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

After the cellular prion protein (PrPC) transits to the cell surface where it is bound by a glycophosphatidyl inositol (GPI) anchor, PrPC is either metabolized or converted into the scrapie isoform (PrPSc). Because most GPI-anchored proteins are associated with cholesterol-rich membranous microdomains, we asked whether such structures participate in the metabolism of PrPC or the formation of PrPSc. The initial degradation of PrPC involves removal of the NH2 terminus of PrPC to produce a 17-kD polypeptide which was found in a Triton X-100 insoluble fraction. Both the formation of PrPSc and the initial degradation of PrPC were diminished by lovastatin-mediated depletion of cellular cholesterol but were insensitive to NH4Cl. Further degradation of the 17-kD polypeptide did occur within an NH4Cl-sensitive, acidic compartment. Replacing the GPI addition signal with the transmembrane and cytoplasmic domains of mouse CD4 rendered chimeric CD4PrPC soluble in cold Triton X-100. Both CD4PrPC and truncated PrPC without the GPI addition signal (Rogers, M., F. Yehieley, M. Scott, and S. B. Prusiner. 1993. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 90:3182-3186) were poor substrates for PrPSc formation. Thus, it seems likely that both the initial degradation of PrPC to the 17-kD polypeptide and the formation of PrPSc occur within a non-acidic compartment bound by cholesterol-rich membranes, possibly glycolipid-rich microdomains, where the metabolic fate of PrPC is determined. The pathway remains to be identified by which the 17-kD polypeptide and PrPSc are transported to an acidic compartment, presumably endosomes, where the 17-kD polypeptide is hydrolyzed and limited proteolysis of PrPSc produces PrP 27-30.

No abstract

No abstract

The primate orbitofrontal cortex is a site of convergence of information from primary taste, olfactory, and somatosensory cortical areas. We describe the responses of a population of single neurons in the orbitofrontal cortex that responds to fat in the mouth. The neurons respond, when fatty foods are being eaten, to pure fat such as glyceryl trioleate and also to substances with a similar texture but different chemical composition such as paraffin oil (hydrocarbon) and silicone oil [Si(CH3)2O)n]. This is evidence that the neurons respond to the oral texture of fat, sensed by the somatosensory system. Some of the population of neurons respond unimodally to the texture of fat. Other single neurons show convergence of taste inputs, and others of olfactory inputs, onto single neurons that respond to fat. For example, neurons were found that responded to the mouth feel of fat and the taste of monosodium glutamate (both found in milk), or to the mouth feel of fat and to odor. Feeding to satiety reduces the responses of these neurons to the fatty food eaten, but the neurons still respond to some other foods that have not been fed to satiety. Thus sensory-specific satiety for fat is represented in the responses of single neurons in the primate orbitofrontal cortex. Fat is an important constituent of food that affects its palatability and nutritional effects. The findings described provide evidence that the reward value (or pleasantness) of the mouth feel of fat is represented in the primate orbitofrontal cortex and that the representation is relevant to appetite.