MTORC1-mediated NRBF2 phosphorylation functions as a switch for the class III PtdIns3K and autophagy

NRBF2/Atg38 has been identified as the fifth subunit of the macroautophagic/autophagic class III phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase (PtdIns3K) complex, along with ATG14/Barkor, BECN1/Vps30, PIK3R4/p150/Vps15 and PIK3C3/Vps34. However, its functional mechanism and regulation are not fully understood. Here, we report that NRBF2 is a fine tuning regulator of PtdIns3K controlled by phosphorylation. Human NRBF2 is phosphorylated by MTORC1 at S113 and S120. Upon nutrient starvation or MTORC1 inhibition, NRBF2 phosphorylation is diminished. Phosphorylated NRBF2 preferentially interacts with PIK3C3/PIK3R4. Suppression of NRBF2 phosphorylation by MTORC1 inhibition alters its binding preference from PIK3C3/PIK3R4 to ATG14/BECN1, leading to increased autophagic PtdIns3K complex assembly, as well as enhancement of ULK1 protein complex association. Consequently, NRBF2 in its unphosphorylated form promotes PtdIns3K lipid kinase activity and autophagy flux, whereas its phosphorylated form blocks them. This study reveals NRBF2 as a critical molecular switch of PtdIns3K and autophagy activation, and its on/off state is precisely controlled by MTORC1 through phosphorylation

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