“…Thus far, studies on the role of autophagy in kidney proximal tubules have often yielded contradictory or unconvincing results (Periyasamy-Thandavan et al, 2008;Inoue et al, 2010;Kimura et al, 2011;Jiang et al, 2012;Liu et al, 2012;Livingston and Dong, 2014;Takabatake et al, 2014;Choi, 2019). We speculate that the reasons for such conflicting data include (1) the use of different autophagy agonists and inhibitors, which are not entirely specific and may have some unknown targets (Kimura et al, 2011;Livingston and Dong, 2014), and when administered at different doses, these autophagy agonists and inhibitors may exhibit different thresholds for autophagy intervention; (2) the differences in the function and degree of damage in different proximal tubule segments (for example, in the AKI mouse model, IRI epithelial cell damage is most apparent in the S3 segment of the proximal tubule, while mitochondrial density is the highest in the S1 segment, and the oxidative burst primarily occurs in the S2 segment; Bao et al, 2017;Gong et al, 2019; therefore, the role of autophagy genes in different proximal tubule segments may differ; one study reported that Atg5 deletion in the whole proximal tubule exacerbates kidney injury in AKI; Takahashi et al, 2012); and (3) the differences in the sex and strains of the experimental animals. Therefore, it is better to choose the same strain for breeding conditional knockout mice (such as the breeding of Cre/loxp recombinases or the insertion of fluorescent reporter in transgenic mice).…”