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

No abstract

Autophagy is characterized by sequestration of bulk cytoplasm and organelles in double or multimembrane autophagic vesicles, and their delivery to and subsequent degradation by the cell's own lysosomal system. Autophagy has multiple physiological functions in multicellular organisms, including protein degradation and organelle turnover. Genes and proteins that constitute the basic machinery of the autophagic process were first identified in the yeast system and some of their mammalian orthologues have been characterized as well. Increasing lines of evidence indicate that these molecular mechanisms may be recruited by an alternative, caspase-independent form of programmed cell death, named autophagic type II cell death. In some settings, autophagy and apoptosis seem to be interconnected positively or negatively, introducing the concept of 'molecular switches' between them. Additionally, mitochondria may be central organelles integrating the two types of cell death. Malignant transformation is frequently associated with suppression of autophagy. The recent implication of tumor suppressors like Beclin 1, DAP-kinase and PTEN in autophagic pathways indicates a causative role for autophagy deficiencies in cancer formation. Autophagic cell death induction by some anticancer agents underlines the potential utility of its induction as a new cancer treatment modality.

No abstract