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

No abstract

The binding of the eukaryotic initiation factor 4E (eIF4E) to the mRNA 5= cap structure is a rate-limiting step in mRNA translation initiation. eIF4E promotes ribosome recruitment to the mRNA. In Drosophila, the eIF4E homologous protein (d4EHP) forms a complex with binding partners to suppress the translation of distinct mRNAs by competing with eIF4E for binding the 5= cap structure. This repression mechanism is essential for the asymmetric distribution of proteins and normal embryonic development in Drosophila. In contrast, the physiological role of the mammalian 4EHP (m4EHP) was not known. In this study, we have identified the Grb10-interacting GYF protein 2 (GIGYF2) and the zinc finger protein 598 (ZNF598) as components of the m4EHP complex. GIGYF2 directly interacts with m4EHP, and this interaction is required for stabilization of both proteins. Disruption of the m4EHP-GIGYF2 complex leads to increased translation and perinatal lethality in mice. We propose a model by which the m4EHP-GIGYF2 complex represses translation of a subset of mRNAs during embryonic development, as was previously reported for d4EHP.

Regulated degradation of cellular components by lysosomes is essential to maintain biological homeostasis. In mammals, three forms of autophagy, macroautophagy, microautophagy and chaperone-mediated autophagy (CMA), have been identified. Here, we showed a novel type of autophagy, in which RNA is taken up directly into lysosomes for degradation. This pathway, which we term “RNautophagy,” is ATP-dependent, and unlike CMA, is independent of HSPA8/Hsc70. LAMP2C, a lysosomal membrane protein, serves as a receptor for this pathway. The cytosolic tail of LAMP2C specifically binds to almost all total RNA derived from mouse brain. The cytosolic sequence of LAMP2C and its affinity for RNA are evolutionarily conserved from nematodes to humans. Our findings shed light on the mechanisms underlying RNA homeostasis in higher eukaryotes.