HMGB1 promotes ductular reaction and tumorigenesis in autophagy-deficient livers

Autophagy is important for liver homeostasis, and the deficiency leads to injury, inflammation, ductular reaction (DR), fibrosis, and tumorigenesis. It is not clear how these events are mechanistically linked to autophagy deficiency. Here, we reveal the role of high-mobility group box 1 (HMGB1) in two of these processes. First, HMGB1 was required for DR, which represents the expansion of hepatic progenitor cells (HPCs) implicated in liver repair and regeneration. DR caused by hepatotoxic diets (3,5-diethoxycarbonyl-1,4-dihydrocollidine [DDC] or choline-deficient, ethionine-supplemented [CDE]) also depended on HMGB1, indicating that HMGB1 may be generally required for DR in various injury scenarios. Second, HMGB1 promoted tumor progression in autophagy-deficient livers. Receptor for advanced glycation end product (RAGE), a receptor for HMGB1, was required in the same two processes and could mediate the proliferative effects of HMBG1 in isolated HPCs. HMGB1 was released from autophagy-deficient hepatocytes independently of cellular injury but depended on NRF2 and the inflammasome, which was activated by NRF2. Pharmacological or genetic activation of NRF2 alone, without disabling autophagy or causing injury, was sufficient to cause inflammasome-dependent HMGB1 release. In conclusion, HMGB1 release is a critical mechanism in hepatic pathogenesis under autophagy-deficient conditions and leads to HPC expansion as well as tumor progression

Живопись викторианской эпохи в Англии. История создания прерафаэлитского братства

В статье рассматривается история возникновения и развития братства Прерафаэлитов. Анализируется творчество художников: Данте Россетти, Холмана Ханта, Джона Миллеса.У статті розглядається історія виникнення та розвитку братства Прерафаелітів. Аналізується творчість митців: Данте Россетті, Холмана Ханта, Джона Міллеса.The foundation and development of the Pre-Raphaelites Brotherhood is observed in the article. The life and main works of the following artists are analyzed: Dante Gabriel Rossetti, William Holman Hunt and John Everett Millais

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

License scheme: an optimal waste management policy under asymmetric information

Waste management, License, Non-compliance, Asymmetric information, Q50, Q53, K42,