Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy (3rd edition)

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. For example, 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 versus those that measure fl ux through the autophagy pathway (i.e., the complete process including the amount and rate of cargo sequestered and degraded). In particular, a block in macroautophagy that results in autophagosome accumulation must be differentiated from stimuli that increase autophagic activity, defi ned as increased autophagy induction coupled with increased delivery to, and degradation within, lysosomes (inmost 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 fi eld 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. It is worth emphasizing here that lysosomal digestion is a stage of autophagy and evaluating its competence is a crucial part of the evaluation of autophagic flux, or complete autophagy. 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. Along these lines, because of the potential for pleiotropic effects due to blocking autophagy through genetic manipulation it is imperative to delete or knock down more than one autophagy-related gene. In addition, some individual Atg proteins, or groups of proteins, are involved in other cellular pathways so not all Atg proteins can be used as a specific marker for an autophagic process. 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

Altered gene expression in phenotypically normal renal cells from carriers of tumor suppressor gene mutations

The inherently complex signaling networks of tumors result from genetic and epigenetic alterations that occur during cancer initiation and progression. In an attempt to identify early molecular changes associated with dominantly inherited predisposition to "two-hit" renal tumors, the expression profiles of primary cultures of phenotypically normal renal epithelial cells from individuals bearing a germline mutation in either the von Hippel-Lindau (VHL) or the tuberous sclerosis complex (TSC) gene were compared to that of renal epithelial cells from control nonmutation carriers by microarray analysis. Reliability of the microarray data from pooled samples was confirmed by real-time RT-PCR. Principal Component Analysis revealed substantial differences in the gene expression profiles of the renal epithelial cells from VHL and TSC mutation carriers. In several instances, the microarray data confirm our present knowledge of the cellular pathways affected by biallelic VHL and TSC mutations. These findings demonstrate that heterozygosity for a mutant tumor suppressor gene may alter the expression profiles of phenotypically normal epithelial cells in a gene-specific manner. Detectable effects of "one-hit" represent early molecular changes in tumorigenesis that may serve as targets for chemopreventive intervention

Haploinsufficiency in tumor predisposition syndromes: altered genomic transcription in morphologically normal cells heterozygous for VHL or TSC mutation

Tumor suppressor genes and their effector pathways have been identified for many dominantly heritable cancers, enabling efforts to intervene early in the course of disease. Our approach on the subject of early intervention was to investigate gene expression patterns of morphologically normal one-hit cells before they become hemizygous or homozygous for the inherited mutant gene which is usually required for tumor formation. Here, we studied histologically non-transformed renal epithelial cells from patients with inherited disorders that predispose to renal tumors, including von Hippel-Lindau (VHL) disease and Tuberous Sclerosis (TSC). As controls, we studied histologically normal cells from non-cancerous renal epithelium of patients with sporadic clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC). Gene expression analyses of VHLmut/wt or TSC1/2mut/wt versus wild-type (WT) cells revealed transcriptomic alterations previously implicated in the transition to precancerous renal lesions. For example, the gene expression changes in VHLmut/wt cells were consistent with activation of the hypoxia response, associated, in part, with the Warburg effect. Knockdown of any remaining VHL mRNA using shRNA induced secondary expression changes, such as activation of NF?B and interferon pathways, that are fundamentally important in the development of RCC. We posit that this is a general pattern of hereditary cancer predisposition, wherein haploinsufficiency for VHL or TSC1/2, or potentially other tumor susceptibility genes, is sufficient to promote development of early lesions, while cancer results from inactivation of the remaining normal allele. The gene expression changes identified here are related to the metabolic basis of renal cancer and may constitute suitable targets for early intervention

Perivascular Epithelioid Cell Tumors (PEComas) of the Head and Neck: Report of Three Cases and Review of the Literature

PEComas are a family of neoplastic lesions that share overlapping morphology, immunohistochemistry, and ultrastructure that include angiomyolipoma, lymphangioleiomyomatosis, clear cell “sugar” tumor of the lung as well as similar tumors occurring in a variety of visceral, cutaneous and soft tissue sites throughout the body. The defining histopathological features are epithelioid cells with a perivascular distribution containing clear to pale eosinophilic granular cytoplasm and a round-to-oval centrally located nucleus with an inconspicuous nucleolus. Immunohistochemically, coexpression of melanocytic (HMB-45 and/or Melan-A) and myoid markers are characteristic. In the present study, we describe three PEComas occurring in the head and neck (nasal cavity and larynx) and discuss the behavior of these distinctive tumors and review the literature of head and neck PEComas. The importance of recognizing this entity will ensure its consideration in the differential diagnosis of tumors of the head and neck with a similar morphology. The histogenesis of PEComas still remains elusive and additional cases with a prolonged follow up remain important to accurately determine the behavior of these distinctive tumors. Complete surgical excision still remains the treatment of choice for histologically benign PEComas

