Life Sciences Institute, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
Autophagy. 2012 Apr;8(4):445-544. doi: 10.4161/auto.19496.
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. 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 vs. those that measure flux through the autophagy pathway (i.e., the complete process); thus, a block in macroautophagy that results in autophagosome accumulation needs to be differentiated from stimuli that result in increased autophagic activity, defined as increased autophagy induction coupled with increased delivery to, and degradation within, lysosomes (in most 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 field 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. 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. 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.
2008 年,我们发布了第一套标准化自噬研究的指南。自那时以来,该主题的研究持续加速,许多新的科学家也进入了该领域。我们的知识库和相关新技术也在不断扩展。因此,更新这些指南以监测不同生物体中的自噬非常重要。各种评论已经描述了为此目的而使用的各种测定方法。然而,在测量自噬的可接受方法方面仍然存在混淆,尤其是在多细胞真核生物中。需要强调的一个关键点是,在自噬过程的任何阶段监测自噬元件(例如自噬体或自溶体)数量或体积的测量与测量通过自噬途径的通量(即完整过程)之间存在差异;因此,导致自噬体积累的巨自噬阻断需要与刺激区分开来,刺激导致自噬活性增加,定义为增加自噬诱导,同时增加递送至溶酶体(在大多数高等真核生物和一些原生生物如盘基网柄菌)或液泡(在植物和真菌中)并在其中降解。换句话说,对于该领域的新手研究人员来说,了解到自噬体的出现并不一定等同于更多的自噬是非常重要的。事实上,在许多情况下,自噬体的积累是由于向溶酶体运输的阻断而没有伴随自噬体生物发生的相应变化,而自溶体的增加可能反映出降解活性的降低。在这里,我们为旨在检查巨自噬和相关过程的研究人员以及需要对专注于这些过程的论文进行现实和合理评价的审稿人提供了一套选择和解释方法的指南。这些指南并不是一套刻板的规则,因为适当的测定方法部分取决于所提出的问题和所使用的系统。此外,我们强调,没有一种单一的测定方法可以保证在每种情况下都是最合适的,我们强烈建议使用多种测定方法来监测自噬。在这些指南中,我们考虑了评估自噬的这些不同方法以及可以或不能从这些方法中获得哪些信息。最后,通过讨论特定自噬测定方法的优点和局限性,我们希望鼓励该领域的技术创新。