scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Institution

National Institute of Technology, Rourkela

EducationRaurkela, India
About: National Institute of Technology, Rourkela is a education organization based out in Raurkela, India. It is known for research contribution in the topics: Control theory & Machining. The organization has 4757 authors who have published 10789 publications receiving 150190 citations. The organization is also known as: NIT, Rourkela & REC, Rourkela.


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 paper, a comprehensive review of the MPPT techniques applied to photovoltaic (PV) power system available until January, 2012 is provided, which is intended to serve as a convenient reference for future MPPT users in PV systems. But, confusion lies while selecting a MPPT as every technique has its own merits and demerits.
Abstract: This paper provides a comprehensive review of the maximum power point tracking (MPPT) techniques applied to photovoltaic (PV) power system available until January, 2012. A good number of publications report on different MPPT techniques for a PV system together with implementation. But, confusion lies while selecting a MPPT as every technique has its own merits and demerits. Hence, a proper review of these techniques is essential. Unfortunately, very few attempts have been made in this regard, excepting two latest reviews on MPPT [Salas, 2006], [Esram and Chapman, 2007]. Since, MPPT is an essential part of a PV system, extensive research has been revealed in recent years in this field and many new techniques have been reported to the list since then. In this paper, a detailed description and then classification of the MPPT techniques have made based on features, such as number of control variables involved, types of control strategies employed, types of circuitry used suitably for PV system and practical/commercial applications. This paper is intended to serve as a convenient reference for future MPPT users in PV systems.

1,584 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Highly photoluminescent carbon dots with a PL quantum yield of 26% have been prepared in one step by hydrothermal treatment of orange juice and demonstrated as excellent probes in cellular imaging.

1,314 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


Authors

Showing all 4860 results

NameH-indexPapersCitations
Prafulla Kumar Behera109120465248
George Varghese8425328598
Bhim Singh76233535726
Mark O'Malley6830517475
Sanjib Kumar Panda6463313808
Michael Milligan531709391
Bijaya Ketan Panigrahi5241310252
Bruno Sinopoli5222715572
Siba Sankar Mahapatra473738920
Ganapati Panda463568888
Pradeep Natarajan4520718462
Sujit K. Bhutia431429989
Biswarup Satpati423908462
Bernard Mulgrew424267380
Aditya Kumar392244469
Network Information
Related Institutions (5)
Indian Institute of Technology Roorkee
21.4K papers, 419.9K citations

96% related

Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur
38.6K papers, 714.5K citations

95% related

Indian Institutes of Technology
40.1K papers, 652.9K citations

94% related

Indian Institute of Technology Delhi
26.9K papers, 503.8K citations

94% related

Jadavpur University
27.6K papers, 422K citations

94% related

Performance
Metrics
No. of papers from the Institution in previous years
YearPapers
202354
2022176
20211,439
20201,311
20191,139
20181,089