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

Autophagy is a major protein degradation pathway that is essential for stress-induced and constitutive protein turnover. Accumulated evidence has demonstrated that amyloid-beta (A beta) protein can be generated in autophagic vacuoles, promoting its extracellular deposition in neuritic plaques as the pathological hallmark of Alzheimer's disease (AD). The molecular machinery for A beta generation, including APP, APP-C99 and beta-/gamma-secretases, are all enriched in autophagic vacuoles. The induction of autophagy can be vividly observed in the brain at early stages of sporadic AD and in an AD transgenic mouse model. Accumulated evidence has also demonstrated a neuroprotective role of autophagy in mediating the degradation of aggregated proteins that are causative of various neurodegenerative diseases. Autophagy is thus widely regarded as an intracellular hub for the removal of the detrimental A beta peptides and Tau aggregates. Nonetheless, compelling data also reveal an unfavorable function of autophagy in facilitating the production of intracellular A beta. The two faces of autophagy on the homeostasis of A beta place it in a very unique and intriguing position in AD pathogenesis. This article briefly summarizes seminal discoveries that are shedding new light on the critical and unique roles of autophagy in AD and potential therapeutic approaches against autophagy-elicited AD.

Mammalian p62/sequestosome-1 protein binds to both LC3, the mammalian homologue of yeast Atg8, and polyubiquitinated cargo proteins destined to undergo autophagy-mediated degradation. We previously identified a cargo receptor-binding domain in Atg8 that is essential for its interaction with the cargo receptor Atg19 in selective autophagic processes in yeast. We, thus, sought to determine whether this interaction is evolutionally conserved from yeast to mammals. Using an amino acid replacement approach, we demonstrate that cells expressing mutant LC3 (LC3-K30D, LC3-K51A, or LC3-L53A) all exhibit defective lipidation of LC3, a disrupted LC3-p62 interaction, and impaired autophagic degradation of p62, suggesting that the p62-binding site of LC3 is localized within an evolutionarily conserved domain. Importantly, whereas cells expressing these LC3 mutants exhibited similar overall autophagic activity comparable to that of cells expressing wild-type LC3, autophagy-mediated clearance of the aggregation-prone mutant Huntingtin was defective in the mutant-expressing cells. Together, these results suggest that p62 directly binds to the evolutionarily conserved cargo receptor-binding domain of Atg8/LC3 and selectively mediates the clearance of mutant Huntingtin.