Variation within the Huntington's Disease Gene Influences Normal Brain Structure

Genetics of the variability of normal and diseased brain structure largely remains to be elucidated. Expansions of certain trinucleotide repeats cause neurodegenerative disorders of which Huntington's disease constitutes the most common example. Here, we test the hypothesis that variation within the IT15 gene on chromosome 4, whose expansion causes Huntington's disease, influences normal human brain structure. In 278 normal subjects, we determined CAG repeat length within the IT15 gene on chromosome 4 and analyzed high-resolution T1-weighted magnetic resonance images by the use of voxel-based morphometry. We found an increase of GM with increasing long CAG repeat and its interaction with age within the pallidum, which is involved in Huntington's disease. Our study demonstrates that a certain trinucleotide repeat influences normal brain structure in humans. This result may have important implications for the understanding of both the healthy and diseased brain

Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy (4th edition)1.

In 2008, we published the first set of guidelines for standardizing research in autophagy. Since then, this topic has received increasing attention, and many scientists have entered the field. Our knowledge base and relevant new technologies have also been expanding. Thus, it is important to formulate on a regular basis updated guidelines for monitoring autophagy in different organisms. Despite numerous reviews, there continues to be confusion regarding acceptable methods to evaluate autophagy, especially in multicellular eukaryotes. Here, we present a set of guidelines for investigators to select and interpret methods to examine autophagy and related processes, and for reviewers to provide realistic and reasonable critiques of reports that are focused on these processes. These guidelines are not meant to be a dogmatic set of rules, because the appropriateness of any assay largely depends on the question being asked and the system being used. Moreover, no individual assay is perfect for every situation, calling for the use of multiple techniques to properly monitor autophagy in each experimental setting. Finally, several core components of the autophagy machinery have been implicated in distinct autophagic processes (canonical and noncanonical autophagy), implying that genetic approaches to block autophagy should rely on targeting two or more autophagy-related genes that ideally participate in distinct steps of the pathway. Along similar lines, because multiple proteins involved in autophagy also regulate other cellular pathways including apoptosis, not all of them can be used as a specific marker for bona fide autophagic responses. Here, we critically discuss current methods of assessing autophagy and the information they can, or cannot, provide. Our ultimate goal is to encourage intellectual and technical innovation in the field

Projections of coronal (upper row) and axial (middle row) slices onto the SPM template as well as maximum intensity projections (lower row) are shown.

<p>MNI coordinates are indicated in the left upper corners. Increasing significance (T score) is color-coded from dark red to light yellow as indicated by the bar in the center. Note that only the clusters marked with a red rectangle contain peak voxels, which remained significant after correction for multiple comparisons at the voxel level. For better visibility, all results (including those from exploratory analyses) are shown at a height threshold of 0.01 uncorrected. Cluster sizes were restricted to 20 contiguous voxels for ROI analyses or subjected to cluster level correction (p<0.05 corrected) for the whole brain analysis. A) Combined effect of long CAG & its interaction with age, ROI analysis (left) and whole-brain analysis (right) revealing one bilateral cluster reaching from the pallidum across parts of the ventral thalamus to the midbrain (corrected P value at the cluster level, 0.003). B) Main effect of the long CAG, ROI analysis. C) Interaction analysis of long CAG with age, ROI analysis.</p

Influence of long CAG and age on cerebral gray matter.

<p><b>Note.</b> L, left; R, right;</p><p>*corrected P value at the set level, 0.023.</p

Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy (4th edition)

In 2008, we published the first set of guidelines for standardizing research in autophagy. Since then, this topic has received increasing attention, and many scientists have entered the field. Our knowledge base and relevant new technologies have also been expanding. Thus, it is important to formulate on a regular basis updated guidelines for monitoring autophagy in different organisms. Despite numerous reviews, there continues to be confusion regarding acceptable methods to evaluate autophagy, especially in multicellular eukaryotes. Here, we present a set of guidelines for investigators to select and interpret methods to examine autophagy and related processes, and for reviewers to provide realistic and reasonable critiques of reports that are focused on these processes. These guidelines are not meant to be a dogmatic set of rules, because the appropriateness of any assay largely depends on the question being asked and the system being used. Moreover, no individual assay is perfect for every situation, calling for the use of multiple techniques to properly monitor autophagy in each experimental setting. Finally, several core components of the autophagy machinery have been implicated in distinct autophagic processes (canonical and noncanonical autophagy), implying that genetic approaches to block autophagy should rely on targeting two or more autophagy-related genes that ideally participate in distinct steps of the pathway. Along similar lines, because multiple proteins involved in autophagy also regulate other cellular pathways including apoptosis, not all of them can be used as a specific marker for bona fide autophagic responses. Here, we critically discuss current methods of assessing autophagy and the information they can, or cannot, provide. Our ultimate goal is to encourage intellectual and technical innovation in the field

Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy (4th edition)

International audienceIn 2008, we published the first set of guidelines for standardizing research in autophagy. Since then, this topic has received increasing attention, and many scientists have entered the field. Our knowledge base and relevant new technologies have also been expanding. Thus, it is important to formulate on a regular basis updated guidelines for monitoring autophagy in different organisms. Despite numerous reviews, there continues to be confusion regarding acceptable methods to evaluate autophagy, especially in multicellular eukaryotes. Here, we present a set of guidelines for investigators to select and interpret methods to examine autophagy and related processes, and for reviewers to provide realistic and reasonable critiques of reports that are focused on these processes. These guidelines are not meant to be a dogmatic set of rules, because the appropriateness of any assay largely depends on the question being asked and the system being used. Moreover, no individual assay is perfect for every situation, calling for the use of multiple techniques to properly monitor autophagy in each experimental setting. Finally, several core components of the autophagy machinery have been implicated in distinct autophagic processes (canonical and noncanonical autophagy), implying that genetic approaches to block autophagy should rely on targeting two or more autophagy-related genes that ideally participate in distinct steps of the pathway. Along similar lines, because multiple proteins involved in autophagy also regulate other cellular pathways including apoptosis, not all of them can be used as a specific marker for bona fide autophagic responses. Here, we critically discuss current methods of assessing autophagy and the information they can, or cannot, provide. Our ultimate goal is to encourage intellectual and technical innovation in the field