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.

For example, 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 versus those that measure flux through the autophagy pathway (i.e., the complete process including the amount and rate of cargo sequestered and degraded). In particular, a block in macroautophagy that results in autophagosome accumulation must be differentiated from stimuli that increase 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. It is worth emphasizing here that lysosomal digestion is a stage of autophagy and evaluating its competence is a crucial part of the evaluation of autophagic flux, or complete autophagy.

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. Along these lines, because of the potential for pleiotropic effects due to blocking autophagy through genetic manipulation, it is imperative to target by gene knockout or RNA interference more than one autophagy-related protein. In addition, some individual Atg proteins, or groups of proteins, are involved in other cellular pathways implying that not all Atg proteins can be used as a specific marker for an autophagic process. 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 assays, we hope to encourage technical innovation in the field.

/pdf/guidelines-for-the-use-and-interpretation-of-assays-for-ijf2t30pbq.pdf

Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy (3rd edition)

Autophagy: Renovation of Cells and Tissues

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.

/pdf/guidelines-for-the-use-and-interpretation-of-assays-for-28d1pi1jvo.pdf

Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy

Autophagy is a process of self-degradation of cellular components in which double-membrane autophagosomes sequester organelles or portions of cytosol and fuse with lysosomes or vacuoles for breakdown by resident hydrolases. Autophagy is upregulated in response to extra- or intracellular stress and signals such as starvation, growth factor deprivation, ER stress, and pathogen infection. Defective autophagy plays a significant role in human pathologies, including cancer, neurodegeneration, and infectious diseases. We present our current knowledge on the key genes composing the autophagy machinery in eukaryotes from yeast to mammalian cells and the signaling pathways that sense the status of different types of stress and induce autophagy for cell survival and homeostasis. We also review the recent advances on the molecular mechanisms that regulate the autophagy machinery at various levels, from transcriptional activation to post-translational protein modification.

/pdf/regulation-mechanisms-and-signaling-pathways-of-autophagy-4ypu4iix6w.pdf

Regulation Mechanisms and Signaling Pathways of Autophagy

Autophagy and the Integrated Stress Response

Loss-of-function mutations in Park2, the gene coding for the ubiquitin ligase Parkin, are a significant cause of early onset Parkinson's disease. Although the role of Parkin in neuron maintenance is unknown, recent work has linked Parkin to the regulation of mitochondria. Its loss is associated with swollen mitochondria and muscle degeneration in Drosophila melanogaster, as well as mitochondrial dysfunction and increased susceptibility to mitochondrial toxins in other species. Here, we show that Parkin is selectively recruited to dysfunctional mitochondria with low membrane potential in mammalian cells. After recruitment, Parkin mediates the engulfment of mitochondria by autophagosomes and the selective elimination of impaired mitochondria. These results show that Parkin promotes autophagy of damaged mitochondria and implicate a failure to eliminate dysfunctional mitochondria in the pathogenesis of Parkinson's disease.

/pdf/parkin-is-recruited-selectively-to-impaired-mitochondria-and-53rmqvs069.pdf

Parkin is recruited selectively to impaired mitochondria and promotes their autophagy

Loss-of-function mutations in PINK1 and Parkin cause parkinsonism in humans and mitochondrial dysfunction in model organisms. Parkin is selectively recruited from the cytosol to damaged mitochondria to trigger their autophagy. How Parkin recognizes damaged mitochondria, however, is unknown. Here, we show that expression of PINK1 on individual mitochondria is regulated by voltage-dependent proteolysis to maintain low levels of PINK1 on healthy, polarized mitochondria, while facilitating the rapid accumulation of PINK1 on mitochondria that sustain damage. PINK1 accumulation on mitochondria is both necessary and sufficient for Parkin recruitment to mitochondria, and disease-causing mutations in PINK1 and Parkin disrupt Parkin recruitment and Parkin-induced mitophagy at distinct steps. These findings provide a biochemical explanation for the genetic epistasis between PINK1 and Parkin in Drosophila melanogaster. In addition, they support a novel model for the negative selection of damaged mitochondria, in which PINK1 signals mitochondrial dysfunction to Parkin, and Parkin promotes their elimination.

