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
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.
Fru-2,6-P2 (fructose 2,6-bisphosphate) is a signal molecule that controls glycolysis. Since its discovery more than 20 years ago, inroads have been made towards the understanding of the structure-function relationships in PFK-2 (6-phosphofructo-2-kinase)/FBPase-2 (fructose-2,6-bisphosphatase), the homodimeric bifunctional enzyme that catalyses the synthesis and degradation of Fru-2,6-P2. The FBPase-2 domain of the enzyme subunit bears sequence, mechanistic and structural similarity to the histidine phosphatase family of enzymes. The PFK-2 domain was originally thought to resemble bacterial PFK-1 (6-phosphofructo-1-kinase), but this proved not to be correct. Molecular modelling of the PFK-2 domain revealed that, instead, it has the same fold as adenylate kinase. This was confirmed by X-ray crystallography. A PFK-2/FBPase-2 sequence in the genome of one prokaryote, the proteobacterium Desulfovibrio desulfuricans, could be the result of horizontal gene transfer from a eukaryote distantly related to all other organisms, possibly a protist. This, together with the presence of PFK-2/FBPase-2 genes in trypanosomatids (albeit with possibly only one of the domains active), indicates that fusion of genes initially coding for separate PFK-2 and FBPase-2 domains might have occurred early in evolution. In the enzyme homodimer, the PFK-2 domains come together in a head-to-head like fashion, whereas the FBPase-2 domains can function as monomers. There are four PFK-2/FBPase-2 isoenzymes in mammals, each coded by a different gene that expresses several isoforms of each isoenzyme. In these genes, regulatory sequences have been identified which account for their long-term control by hormones and tissue-specific transcription factors. One of these, HNF-6 (hepatocyte nuclear factor-6), was discovered in this way. As to short-term control, the liver isoenzyme is phosphorylated at the N-terminus, adjacent to the PFK-2 domain, by PKA (cAMP-dependent protein kinase), leading to PFK-2 inactivation and FBPase-2 activation. In contrast, the heart isoenzyme is phosphorylated at the C-terminus by several protein kinases in different signalling pathways, resulting in PFK-2 activation.
Protozoan Kinetoplastida, including the pathogenic trypanosomatids of the genera Trypanosoma and Leishmania, compartmentalize several important metabolic systems in their peroxisomes which are designated glycosomes. The enzymatic content of these organelles may vary considerably during the life-cycle of most trypanosomatid parasites which often are transmitted between their mammalian hosts by insects. The glycosomes of the Trypanosoma brucei form living in the mammalian bloodstream display the highest level of specialization; 90% of their protein content is made up of glycolytic enzymes. The compartmentation of glycolysis in these organelles appears essential for the regulation of this process and enables the cells to overcome short periods of anaerobiosis. Glycosomes of all other trypanosomatid forms studied contain an extended glycolytic pathway catalyzing the aerobic fermentation of glucose to succinate. In addition, these organelles contain enzymes for several other processes such as the pentose-phosphate pathway, beta-oxidation of fatty acids, purine salvage, and biosynthetic pathways for pyrimidines, ether-lipids and squalenes. The enzymatic content of glycosomes is rapidly changed during differentiation of mammalian bloodstream-form trypanosomes to the forms living in the insect midgut. Autophagy appears to play an important role in trypanosomatid differentiation, and several lines of evidence indicate that it is then also involved in the degradation of old glycosomes, while a population of new organelles containing different enzymes is synthesized. The compartmentation of environment-sensitive parts of the metabolic network within glycosomes would, through this way of organelle renewal, enable the parasites to adapt rapidly and efficiently to the new conditions.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.