ATP release via anion channels

ATP serves not only as an energy source for all cell types but as an ‘extracellular messenger-for autocrine and paracrine signalling. It is released from the cell via several different purinergic signal efflux pathways. ATP and its Mg2+ and/or H+ salts exist in anionic forms at physiological pH and may exit cells via some anion channel if the pore physically permits this. In this review we survey experimental data providing evidence for and against the release of ATP through anion channels. CFTR has long been considered a probable pathway for ATP release in airway epithelium and other types of cells expressing this protein, although non-CFTR ATP currents have also been observed. Volume-sensitive outwardly rectifying (VSOR) chloride channels are found in virtually all cell types and can physically accommodate or even permeate ATP4- in certain experimental conditions. However, pharmacological studies are controversial and argue against the actual involvement of the VSOR channel in significant release of ATP. A large-conductance anion channel whose open probability exhibits a bell-shaped voltage dependence is also ubiquitously expressed and represents a putative pathway for ATP release. This channel, called a maxi-anion channel, has a wide nanoscopic pore suitable for nucleotide transport and possesses an ATP-binding site in the middle of the pore lumen to facilitate the passage of the nucleotide. The maxi-anion channel conducts ATP and displays a pharmacological profile similar to that of ATP release in response to osmotic, ischemic, hypoxic and salt stresses. The relation of some other channels and transporters to the regulated release of ATP is also discussed

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