/pdf/pink1-is-selectively-stabilized-on-impaired-mitochondria-to-ityomeni04.pdf

PINK1 is selectively stabilized on impaired mitochondria to activate Parkin.

Damage to mitochondria can lead to the depolarization of the inner mitochondrial membrane, thereby sensitizing impaired mitochondria for selective elimination by autophagy. However, fusion of uncoupled mitochondria with polarized mitochondria can compensate for damage, reverse membrane depolarization, and obviate mitophagy. Parkin, an E3 ubiquitin ligase that is mutated in monogenic forms of Parkinson’s disease, was recently found to induce selective autophagy of damaged mitochondria. Here we show that ubiquitination of mitofusins Mfn1 and Mfn2, large GTPases that mediate mitochondrial fusion, is induced by Parkin upon membrane depolarization and leads to their degradation in a proteasome- and p97-dependent manner. p97, a AAA+ ATPase, accumulates on mitochondria upon uncoupling of Parkin-expressing cells, and both p97 and proteasome activity are required for Parkin-mediated mitophagy. After mitochondrial fission upon depolarization, Parkin prevents or delays refusion of mitochondria, likely by the elimination of mitofusins. Inhibition of Drp1-mediated mitochondrial fission, the proteasome, or p97 prevents Parkin-induced mitophagy.

https://rupress.org/jcb/article-pdf/191/7/1367/1350213/jcb_201007013.pdf

Proteasome and p97 mediate mitophagy and degradation of mitofusins induced by Parkin

Mitochondrial genomes with deleterious mutations can replicate in cells along with wild-type genomes in a state of heteroplasmy, and are a cause of severe inherited syndromes, such as mitochondrial myopathy, encephalopathy, lactic acidosis, and stroke (MELAS), neuropathy, ataxia, retinitis pigmentosa-maternally inherited Leigh syndrome (NARP-MILS), and Leber's hereditary optic neuropathy (LHON). The cytosolic E3 ligase, Parkin, commonly mutated in recessive familial parkinsonism, translocates to depolarized mitochondria and induces their autophagic elimination, suggesting that Parkin may signal the selective removal of defective mitochondria within the cell. We report that long-term overexpression of Parkin can eliminate mitochondria with deleterious COXI mutations in heteroplasmic cybrid cells, thereby enriching cells for wild-type mtDNA and restoring cytochrome c oxidase activity. After relieving cybrid cells of Parkin overexpression, a more favorable wild-type to mutant mitochondrial genome ratio is stably maintained. These data support the model that Parkin functions in a mitochondrial quality control pathway. Additionally, they suggest that transiently increasing levels of Parkin expression might ameliorate certain mitochondrial diseases.

https://www.pnas.org/content/pnas/early/2010/06/03/0914569107.full.pdf

Parkin overexpression selects against a deleterious mtDNA mutation in heteroplasmic cybrid cells

Knockout of the ubiquitin ligase Parkin, the gene product of the Parkinson associated Park2, leads to loss of mitochondrial integrity and function in Drosophila melanogaster.  Although Parkin is primarily cytosolic, we have found that Parkin is selectively recruited to dysfunctional mitochondria with low membrane potential and subsequently promotes their autophagy.  Here we report that Parkin recruitment is voltage-dependent and independent of changes in ATP or pH.  These findings suggest that Parkin promotes mitophagy of dysfunctional mitochondria following loss of mitochondrial membrane potential and implicate the targeted elimination of mitochondria in the pathogenesis of Parkinson disease.

Atsushi Tanaka

Papers

Parkin is recruited selectively to impaired mitochondria and promotes their autophagy

PINK1 is selectively stabilized on impaired mitochondria to activate Parkin.

Proteasome and p97 mediate mitophagy and degradation of mitofusins induced by Parkin

Parkin overexpression selects against a deleterious mtDNA mutation in heteroplasmic cybrid cells

Parkin-induced mitophagy in the pathogenesis of Parkinson disease.