Direct Binding of a Hepatitis C Virus Inhibitor to the Viral Capsid Protein

Over 130 million people are infected chronically with hepatitis C virus (HCV), which, together with HBV, is the leading cause of liver disease. Novel small molecule inhibitors of Hepatitis C virus (HCV) are needed to complement or replace current treatments based on pegylated interferon and ribavirin, which are only partially successful and plagued with side-effects. Assembly of the virion is initiated by the oligomerization of core, the capsid protein, followed by the interaction with NS5A and other HCV proteins. By screening for inhibitors of core dimerization, we previously discovered peptides and drug-like compounds that disrupt interactions between core and other HCV proteins, NS3 and NS5A, and block HCV production. Here we report that a biotinylated derivative of SL209, a prototype small molecule inhibitor of core dimerization (IC50 of 2.80 µM) that inhibits HCV production with an EC50 of 3.20 µM, is capable of penetrating HCV-infected cells and tracking with core. Interaction between the inhibitors, core and other viral proteins was demonstrated by SL209–mediated affinity-isolation of HCV proteins from lysates of infected cells, or of the corresponding recombinant HCV proteins. SL209-like inhibitors of HCV core may form the basis of novel treatments of Hepatitis C in combination with other target-specific HCV drugs such as inhibitors of the NS3 protease, the NS5B polymerase, or the NS5A regulatory protein. More generally, our work supports the hypothesis that inhibitors of viral capsid formation might constitute a new class of potent antiviral agents, as was recently also shown for HIV capsid inhibitors

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

Mapping and linking supply- and demand-side measures in climate-smart agriculture. A review

Climate change and food security are two of humanity’s greatest challenges and are highly interlinked. On the one hand, climate change puts pressure on food security. On the other hand, farming significantly contributes to anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions. This calls for climate-smart agriculture—agriculture that helps to mitigate and adapt to climate change. Climate-smart agriculture measures are diverse and include emission reductions, sink enhancements, and fossil fuel offsets for mitigation. Adaptation measures include technological advancements, adaptive farming practices, and financial management. Here, we review the potentials and trade-offs of climate-smart agricultural measures by producers and consumers. Our two main findings are as follows: (1) The benefits of measures are often site-dependent and differ according to agricultural practices (e.g., fertilizer use), environmental conditions (e.g., carbon sequestration potential), or the production and consumption of specific products (e.g., rice and meat). (2) Climate-smart agricultural measures on the supply side are likely to be insufficient or ineffective if not accompanied by changes in consumer behavior, as climate-smart agriculture will affect the supply of agricultural commodities and require changes on the demand side in response. Such linkages between demand and supply require simultaneous policy and market incentives. It, therefore, requires interdisciplinary cooperation to meet the twin challenge of climate change and food security. The link to consumer behavior is often neglected in research but regarded as an essential component of climate-smart agriculture. We argue for not solely focusing research and implementation on one-sided measures but designing good, site-specific combinations of both demand- and supply-side measures to use the potential of agriculture more effectively to mitigate and adapt to climate change