodies, indicating the importance of Atg16L1 in the suppression of intestinal inflammation. These results demonstrate that Atg16L1 is an essential component of the autophagic machinery responsible for control of the endotoxin-induced inflammatory immune response.

Autophagy is a dynamic membrane phenomenon for bulk protein degradation in the lysosome/vacuole. Apg8/Aut7 is an essential factor for autophagy in yeast. We previously found that the carboxy-terminal arginine of nascent Apg8 is removed by Apg4/Aut2 protease, leaving a glycine residue at the C terminus. Apg8 is then converted to a form (Apg8-X) that is tightly bound to the membrane. Here we report a new mode of protein lipidation. Apg8 is covalently conjugated to phosphatidylethanolamine through an amide bond between the C-terminal glycine and the amino group of phosphatidylethanolamine. This lipidation is mediated by a ubiquitination-like system. Apg8 is a ubiquitin-like protein that is activated by an E1 protein, Apg7 (refs 7, 8), and is transferred subsequently to the E2 enzymes Apg3/Aut1 (ref. 9). Apg7 activates two different ubiquitin-like proteins, Apg12 (ref. 10) and Apg8, and assigns them to specific E2 enzymes, Apg10 (ref. 11) and Apg3, respectively. These reactions are necessary for the formation of Apg8-phosphatidylethanolamine. This lipidation has an essential role in membrane dynamics during autophagy.

Autophagy is a tightly regulated intracellular bulk degradation/recycling system that has fundamental roles in cellular homeostasis. Autophagy is initiated by isolation membranes, which form and elongate as they engulf portions of the cytoplasm and organelles. Eventually isolation membranes close to form double membrane-bound autophagosomes and fuse with lysosomes to degrade their contents. The physiological role of autophagy has been determined since its discovery, but the origin of autophagosomal membranes has remained unclear. At present, there is much controversy about the organelle from which the membranes originate--the endoplasmic reticulum (ER), mitochondria and plasma membrane. Here we show that autophagosomes form at the ER-mitochondria contact site in mammalian cells. Imaging data reveal that the pre-autophagosome/autophagosome marker ATG14 (also known as ATG14L) relocalizes to the ER-mitochondria contact site after starvation, and the autophagosome-formation marker ATG5 also localizes at the site until formation is complete. Subcellular fractionation showed that ATG14 co-fractionates in the mitochondria-associated ER membrane fraction under starvation conditions. Disruption of the ER-mitochondria contact site prevents the formation of ATG14 puncta. The ER-resident SNARE protein syntaxin 17 (STX17) binds ATG14 and recruits it to the ER-mitochondria contact site. These results provide new insight into organelle biogenesis by demonstrating that the ER-mitochondria contact site is important in autophagosome formation.

Autophagy is a process for the bulk degradation of proteins, in which cytoplasmic components of the cell are enclosed by double-membrane structures known as autophagosomes for delivery to lysosomes or vacuoles for degradation. This process is crucial for survival during starvation and cell differentiation. No molecules have been identified that are involved in autophagy in higher eukaryotes. We have isolated 14 autophagy-defective (apg) mutants of the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae and examined the autophagic process at the molecular level. We show here that a unique covalent-modification system is essential for autophagy to occur. The carboxy-terminal glycine residue of Apg12, a 186-amino-acid protein, is conjugated to a lysine at residue 149 of Apg5, a 294-amino-acid protein. Of the apg mutants, we found that apg7 and apg10 were unable to form an Apg5/Apg12 conjugate. By cloning APG7, we discovered that Apg7 is a ubiquitin-E1-like enzyme. This conjugation can be reconstituted in vitro and depends on ATP. To our knowledge, this is the first report of a protein unrelated to ubiquitin that uses a ubiquitination-like conjugation system. Furthermore, Apg5 and Apg12 have mammalian homologues, suggesting that this new modification system is conserved from yeast to mammalian cells.