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

Mutations of the parkin gene are the most frequent cause of early onset autosomal recessive parkinsonism (EO-AR). Here we show that inactivation of the parkin gene in mice results in motor and cognitive deficits, inhibition of amphetamine-induced dopamine release and inhibition of glutamate neurotransmission. The levels of dopamine are increased in the limbic brain areas of parkin mutant mice and there is a shift towards increased metabolism of dopamine by MAO. Although there was no evidence for a reduction of nigrostriatal dopamine neurons in the parkin mutant mice, the level of dopamine transporter protein was reduced in these animals, suggesting a decreased density of dopamine terminals, or adaptative changes in the nigrostriatal dopamine system. GSH levels were increased in the striatum and fetal mesencephalic neurons from parkin mutant mice, suggesting that a compensatory mechanism may protect dopamine neurons from neuronal death. These parkin mutant mice provide a valuable tool to better understand the preclinical deficits observed in patients with PD and to characterize the mechanisms leading to the degeneration of dopamine neurons that could provide new strategies for neuroprotection.

No abstract

Levodopa is the most effective symptomatic agent in the treatment of Parkinson's disease (PD) and the "gold standard" against which new agents must be compared. However, there remain two areas of controversy: (1) whether levodopa is toxic, and (2) whether levodopa directly causes motor complications. Levodopa is toxic to cultured dopamine neurons, and this may be a problem in PD where there is evidence of oxidative stress in the nigra. However, there is little firm evidence to suggest that levodopa is toxic in vivo or in PD. Clinical trials have not clarified this situation. Levodopa is also associated with motor complications. Increasing evidence suggests that they are related, at least in part, to the short half-life of the drug (and its potential to induce pulsatile stimulation of dopamine receptors) rather than to specific properties of the molecule. Treatment strategies that provide more continuous stimulation of dopamine receptors provide reduced motor complications in MPTP monkeys and PD patients. These studies raise the possibility that more continuous and physiological delivery of levodopa might reduce the risk of motor complications. Clinical trials to test this hypothesis are underway. We review current evidence relating to these areas of controversy.