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

Mutations in either the TSC1 or TSC2 tumor suppressor gene are responsible for Tuberous Sclerosis Complex. The gene products of TSC1 and TSC2 form a functional complex and inhibit the phosphorylation of S6K and 4EBP1, two key regulators of translation. Here, we describe that TSC2 is regulated by cellular energy levels and plays an essential role in the cellular energy response pathway. Under energy starvation conditions, the AMP-activated protein kinase (AMPK) phosphorylates TSC2 and enhances its activity. Phosphorylation of TSC2 by AMPK is required for translation regulation and cell size control in response to energy deprivation. Furthermore, TSC2 and its phosphorylation by AMPK protect cells from energy deprivation-induced apoptosis. These observations demonstrate a model where TSC2 functions as a key player in regulation of the common mTOR pathway of protein synthesis, cell growth, and viability in response to cellular energy levels.

Tuberous sclerosis (TSC) is an autosomal dominant disorder characterized by the formation of hamartomas in a wide range of human tissues. Mutation in either the TSC1 or TSC2 tumour suppressor gene is responsible for both the familial and sporadic forms of this disease. TSC1 and TSC2 proteins form a physical and functional complex in vivo. Here, we show that TSC1-TSC2 inhibits the p70 ribosomal protein S6 kinase 1 (an activator of translation) and activates the eukaryotic initiation factor 4E binding protein 1 (4E-BP1, an inhibitor of translational initiation). These functions of TSC1-TSC2 are mediated by inhibition of the mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR). Furthermore, TSC2 is directly phosphorylated by Akt, which is involved in stimulating cell growth and is activated by growth stimulating signals, such as insulin. TSC2 is inactivated by Akt-dependent phosphorylation, which destabilizes TSC2 and disrupts its interaction with TSC1. Our data indicate a molecular mechanism for TSC2 in insulin signalling, tumour suppressor functions and in the inhibition of cell growth.

Tuberous sclerosis complex (TSC) is a genetic disease caused by mutation in either TSC1 or TSC2. The TSC1 and TSC2 gene products form a functional complex and inhibit phosphorylation of S6K and 4EBP1. These functions of TSC1/TSC2 are likely mediated by mTOR. Here we report that TSC2 is a GTPase-activating protein (GAP) toward Rheb, a Ras family GTPase. Rheb stimulates phosphorylation of S6K and 4EBP1. This function of Rheb is blocked by rapamycin and dominant-negative mTOR. Rheb stimulates the phosphorylation of mTOR and plays an essential role in regulation of S6K and 4EBP1 in response to nutrients and cellular energy status. Our data demonstrate that Rheb acts downstream of TSC1/TSC2 and upstream of mTOR to regulate cell growth.

No abstract