Structural basis of water-mediated cis Watson–Crick/Hoogsteen base-pair formation in non-CpG methylation

Non-CpG methylation is associated with several cellular processes, especially neuronal development and cancer, while its effect on DNA structure remains unclear. We have determined the crystal structures of DNA duplexes containing -CGCCG- regions as CCG repeat motifs that comprise a non-CpG site with or without cytosine methylation. Crystal structure analyses have revealed that the mC:G base-pair can simultaneously form two alternative conformations arising from non-CpG methylation, including a unique water-mediated cis Watson–Crick/Hoogsteen, (w)cWH, and Watson–Crick (WC) geometries, with partial occupancies of 0.1 and 0.9, respectively. NMR studies showed that an alternative conformation of methylated mC:G base-pair at non-CpG step exhibits characteristics of cWH with a syn-guanosine conformation in solution. DNA duplexes complexed with the DNA binding drug echinomycin result in increased occupancy of the (w)cWH geometry in the methylated base-pair (from 0.1 to 0.3). Our structural results demonstrated that cytosine methylation at a non-CpG step leads to an anti→syntransition of its complementary guanosine residue toward the (w)cWH geometry as a partial population of WC, in both drug-bound and naked mC:G base pairs. This particular geometry is specific to non-CpG methylated dinucleotide sites in B-form DNA. Overall, the current study provides new insights into DNA conformation during epigenetic regulation

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