scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Author

Pascal Genschik

Bio: Pascal Genschik is an academic researcher from University of Strasbourg. The author has contributed to research in topics: Arabidopsis & Ubiquitin ligase. The author has an hindex of 57, co-authored 117 publications receiving 15701 citations. Previous affiliations of Pascal Genschik include Centre national de la recherche scientifique & Institut national de la recherche agronomique.


Papers
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
Daniel J. Klionsky1, Kotb Abdelmohsen2, Akihisa Abe3, Joynal Abedin4  +2519 moreInstitutions (695)
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors present a set of guidelines for the selection and interpretation of methods for use by investigators who aim to examine macro-autophagy and related processes, as well as for reviewers who need to provide realistic and reasonable critiques of papers that are focused on these processes.
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.

5,187 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this article, the authors 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.
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.

1,129 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
12 Dec 2003-Cell
TL;DR: This work places two Arabidopsis F box proteins called EBF1 and EBF2 within the genetic framework of the ethylene-response pathway and supports a model in which ethylene action depends on EIN3 protein stabilization.

679 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: It is proposed that low temperature–induced CBF1 expression restrains growth at least in part by allowing the accumulation of DELLAs, a family of nuclear growth-repressing proteins, the degradation of which is stimulated by gibberellin (GA).
Abstract: Plants have evolved robust mechanisms to respond and adapt to unfavorable environmental conditions, such as low temperature. The C-repeat/drought-responsive element binding factor CBF1/DREB1b gene encodes a transcriptional activator transiently induced by cold that controls the expression of a set of genes responding to low temperature (the CBF regulon). Constitutive expression of CBF1 confers freezing tolerance but also slows growth. Here, we propose that low temperature-induced CBF1 expression restrains growth at least in part by allowing the accumulation of DELLAs, a family of nuclear growth-repressing proteins, the degradation of which is stimulated by gibberellin (GA). We show that cold/CBF1 enhances the accumulation of a green fluorescent protein (GFP)-tagged DELLA protein (GFP-RGA) by reducing GA content through stimulating expression of GA-inactivating GA 2-oxidase genes. Accordingly, transgenic plants that constitutively express CBF1 accumulate less bioactive GA and as a consequence exhibit dwarfism and late flowering. Both phenotypes are suppressed when CBF1 is expressed in a line lacking two DELLA proteins, GA-INSENSITIVE and REPRESSOR OF GA1-3. In addition, we show that DELLAs contribute significantly to CBF1-induced cold acclimation and freezing tolerance by a mechanism that is distinct from the CBF regulon. We conclude that DELLAs are components of the CBF1-mediated cold stress response.

653 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: It is demonstrated that COI1 associates physically with AtCUL1, AtRbx1, and either of the Arabidopsis Skp1-like proteins ASK1 or ASK2 to assemble ubiquitin-ligase complexes, which are designated SCF(COI1), and that the axr1 and coi1 mutations display a synergistic genetic interaction in the double mutant.
Abstract: Xie and colleagues previously isolated the Arabidopsis COI1 gene that is required for response to jasmonates (JAs), which regulate root growth, pollen fertility, wound healing, and defense against insects and pathogens. In this study, we demonstrate that COI1 associates physically with AtCUL1, AtRbx1, and either of the Arabidopsis Skp1-like proteins ASK1 or ASK2 to assemble ubiquitin-ligase complexes, which we have designated SCF(COI1). COI1(E22A), a single amino acid substitution in the F-box motif of COI1, abolishes the formation of the SCF(COI1) complexes and results in loss of the JA response. AtRbx1 double-stranded RNA-mediated genetic interference reduces AtRbx1 expression and affects JA-inducible gene expression. Furthermore, we show that the AtCUL1 component of SCF(COI1) complexes is modified in planta, where mutations in AXR1 decrease the abundance of the modified AtCUL1 of SCF(COI1) and lead to a reduction in JA response. Finally, we demonstrate that the axr1 and coi1 mutations display a synergistic genetic interaction in the double mutant. These results suggest that the COI1-mediated JA response is dependent on the SCF(COI1) complexes in Arabidopsis and that the AXR1-dependent modification of the AtCUL1 subunit of SCF(COI1) complexes is important for JA signaling.

619 citations


Cited by
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
Daniel J. Klionsky1, Kotb Abdelmohsen2, Akihisa Abe3, Joynal Abedin4  +2519 moreInstitutions (695)
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors present a set of guidelines for the selection and interpretation of methods for use by investigators who aim to examine macro-autophagy and related processes, as well as for reviewers who need to provide realistic and reasonable critiques of papers that are focused on these processes.
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.

5,187 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: This review summarizes results from Arabidopsis-pathogen systems regarding the contributions of various defense responses to resistance to several biotrophic and necrotrophic pathogens.
Abstract: It has been suggested that effective defense against biotrophic pathogens is largely due to programmed cell death in the host, and to associated activation of defense responses regulated by the salicylic acid-dependent pathway. In contrast, necrotrophic pathogens benefit from host cell death, so they are not limited by cell death and salicylic acid-dependent defenses, but rather by a different set of defense responses activated by jasmonic acid and ethylene signaling. This review summarizes results from Arabidopsis-pathogen systems regarding the contributions of various defense responses to resistance to several biotrophic and necrotrophic pathogens. While the model above seems generally correct, there are exceptions and additional complexities.

3,721 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
Lorenzo Galluzzi1, Lorenzo Galluzzi2, Ilio Vitale3, Stuart A. Aaronson4  +183 moreInstitutions (111)
TL;DR: The Nomenclature Committee on Cell Death (NCCD) has formulated guidelines for the definition and interpretation of cell death from morphological, biochemical, and functional perspectives.
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.

3,301 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: A functional classification of cell death subroutines is proposed that applies to both in vitro and in vivo settings and includes extrinsic apoptosis, caspase-dependent or -independent intrinsic programmed cell death, regulated necrosis, autophagic cell death and mitotic catastrophe.
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.

2,238 citations

Proceedings Article
01 Jan 1994
TL;DR: The main focus in MUCKE is on cleaning large scale Web image corpora and on proposing image representations which are closer to the human interpretation of images.
Abstract: MUCKE aims to mine a large volume of images, to structure them conceptually and to use this conceptual structuring in order to improve large-scale image retrieval. The last decade witnessed important progress concerning low-level image representations. However, there are a number problems which need to be solved in order to unleash the full potential of image mining in applications. The central problem with low-level representations is the mismatch between them and the human interpretation of image content. This problem can be instantiated, for instance, by the incapability of existing descriptors to capture spatial relationships between the concepts represented or by their incapability to convey an explanation of why two images are similar in a content-based image retrieval framework. We start by assessing existing local descriptors for image classification and by proposing to use co-occurrence matrices to better capture spatial relationships in images. The main focus in MUCKE is on cleaning large scale Web image corpora and on proposing image representations which are closer to the human interpretation of images. Consequently, we introduce methods which tackle these two problems and compare results to state of the art methods. Note: some aspects of this deliverable are withheld at this time as they are pending review. Please contact the authors for a preview.

2,134 citations