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。

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

Autophagy, or cellular self-digestion, is a cellular pathway involved in protein and organelle degradation, with an astonishing number of connections to human disease and physiology. For example, autophagic dysfunction is associated with cancer, neurodegeneration, microbial infection and ageing. Paradoxically, although autophagy is primarily a protective process for the cell, it can also play a role in cell death. Understanding autophagy may ultimately allow scientists and clinicians to harness this process for the purpose of improving human health.

/pdf/autophagy-fights-disease-through-cellular-self-digestion-5i6zc9bv8a.pdf

Autophagy fights disease through cellular self-digestion

Autophagy is a process by which components of the cell are degraded to maintain essential activity and viability in response to nutrient limitation. Extensive genetic studies have shown that the yeast ATG1 kinase has an essential role in autophagy induction. Furthermore, autophagy is promoted by AMP activated protein kinase (AMPK), which is a key energy sensor and regulates cellular metabolism to maintain energy homeostasis. Conversely, autophagy is inhibited by the mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR), a central cell-growth regulator that integrates growth factor and nutrient signals. Here we demonstrate a molecular mechanism for regulation of the mammalian autophagy-initiating kinase Ulk1, a homologue of yeast ATG1. Under glucose starvation, AMPK promotes autophagy by directly activating Ulk1 through phosphorylation of Ser 317 and Ser 777. Under nutrient sufficiency, high mTOR activity prevents Ulk1 activation by phosphorylating Ulk1 Ser 757 and disrupting the interaction between Ulk1 and AMPK. This coordinated phosphorylation is important for Ulk1 in autophagy induction. Our study has revealed a signalling mechanism for Ulk1 regulation and autophagy induction in response to nutrient signalling.

/pdf/ampk-and-mtor-regulate-autophagy-through-direct-14wqsz16ke.pdf

AMPK and mTOR regulate autophagy through direct phosphorylation of Ulk1

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.

/pdf/guidelines-for-the-use-and-interpretation-of-assays-for-ijf2t30pbq.pdf

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

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.

/pdf/guidelines-for-the-use-and-interpretation-of-assays-for-28d1pi1jvo.pdf

Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy

Enteroviruses support cell-to-cell viral transmission prior to their canonical lytic spread of virus. Poliovirus (PV), a prototype for human pathogenic positive-sense RNA enteroviruses, and picornaviruses in general, transport multiple virions en bloc via infectious extracellular vesicles secreted from host cells. Using biochemical and biophysical methods we identify multiple components in these secreted vesicles, including PV virions; positive and negative-sense viral RNA; essential viral replication proteins; ribosomal and regulatory cellular RNAs; and numerous host cell proteins, such as regulators of cellular metabolism and structural remodeling. Using cryo-electron tomography, we visualize the near-native three-dimensional architecture of secreted infectious extracellular vesicles containing both virions and a unique mat-like structure. Based on our biochemical data (western blot, RNA-Seq, and mass spectrometry), these mat-like structures are expected to be comprised of unencapsidated RNA and proteins. Our data show that, prior to cell lysis, non-enveloped viruses are secreted within infectious vesicles that also transport viral and host RNAs and proteins. Importance The family of picornaviridae is comprised of small positive-sense RNA viruses, many of which are significant human pathogens. Picornaviruses exploit secreted extracellular vesicles for cell-to-cell viral transmission without cell lysis, and poliovirus serves as a model system for picornaviruses that are not protected by a surrounding membrane (non-enveloped viruses). The structure and contents of these vesicles secreted by virus-infected cells are described here. In addition to mature virions, these vesicles carry negative-sense, ‘template’ viral RNA and essential replication proteins, as well as cellular resources from the host. Their complex contents may comprise an enhanced virulence factor for propagation of infection, and understanding their structure and function is helping elucidate the mechanism by which extracellular vesicles contribute to the spread of non-enveloped virus infection.

https://www.biorxiv.org/content/biorxiv/early/2019/05/02/618306.full.pdf

Complexity and ultrastructure of infectious extracellular vesicles from cells infected by non-enveloped virus

Dangerous Membranes: Viruses That Subvert Autophagosomes.

ABSTRACT Enterovirus D68 (EV-D68) is a respiratory pathogen associated with acute flaccid myelitis, a childhood paralysis disease. No approved vaccine or antiviral treatment exists against EV-D68. Infection with this virus induces the formation of autophagosomes to enhance its replication but blocks the downstream autophagosome- lysosome fusion steps. Here, we examined the impact of autophagy induction through starvation, either before (starvation before infection, SBI) or after (starvation after infection, SAI) EV-D68 infection. We showed that SAI, but not SBI, attenuated EV-D68 replication in multiple cell lines and abrogated the viral-mediated cleavage of host autophagic flux-related proteins. Furthermore, SAI induced autophagic flux during EV-D68 replication and prevented production of virus-induced membranes, which are required for picornavirus replication. Pharmacological inhibition of autophagic flux during SAI did not rescue EV-D68 titers. SAI had the same effect in multiple cell types, and restricted the replication of several medically relevant picornaviruses. Our results highlight the significance of autophagosomes for picornavirus replication and identify SAI as an attractive broad-spectrum anti-picornavirus strategy. Abbreviations: BAF: bafilomycin A1; CCCP: carbonyl cyanide m-chlorophenylhydrazone; CQ: chloroquine; CVB3: coxsackievirus B3; EV-D68: enterovirus D68; hpi: hour post-infection; MAP1LC3/LC3: microtubule associated protein 1 light chain 3; MOI: multiplicity of infection; NSP2B: nonstructural protein 2B; PV: poliovirus; RES: resveratrol; RV14: rhinovirus 14; SAI: starvation after infection; SBI: starvation before infection; SNAP29: synaptosome associated protein 29; SQSTM1/p62: sequestosome 1; TFEB: transcription factor EB.

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/15548627.2022.2062888?needAccess=true

Starvation after infection restricts enterovirus D68 replication

The relationship between infection and immunity and autophagy, a pathway of cellular homeostasis and stress response, has been a rapidly growing field of study over the last decade. While some cellular processes are proor anti-infection, autophagy has been proven to be both: a part of the innate immune response against some microbes, and a cellular pathway subverted by some pathogens to promote their own replication. Autophagy, Infection, and the Immune Response provides a unified overview of the roles of cellular autophagy during microbial infection. Introductory chapters ground the reader by delineating the autophagic pathway from a cellular perspective, and by listing assays available for measuring autophagy. Subsequent chapters address virus interactions with autophagy machinery, the various roles of autophagy parasitic infection, and interactions of bacteria with the autophagic pathway. Concluding chapters explore the relationships of autophagy to systemic immune responses, including antigen presentation, ER stress, and production of IFN-gamma.

William T. Jackson

Papers

Complexity and ultrastructure of infectious extracellular vesicles from cells infected by non-enveloped virus

Dangerous Membranes: Viruses That Subvert Autophagosomes.

Starvation after infection restricts enterovirus D68 replication

Autophagy, Infection, and the Immune Response

SNAP23 is essential for germination of EV-D68 replication organelles.