Shunsuke Kimura

Bio: Shunsuke Kimura is an academic researcher from Keio University. The author has contributed to research in topics: Microfold cell & Antigen. The author has an hindex of 22, co-authored 48 publications receiving 4048 citations. Previous affiliations of Shunsuke Kimura include Osaka University & Nagoya City University.

Dissection of the Autophagosome Maturation Process by a Novel Reporter Protein, Tandem Fluorescent-Tagged LC3

Abstract: During the process of autophagy, autophagosomes undergo a maturation process consisting of multiple fusions with endosomes and lysosomes, which provide an acidic environment and digestive function to the interior of the autophagosome. Here we found that a fusion protein of monomeric red-fluorescence protein and LC3, the most widely used marker for autophagosomes, exhibits a quite different localization pattern from that of GFP-LC3. GFP-LC3 loses fluorescence due to lysosomal acidic and degradative conditions but mRFP-LC3 does not, indicating that the latter can label the autophagic compartments both before and after fusion with lysosomes. Taking advantage of this property, we devised a novel method for dissecting the maturation process of autophagosomes. mRFP-GFP tandem fluorescent-tagged LC3 (tfLC3) showed a GFP and mRFP signal before the fusion with lysosomes, and exhibited only the mRFP signal subsequently. Using this method, we provided evidence that overexpression of a dominant negative form of Rab7 prevented the fusion of autophagosomes with lysosomes, suggesting that Rab7 is involved in this step. This method will be of general utility for analysis of the autophagosome maturation process.

Uptake through glycoprotein 2 of FimH(+) bacteria by M cells initiates mucosal immune response.

Abstract: The mucosal immune system forms the largest part of the entire immune system, containing about three-quarters of all lymphocytes and producing grams of secretory IgA daily to protect the mucosal surface from pathogens. To evoke the mucosal immune response, antigens on the mucosal surface must be transported across the epithelial barrier into organized lymphoid structures such as Peyer's patches. This function, called antigen transcytosis, is mediated by specialized epithelial M cells. The molecular mechanisms promoting this antigen uptake, however, are largely unknown. Here we report that glycoprotein 2 (GP2), specifically expressed on the apical plasma membrane of M cells among enterocytes, serves as a transcytotic receptor for mucosal antigens. Recombinant GP2 protein selectively bound a subset of commensal and pathogenic enterobacteria, including Escherichia coli and Salmonella enterica serovar Typhimurium (S. Typhimurium), by recognizing FimH, a component of type I pili on the bacterial outer membrane. Consistently, these bacteria were colocalized with endogenous GP2 on the apical plasma membrane as well as in cytoplasmic vesicles in M cells. Moreover, deficiency of bacterial FimH or host GP2 led to defects in transcytosis of type-I-piliated bacteria through M cells, resulting in an attenuation of antigen-specific immune responses in Peyer's patches. GP2 is therefore a previously unrecognized transcytotic receptor on M cells for type-I-piliated bacteria and is a prerequisite for the mucosal immune response to these bacteria. Given that M cells are considered a promising target for oral vaccination against various infectious diseases, the GP2-dependent transcytotic pathway could provide a new target for the development of M-cell-targeted mucosal vaccines.

Dynein-dependent movement of autophagosomes mediates efficient encounters with lysosomes.

Abstract: Autophagy is a membrane trafficking pathway that carries cytosolic components to the lysosome for degradation. During this process, the autophagosome, a double-membraned organelle, is generated de novo, sequesters cytoplasmic proteins and organelles, and delivers them to lysosomes. However, the mechanism by which autophagosomes are targeted to lysosomes has not been determined. Here, we observed the real-time behavior of microtubule-associated protein light chain 3 (LC3), which localizes to autophagosomes, and showed that autophagosomes move in a microtubule- and dynein-dynactin motor complex-dependent manner. After formation, autophagosomes show a rapid vectorial movement in the direction of the centrosome, where lysosomes are usually concentrated. Microinjection of antibodies against LC3 inhibited this movement; furthermore, using FRAP, we showed that anti-LC3 antibody injection caused a defect in targeting of autophagosomes to lysosomes. Collectively, our data demonstrate the functional significance of autophagosome movement that enables effective delivery from the cytosol to lysosomes.

M-Sec promotes membrane nanotube formation by interacting with Ral and the exocyst complex.

Abstract: How tunnelling nanotubes form between cells is unclear. A mammalian protein, M-Sec, that has homology to the Sec6 subunit of the exocyst complex, is sufficient and necessary for nanotube formation. The Ral GTPase and its effector, the exocyst complex, are required for M-Sec-dependent regulation of nanotubes.

Monitoring autophagy in mammalian cultured cells through the dynamics of LC3.

Abstract: In this chapter, we introduce several methods that rely on the analysis of LC3, a versatile marker protein of autophagic structures in mammalian cultured cells. The appearance of LC3-positive puncta is indicative of the induction of autophagy, and it is observed either by immunofluorescence or by GFP-based microscopy. The maturation process by which autophagosomes are converted into autolysosomes can be monitored by the GFP and RFP tandemly tagged LC3 (tfLC3) method. Lysosomal turnover of LC3 is a good index of the proceeding of autophagy and can be assessed by Western blotting. These methods will provide a relatively easy assessment of autophagy, and the details of the procedure will be described along with possible pitfalls.

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.

Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy

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. 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.

Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy in higher eukaryotes

Abstract: Research in autophagy continues to accelerate,(1) and as a result many new scientists are entering the field Accordingly, it is important to establish a standard set of criteria for monitoring macroautophagy in different organisms Recent reviews have described the range of assays that have been used for this purpose(2,3) There are many useful and convenient methods that can be used to monitor macroautophagy in yeast, but relatively few in other model systems, and there is much confusion regarding acceptable methods to measure macroautophagy in higher eukaryotes A key point that needs to be emphasized is that there is a difference between measurements that monitor the numbers of autophagosomes versus those that measure flux through the autophagy pathway; thus, a block in macroautophagy that results in autophagosome accumulation needs to be differentiated from fully functional autophagy that includes delivery to, and degradation within, lysosomes (in most higher eukaryotes) or the vacuole (in plants and fungi) Here, we present a set of guidelines for the selection and interpretation of the methods that can be used by investigators who are attempting to examine macroautophagy and related processes, as well as by reviewers who need to provide realistic and reasonable critiques of papers that investigate these processes This set of guidelines is 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 verify an autophagic response

Intestinal epithelial cells: regulators of barrier function and immune homeostasis

Abstract: The abundance of innate and adaptive immune cells that reside together with trillions of beneficial commensal microorganisms in the mammalian gastrointestinal tract requires barrier and regulatory mechanisms that conserve host-microbial interactions and tissue homeostasis. This homeostasis depends on the diverse functions of intestinal epithelial cells (IECs), which include the physical segregation of commensal bacteria and the integration of microbial signals. Hence, IECs are crucial mediators of intestinal homeostasis that enable the establishment of an immunological environment permissive to colonization by commensal bacteria. In this Review, we provide a comprehensive overview of how IECs maintain host-commensal microbial relationships and immune cell homeostasis in the intestine.