A Microbe Associated with Sleep Revealed by a Novel Systems Genetic Analysis of the Microbiome in Collaborative Cross Mice.

The microbiome influences health and disease through complex networks of host genetics, genomics, microbes, and environment. Identifying the mechanisms of these interactions has remained challenging. Systems genetics in laboratory mice (Mus musculus) enables data-driven discovery of biological network components and mechanisms of host-microbial interactions underlying disease phenotypes. To examine the interplay among the whole host genome, transcriptome, and microbiome, we mapped QTL and correlated the abundance of cecal messenger RNA, luminal microflora, physiology, and behavior in a highly diverse Collaborative Cross breeding population. One such relationship, regulated by a variant on chromosome 7, was the association of Odoribacter (Bacteroidales) abundance and sleep phenotypes. In a test of this association in the BKS.Cg-Dock7m +/+ Leprdb/J mouse model of obesity and diabetes, known to have abnormal sleep and colonization by Odoribacter, treatment with antibiotics altered sleep in a genotype-dependent fashion. The many other relationships extracted from this study can be used to interrogate other diseases, microbes, and mechanisms

Etk/Bmx Regulates Proteinase-Activated-Receptor1 (PAR1) in Breast Cancer Invasion: Signaling Partners, Hierarchy and Physiological Significance

BACKGROUND: While protease-activated-receptor 1 (PAR(1)) plays a central role in tumor progression, little is known about the cell signaling involved. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: We show here the impact of PAR(1) cellular activities using both an orthotopic mouse mammary xenograft and a colorectal-liver metastasis model in vivo, with biochemical analyses in vitro. Large and highly vascularized tumors were generated by cells over-expressing wt hPar1, Y397Z hPar1, with persistent signaling, or Y381A hPar1 mutant constructs. In contrast, cells over-expressing the truncated form of hPar1, which lacks the cytoplasmic tail, developed small or no tumors, similar to cells expressing empty vector or control untreated cells. Antibody array membranes revealed essential hPar1 partners including Etk/Bmx and Shc. PAR(1) activation induces Etk/Bmx and Shc binding to the receptor C-tail to form a complex. Y/A mutations in the PAR(1) C-tail did not prevent Shc-PAR(1) association, but enhanced the number of liver metastases compared with the already increased metastases obtained with wt hPar1. We found that Etk/Bmx first binds via the PH domain to a region of seven residues, located between C378-S384 in PAR(1) C-tail, enabling subsequent Shc association. Importantly, expression of the hPar1-7A mutant form (substituted A, residues 378-384), which is incapable of binding Etk/Bmx, resulted in inhibition of invasion through Matrigel-coated membranes. Similarly, knocking down Etk/Bmx inhibited PAR(1)-induced MDA-MB-435 cell migration. In addition, intact spheroid morphogenesis of MCF10A cells is markedly disrupted by the ectopic expression of wt hPar1. In contrast, the forced expression of the hPar1-7A mutant results in normal ball-shaped spheroids. Thus, by preventing binding of Etk/Bmx to PAR(1) -C-tail, hPar1 oncogenic properties are abrogated. CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: This is the first demonstration that a cytoplasmic portion of the PAR(1) C-tail functions as a scaffold site. We identify here essential signaling partners, determine the hierarchy of binding and provide a platform for therapeutic vehicles via definition of the critical PAR(1)-associating region in the breast cancer signaling niche

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