Jun Li

Bio: Jun Li is an academic researcher from Spanish National Research Council. The author has contributed to research in topics: Starch & Sucrose synthase. The author has an hindex of 27, co-authored 54 publications receiving 6760 citations. Previous affiliations of Jun Li include Thomas Jefferson University & University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center.

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

Abstract: 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.

Sucrose synthase activity in the sus1/sus2/sus3/sus4 Arabidopsis mutant is sufficient to support normal cellulose and starch production

Abstract: Sucrose synthase (SUS) catalyzes the reversible conversion of sucrose and a nucleoside diphosphate into the corresponding nucleoside diphosphate-glucose and fructose. In Arabidopsis, a multigene family encodes six SUS (SUS1-6) isoforms. The involvement of SUS in the synthesis of UDP-glucose and ADP-glucose linked to Arabidopsis cellulose and starch biosynthesis, respectively, has been questioned by Barratt et al. [(2009) Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 106:13124–13129], who showed that (i) SUS activity in wild type (WT) leaves is too low to account for normal rate of starch accumulation in Arabidopsis, and (ii) different organs of the sus1/sus2/sus3/sus4 SUS mutant impaired in SUS activity accumulate WT levels of ADP-glucose, UDP-glucose, cellulose and starch. However, these authors assayed SUS activity under unfavorable pH conditions for the reaction. By using favorable pH conditions for assaying SUS activity, in this work we show that SUS activity in the cleavage direction is sufficient to support normal rate of starch accumulation in WT leaves. We also demonstrate that sus1/sus2/sus3/sus4 leaves display WT SUS5 and SUS6 expression levels, whereas leaves of the sus5/sus6 mutant display WT SUS1–4 expression levels. Furthermore, we show that SUS activity in leaves and stems of the sus1/sus2/sus3/sus4 and sus5/sus6 plants is ∼85% of that of WT leaves, which can support normal cellulose and starch biosynthesis. The overall data disprove Barratt et al. (2009) claims, and are consistent with the possible involvement of SUS in cellulose and starch biosynthesis in Arabidopsis.

Enhancing Sucrose Synthase Activity in Transgenic Potato ( Solanum tuberosum L.) Tubers Results in Increased Levels of Starch, ADPglucose and UDPglucose and Total Yield

Abstract: Sucrose synthase (SuSy) is a highly regulated cytosolic enzyme that catalyzes the conversion of sucrose and a nucleoside diphosphate into the corresponding nucleoside diphosphate glucose and fructose. To determine the impact of SuSy activity in starch metabolism and yield in potato (Solanum tuberosum L.) tubers we measured sugar levels and enzyme activities in tubers of SuSy-overexpressing potato plants grown in greenhouse and open field conditions. We also transcriptionally characterized tubers of SuSy-overexpressing and -antisensed potato plants. SuSy-overexpressing tubers exhibited a substantial increase in starch, UDPglucose and ADPglucose content when compared with controls. Tuber dry weight, starch content per plant and total yield of SuSy-overexpressing tubers increased significantly over those of control plants. In contrast, activities of enzymes directly involved in starch metabolism in SuSy-overexpressing tubers were normal when compared with controls. Transcriptomic analyses using POCI arrays and the MapMan software revealed that changes in SuSy activity affect the expression of genes involved in multiple biological processes, but not that of genes directly involved in starch metabolism. These analyses also revealed a reverse correlation between the expressions of acid invertase and SuSy-encoding genes, indicating that the balance between SuSy- and acid invertase-mediated sucrolytic pathways is a major determinant of starch accumulation in potato tubers. Results presented in this work show that SuSy strongly determines the intracellular levels of UDPglucose, ADPglucose and starch, and total yield in potato tubers. We also show that enhancement of SuSy activity represents a useful strategy for increasing starch accumulation and yield in potato tubers.

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

Abstract: 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.

Molecular mechanisms of cell death: recommendations of the Nomenclature Committee on Cell Death 2018.

Abstract: Over the past decade, the Nomenclature Committee on Cell Death (NCCD) has formulated guidelines for the definition and interpretation of cell death from morphological, biochemical, and functional perspectives. Since the field continues to expand and novel mechanisms that orchestrate multiple cell death pathways are unveiled, we propose an updated classification of cell death subroutines focusing on mechanistic and essential (as opposed to correlative and dispensable) aspects of the process. As we provide molecularly oriented definitions of terms including intrinsic apoptosis, extrinsic apoptosis, mitochondrial permeability transition (MPT)-driven necrosis, necroptosis, ferroptosis, pyroptosis, parthanatos, entotic cell death, NETotic cell death, lysosome-dependent cell death, autophagy-dependent cell death, immunogenic cell death, cellular senescence, and mitotic catastrophe, we discuss the utility of neologisms that refer to highly specialized instances of these processes. The mission of the NCCD is to provide a widely accepted nomenclature on cell death in support of the continued development of the field.

Molecular definitions of cell death subroutines: recommendations of the Nomenclature Committee on Cell Death 2012

Abstract: In 2009, the Nomenclature Committee on Cell Death (NCCD) proposed a set of recommendations for the definition of distinct cell death morphologies and for the appropriate use of cell death-related terminology, including 'apoptosis', 'necrosis' and 'mitotic catastrophe'. In view of the substantial progress in the biochemical and genetic exploration of cell death, time has come to switch from morphological to molecular definitions of cell death modalities. Here we propose a functional classification of cell death subroutines that applies to both in vitro and in vivo settings and includes extrinsic apoptosis, caspase-dependent or -independent intrinsic apoptosis, regulated necrosis, autophagic cell death and mitotic catastrophe. Moreover, we discuss the utility of expressions indicating additional cell death modalities. On the basis of the new, revised NCCD classification, cell death subroutines are defined by a series of precise, measurable biochemical features.

Targeting autophagy in cancer

Abstract: Autophagy is a mechanism by which cellular material is delivered to lysosomes for degradation, leading to the basal turnover of cell components and providing energy and macromolecular precursors. Autophagy has opposing, context-dependent roles in cancer, and interventions to both stimulate and inhibit autophagy have been proposed as cancer therapies. This has led to the therapeutic targeting of autophagy in cancer to be sometimes viewed as controversial. In this Review, we suggest a way forwards for the effective targeting of autophagy by understanding the context-dependent roles of autophagy and by capitalizing on modern approaches to clinical trial design.

Chloroquine inhibits autophagic flux by decreasing autophagosome-lysosome fusion.

Abstract: Macroautophagy/autophagy is a conserved transport pathway where targeted structures are sequestered by phagophores, which mature into autophagosomes, and then delivered into lysosomes for degradati...