Lei Liu

Bio: Lei Liu is an academic researcher from Chinese Academy of Sciences. The author has contributed to research in topics: Mitophagy & Mitochondrion. The author has an hindex of 12, co-authored 14 publications receiving 1939 citations.

Mitochondrial outer-membrane protein FUNDC1 mediates hypoxia-induced mitophagy in mammalian cells

Abstract: Accumulating evidence has shown that dysfunctional mitochondria can be selectively removed by mitophagy. Dysregulation of mitophagy is implicated in the development of neurodegenerative disease and metabolic disorders. How individual mitochondria are recognized for removal and how this process is regulated remain poorly understood. Here we report that FUNDC1, an integral mitochondrial outer-membrane protein, is a receptor for hypoxia-induced mitophagy. FUNDC1 interacted with LC3 through its typical LC3-binding motif Y(18)xxL(21), and mutation of the LC3-interaction region impaired its interaction with LC3 and the subsequent induction of mitophagy. Knockdown of endogenous FUNDC1 significantly prevented hypoxia-induced mitophagy, which could be reversed by the expression of wild-type FUNDC1, but not LC3-interaction-deficient FUNDC1 mutants. Mechanistic studies further revealed that hypoxia induced dephosphorylation of FUNDC1 and enhanced its interaction with LC3 for selective mitophagy. Our findings thus offer insights into mitochondrial quality control in mammalian cells.

Mitophagy receptor FUNDC1 regulates mitochondrial dynamics and mitophagy.

Abstract: Mitochondrial fragmentation due to imbalanced fission and fusion of mitochondria is a prerequisite for mitophagy, however, the exact “coupling” of mitochondrial dynamics and mitophagy remains unclear. We have previously identified that FUNDC1 recruits MAP1LC3B/LC3B (LC3) through its LC3-interacting region (LIR) motif to initiate mitophagy in mammalian cells. Here, we show that FUNDC1 interacts with both DNM1L/DRP1 and OPA1 to coordinate mitochondrial fission or fusion and mitophagy. OPA1 interacted with FUNDC1 via its Lys70 (K70) residue, and mutation of K70 to Ala (A), but not to Arg (R), abolished the interaction and promoted mitochondrial fission and mitophagy. Mitochondrial stress such as selenite or FCCP treatment caused the disassembly of the FUNDC1-OPA1 complex while enhancing DNM1L recruitment to the mitochondria. Furthermore, we observed that dephosphorylation of FUNDC1 under stress conditions promotes the dissociation of FUNDC1 from OPA1 and association with DNM1L. Our data suggest that ...

Receptor-mediated mitophagy in yeast and mammalian systems

Abstract: Mitophagy, or mitochondria autophagy, plays a critical role in selective removal of damaged or unwanted mitochondria. Several protein receptors, including Atg32 in yeast, NIX/BNIP3L, BNIP3 and FUNDC1 in mammalian systems, directly act in mitophagy. Atg32 interacts with Atg8 and Atg11 on the surface of mitochondria, promoting core Atg protein assembly for mitophagy. NIX/BNIP3L, BNIP3 and FUNDC1 also have a classic motif to directly bind LC3 (Atg8 homolog in mammals) for activation of mitophagy. Recent studies have shown that receptor-mediated mitophagy is regulated by reversible protein phosphorylation. Casein kinase 2 (CK2) phosphorylates Atg32 and activates mitophagy in yeast. In contrast, in mammalian cells Src kinase and CK2 phosphorylate FUNDC1 to prevent mitophagy. Notably, in response to hypoxia and FCCP treatment, the mitochondrial phosphatase PGAM5 dephosphorylates FUNDC1 to activate mitophagy. Here, we mainly focus on recent advances in our understanding of the molecular mechanisms underlying the activation of receptor-mediated mitophagy and the implications of this catabolic process in health and disease.

STING directly activates autophagy to tune the innate immune response.

Abstract: STING (stimulator of interferon genes) is a central molecule that binds to cyclic dinucleotides produced by the cyclic GMP-AMP synthase (cGAS) to activate innate immunity against microbial infection. Here we report that STING harbors classic LC-3 interacting regions (LIRs) and mediates autophagy through its direct interaction with LC3. We observed that poly(dA:dT), cGAMP, and HSV-1 induced STING-dependent autophagy and degradation of STING immediately after TBK1 activation. STING induces non-canonical autophagy that is dependent on ATG5, whereas other autophagy regulators such as Beclin1, Atg9a, ULK1, and p62 are dispensable. LIR mutants of STING abolished its interaction with LC3 and its activation of autophagy. Also, mutants that abolish STING dimerization and cGAMP-binding diminished the STING-LC3 interaction and subsequent autophagy, suggesting that STING activation is indispensable for autophagy induction. Our results thus uncover dual functions of STING in activating the immune response and autophagy, and suggest that STING is involved in ensuring a measured innate immune response.

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.

The pathways of mitophagy for quality control and clearance of mitochondria.

Abstract: Selective autophagy of mitochondria, known as mitophagy, is an important mitochondrial quality control mechanism that eliminates damaged mitochondria. Mitophagy also mediates removal of mitochondria from developing erythrocytes, and contributes to maternal inheritance of mitochondrial DNA through the elimination of sperm-derived mitochondria. Recent studies have identified specific regulators of mitophagy that ensure selective sequestration of mitochondria as cargo. In yeast, the mitochondrial outer membrane protein autophagy-related gene 32 (ATG32) recruits the autophagic machinery to mitochondria, while mammalian Nix is required for degradation of erythrocyte mitochondria. The elimination of damaged mitochondria in mammals is mediated by a pathway comprised of PTEN-induced putative protein kinase 1 (PINK1) and the E3 ubiquitin ligase Parkin. PINK1 and Parkin accumulate on damaged mitochondria, promote their segregation from the mitochondrial network, and target these organelles for autophagic degradation in a process that requires Parkin-dependent ubiquitination of mitochondrial proteins. Here we will review recent advances in our understanding of the different pathways of mitophagy. In addition, we will discuss the relevance of these pathways in neurons where defects in mitophagy have been implicated in neurodegeneration.

Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy (4th edition)

Abstract: 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.

Molecular definitions of autophagy and related processes

Abstract: Over the past two decades, the molecular machinery that underlies autophagic responses has been characterized with ever increasing precision in multiple model organisms. Moreover, it has become clear that autophagy and autophagy-related processes have profound implications for human pathophysiology. However, considerable confusion persists about the use of appropriate terms to indicate specific types of autophagy and some components of the autophagy machinery, which may have detrimental effects on the expansion of the field. Driven by the overt recognition of such a potential obstacle, a panel of leading experts in the field attempts here to define several autophagy-related terms based on specific biochemical features. The ultimate objective of this collaborative exchange is to formulate recommendations that facilitate the dissemination of knowledge within and outside the field of autophagy research.