Thirumala-Devi Kanneganti

Bio: Thirumala-Devi Kanneganti is an academic researcher from St. Jude Children's Research Hospital. The author has contributed to research in topics: Inflammasome & Innate immune system. The author has an hindex of 94, co-authored 305 publications receiving 37831 citations. Previous affiliations of Thirumala-Devi Kanneganti include Ohio Agricultural Research and Development Center & Boston Children's Hospital.

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 (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.

Cytosolic flagellin requires Ipaf for activation of caspase-1 and interleukin 1β in salmonella-infected macrophages

Abstract: Gram-negative bacteria that replicate in the cytosol of mammalian macrophages can activate a signaling pathway leading to caspase-1 cleavage and secretion of interleukin 1beta, a powerful host response factor. Ipaf, a cytosolic pattern-recognition receptor in the family of nucleotide-binding oligomerization domain-leucine-rich repeat proteins, is critical in such a response to salmonella infection, but the mechanism of how Ipaf is activated by the bacterium remains poorly understood. Here we demonstrate that salmonella strains either lacking flagellin or expressing mutant flagellin were deficient in activation of caspase-1 and in interleukin 1beta secretion, although transcription factor NF-kappaB-dependent production of interleukin 6 or the chemokine MCP-1 was unimpaired. Delivery of flagellin to the macrophage cytosol induced Ipaf-dependent activation of caspase-1 that was independent of Toll-like receptor 5, required for recognition of extracellular flagellin. In macrophages made tolerant by previous exposure to lipopolysaccharide, which abrogates activation of NF-kappaB and mitogen-activated protein kinases, salmonella infection still activated caspase-1. Thus, detection of flagellin through Ipaf induces caspase-1 activation independently of Toll-like receptor 5 in salmonella-infected and lipopolysaccharide-tolerized macrophages.

Bacterial RNA and small antiviral compounds activate caspase-1 through cryopyrin/Nalp3

Abstract: Missense mutations in the CIAS1 gene cause three autoinflammatory disorders: familial cold autoinflammatory syndrome, Muckle-Wells syndrome and neonatal-onset multiple-system inflammatory disease. Cryopyrin (also called Nalp3), the product of CIAS1, is a member of the NOD-LRR protein family that has been linked to the activation of intracellular host defence signalling pathways. Cryopyrin forms a multi-protein complex termed 'the inflammasome', which contains the apoptosis-associated speck-like protein (ASC) and caspase-1, and promotes caspase-1 activation and processing of pro-interleukin (IL)-1beta (ref. 4). Here we show the effect of cryopyrin deficiency on inflammasome function and immune responses. Cryopyrin and ASC are essential for caspase-1 activation and IL-1beta and IL-18 production in response to bacterial RNA and the imidazoquinoline compounds R837 and R848. In contrast, secretion of tumour-necrosis factor-alpha and IL-6, as well as activation of NF-kappaB and mitogen-activated protein kinases (MAPKs) were unaffected by cryopyrin deficiency. Furthermore, we show that Toll-like receptors and cryopyrin control the secretion of IL-1beta and IL-18 through different intracellular pathways. These results reveal a critical role for cryopyrin in host defence through bacterial RNA-mediated activation of caspase-1, and provide insights regarding the pathogenesis of autoinflammatory syndromes.

疟原虫var基因转换速率变化导致抗原变异[英]／Paul H, Robert P, Christodoulou Z, et al//Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A

Abstract: 抗原变异可使得多种致病微生物易于逃避宿主免疫应答。表达在感染红细胞表面的恶性疟原虫红细胞表面蛋白1（PfPMP1）与感染红细胞、内皮细胞、树突状细胞以及胎盘的单个或多个受体作用，在黏附及免疫逃避中起关键的作用。每个单倍体基因组var基因家族编码约60种成员，通过启动转录不同的var基因变异体为抗原变异提供了分子基础。

The plant immune system

Abstract: Many plant-associated microbes are pathogens that impair plant growth and reproduction. Plants respond to infection using a two-branched innate immune system. The first branch recognizes and responds to molecules common to many classes of microbes, including non-pathogens. The second responds to pathogen virulence factors, either directly or through their effects on host targets. These plant immune systems, and the pathogen molecules to which they respond, provide extraordinary insights into molecular recognition, cell biology and evolution across biological kingdoms. A detailed understanding of plant immune function will underpin crop improvement for food, fibre and biofuels production.

The role of pattern-recognition receptors in innate immunity: update on Toll-like receptors

Abstract: The discovery of Toll-like receptors (TLRs) as components that recognize conserved structures in pathogens has greatly advanced understanding of how the body senses pathogen invasion, triggers innate immune responses and primes antigen-specific adaptive immunity. Although TLRs are critical for host defense, it has become apparent that loss of negative regulation of TLR signaling, as well as recognition of self molecules by TLRs, are strongly associated with the pathogenesis of inflammatory and autoimmune diseases. Furthermore, it is now clear that the interaction between TLRs and recently identified cytosolic innate immune sensors is crucial for mounting effective immune responses. Here we describe the recent advances that have been made by research into the role of TLR biology in host defense and disease.

Toll-like receptors.

Abstract: The innate immune system in drosophila and mammals senses the invasion of microorganisms using the family of Toll receptors, stimulation of which initiates a range of host defense mechanisms. In drosophila antimicrobial responses rely on two signaling pathways: the Toll pathway and the IMD pathway. In mammals there are at least 10 members of the Toll-like receptor (TLR) family that recognize specific components conserved among microorganisms. Activation of the TLRs leads not only to the induction of inflammatory responses but also to the development of antigen-specific adaptive immunity. The TLR-induced inflammatory response is dependent on a common signaling pathway that is mediated by the adaptor molecule MyD88. However, there is evidence for additional pathways that mediate TLR ligand-specific biological responses.