Modulation of NKp30- and NKp46-Mediated Natural Killer Cell Responses by Poxviral Hemagglutinin

Natural killer (NK) cells are an important element in the immune defense against the orthopox family members vaccinia virus (VV) and ectromelia virus (ECTV). NK cells are regulated through inhibitory and activating signaling receptors, the latter involving NKG2D and the natural cytotoxicity receptors (NCR), NKp46, NKp44 and NKp30. Here we report that VV infection results in an upregulation of ligand structures for NKp30 and NKp46 on infected cells, whereas the binding of NKp44 and NKG2D was not significantly affected. Likewise, infection with ectromelia virus (ECTV), the mousepox agent, enhanced binding of NKp30 and, to a lesser extent, NKp46. The hemagglutinin (HA) molecules from VV and ECTV, which are known virulence factors, were identified as novel ligands for NKp30 and NKp46. Using NK cells with selectively silenced NCR expression and NCR-CD3ζ reporter cells, we observed that HA present on the surface of VV-infected cells, or in the form of recombinant soluble protein, was able to block NKp30-triggered activation, whereas it stimulated the activation through NKp46. The net effect of this complex influence on NK cell activity resulted in a decreased NK lysis susceptibility of infected cells at late time points of VV infection when HA was expression was pronounced. We conclude that poxviral HA represents a conserved ligand of NCR, exerting a novel immune escape mechanism through its blocking effect on NKp30-mediated activation at a late stage of infection

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