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

Certain fish and amphibians retain a robust capacity for cardiac regeneration throughout life, but the same is not true of the adult mammalian heart. Whether the capacity for cardiac regeneration is absent in mammals or whether it exists and is switched off early after birth has been unclear. We found that the hearts of 1-day-old neonatal mice can regenerate after partial surgical resection, but this capacity is lost by 7 days of age. This regenerative response in 1-day-old mice was characterized by cardiomyocyte proliferation with minimal hypertrophy or fibrosis, thereby distinguishing it from repair processes. Genetic fate mapping indicated that the majority of cardiomyocytes within the regenerated tissue originated from preexisting cardiomyocytes. Echocardiography performed 2 months after surgery revealed that the regenerated ventricular apex had normal systolic function. Thus, for a brief period after birth, the mammalian heart appears to have the capacity to regenerate.

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.

Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is a public health epidemic that increases risk of death due to cardiovascular disease. Left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH) is an important mechanism of cardiovascular disease in individuals with CKD. Elevated levels of FGF23 have been linked to greater risks of LVH and mortality in patients with CKD, but whether these risks represent causal effects of FGF23 is unknown. Here, we report that elevated FGF23 levels are independently associated with LVH in a large, racially diverse CKD cohort. FGF23 caused pathological hypertrophy of isolated rat cardiomyocytes via FGF receptor-dependent activation of the calcineurin-NFAT signaling pathway, but this effect was independent of klotho, the coreceptor for FGF23 in the kidney and parathyroid glands. Intramyocardial or intravenous injection of FGF23 in wild-type mice resulted in LVH, and klotho-deficient mice demonstrated elevated FGF23 levels and LVH. In an established animal model of CKD, treatment with an FGF-receptor blocker attenuated LVH, although no change in blood pressure was observed. These results unveil a klotho-independent, causal role for FGF23 in the pathogenesis of LVH and suggest that chronically elevated FGF23 levels contribute directly to high rates of LVH and mortality in individuals with CKD.