Erratum to: Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy (3rd edition) (Autophagy, 12, 1, 1-222, 10.1080/15548627.2015.1100356

No abstract available

Fungal diversity notes 253-366: taxonomic and phylogenetic contributions to fungal taxa

Notes on 113 fungal taxa are compiled in this paper, including 11 new genera, 89 new species, one new subspecies, three new combinations and seven reference specimens. A wide geographic and taxonomic range of fungal taxa are detailed. In the Ascomycota the new genera Angustospora (Testudinaceae), Camporesia (Xylariaceae), Clematidis, Crassiparies (Pleosporales genera incertae sedis), Farasanispora, Longiostiolum (Pleosporales genera incertae sedis), Multilocularia (Parabambusicolaceae), Neophaeocryptopus (Dothideaceae), Parameliola (Pleosporales genera incertae sedis), and Towyspora (Lentitheciaceae) are introduced. Newly introduced species are Angustospora nilensis, Aniptodera aquibella, Annulohypoxylon albidiscum, Astrocystis thailandica, Camporesia sambuci, Clematidis italica, Colletotrichum menispermi, C. quinquefoliae, Comoclathris pimpinellae, Crassiparies quadrisporus, Cytospora salicicola, Diatrype thailandica, Dothiorella rhamni, Durotheca macrostroma, Farasanispora avicenniae, Halorosellinia rhizophorae, Humicola koreana, Hypoxylon lilloi, Kirschsteiniothelia tectonae, Lindgomyces okinawaensis, Longiostiolum tectonae, Lophiostoma pseudoarmatisporum, Moelleriella phukhiaoensis, M. pongdueatensis, Mucoharknessia anthoxanthi, Multilocularia bambusae, Multiseptospora thysanolaenae, Neophaeocryptopus cytisi, Ocellularia arachchigei, O. ratnapurensis, Ochronectria thailandica, Ophiocordyceps karstii, Parameliola acaciae, P. dimocarpi, Parastagonospora cumpignensis, Pseudodidymosphaeria phlei, Polyplosphaeria thailandica, Pseudolachnella brevifusiformis, Psiloglonium macrosporum, Rhabdodiscus albodenticulatus, Rosellinia chiangmaiensis, Saccothecium rubi, Seimatosporium pseudocornii, S. pseudorosae, Sigarispora ononidis and Towyspora aestuari. New combinations are provided for Eutiarosporella dactylidis (sexual morph described and illustrated) and Pseudocamarosporium pini. Descriptions, illustrations and/or reference specimens are designated for Aposphaeria corallinolutea, Cryptovalsa ampelina, Dothiorella vidmadera, Ophiocordyceps formosana, Petrakia echinata, Phragmoporthe conformis and Pseudocamarosporium pini. The new species of Basidiomycota are Agaricus coccyginus, A. luteofibrillosus, Amanita atrobrunnea, A. digitosa, A. gleocystidiosa, A. pyriformis, A. strobilipes, Bondarzewia tibetica, Cortinarius albosericeus, C. badioflavidus, C. dentigratus, C. duboisensis, C. fragrantissimus, C. roseobasilis, C. vinaceobrunneus, C. vinaceogrisescens, C. wahkiacus, Cyanoboletus hymenoglutinosus, Fomitiporia atlantica, F. subtilissima, Ganoderma wuzhishanensis, Inonotus shoreicola, Lactifluus armeniacus, L. ramipilosus, Leccinum indoaurantiacum, Musumecia alpina, M. sardoa, Russula amethystina subp. tengii and R. wangii are introduced. Descriptions, illustrations, notes and / or reference specimens are designated for Clarkeinda trachodes, Dentocorticium ussuricum, Galzinia longibasidia, Lentinus stuppeus and Leptocorticium tenellum. The other new genera, species new combinations are Anaeromyces robustus, Neocallimastix californiae and Piromyces finnis from Neocallimastigomycota, Phytophthora estuarina, P. rhizophorae, Salispina, S. intermedia, S. lobata and S. spinosa from Oomycota, and Absidia stercoraria, Gongronella orasabula, Mortierella calciphila, Mucor caatinguensis, M. koreanus, M. merdicola and Rhizopus koreanus in Zygomycota

Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy.

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