Institution
Saitama University
Education•Saitama, Japan•
About: Saitama University is a education organization based out in Saitama, Japan. It is known for research contribution in the topics: Band-pass filter & Magnetization. The organization has 7620 authors who have published 13432 publications receiving 239945 citations. The organization is also known as: Saitama Daigaku.
Topics: Band-pass filter, Magnetization, Catalysis, Mutant, Resonator
Papers published on a yearly basis
Papers
More filters
••
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
••
Daniel J. Klionsky1, Fábio Camargo Abdalla2, Hagai Abeliovich3, Robert T. Abraham4 +1284 more•Institutions (463)
TL;DR: These guidelines are presented 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.
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.
4,316 citations
••
Goddard Space Flight Center1, University of Milan2, Brera Astronomical Observatory3, University College London4, Pennsylvania State University5, University of Leicester6, Sonoma State University7, University of California, Berkeley8, Universities Space Research Association9, National Research Council10, University of Southampton11, Los Alamos National Laboratory12, National Radio Astronomy Observatory13, Space Telescope Science Institute14, Max Planck Society15, California Institute of Technology16, University of Texas at Austin17, French Alternative Energies and Atomic Energy Commission18, University of Toronto19, University of Maryland, College Park20, Princeton University21, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory22, University of Cambridge23, University of California, Santa Barbara24, Rice University25, University of Tokyo26, Saitama University27, University of Florence28
TL;DR: The Swift mission as discussed by the authors is a multi-wavelength observatory for gamma-ray burst (GRB) astronomy, which is a first-of-its-kind autonomous rapid-slewing satellite for transient astronomy and pioneers the way for future rapid-reaction and multiwavelength missions.
Abstract: The Swift mission, scheduled for launch in 2004, is a multiwavelength observatory for gamma-ray burst (GRB) astronomy. It is a first-of-its-kind autonomous rapid-slewing satellite for transient astronomy and pioneers the way for future rapid-reaction and multiwavelength missions. It will be far more powerful than any previous GRB mission, observing more than 100 bursts yr � 1 and performing detailed X-ray and UV/optical afterglow observations spanning timescales from 1 minute to several days after the burst. The objectives are to (1) determine the origin of GRBs, (2) classify GRBs and search for new types, (3) study the interaction of the ultrarelativistic outflows of GRBs with their surrounding medium, and (4) use GRBs to study the early universe out to z >10. The mission is being developed by a NASA-led international collaboration. It will carry three instruments: a newgeneration wide-field gamma-ray (15‐150 keV) detector that will detect bursts, calculate 1 0 ‐4 0 positions, and trigger autonomous spacecraft slews; a narrow-field X-ray telescope that will give 5 00 positions and perform spectroscopy in the 0.2‐10 keV band; and a narrow-field UV/optical telescope that will operate in the 170‐ 600 nm band and provide 0B3 positions and optical finding charts. Redshift determinations will be made for most bursts. In addition to the primary GRB science, the mission will perform a hard X-ray survey to a sensitivity of � 1m crab (� 2;10 � 11 ergs cm � 2 s � 1 in the 15‐150 keV band), more than an order of magnitude better than HEAO 1 A-4. A flexible data and operations system will allow rapid follow-up observations of all types of
3,753 citations
••
Daniel J. Klionsky1, Hagai Abeliovich2, Patrizia Agostinis3, Devendra K. Agrawal4 +232 more•Institutions (137)
TL;DR: 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 are presented.
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
2,310 citations
••
TL;DR: A new method is proposed in which the distribution of complex amplitude at a plane is measured by phase-shifting interferometry and then Fresnel transformed by a digital computer, which can reconstruct an arbitrary cross section of a three-dimensional object with higher image quality and a wider viewing angle than from conventional digital holography using an off-axis configuration.
Abstract: A new method for three-dimensional image formation is proposed in which the distribution of complex amplitude at a plane is measured by phase-shifting interferometry and then Fresnel transformed by a digital computer. The method can reconstruct an arbitrary cross section of a three-dimensional object with higher image quality and a wider viewing angle than from conventional digital holography using an off-axis configuration. Basic principles and experimental verification are described.
1,813 citations
Authors
Showing all 7650 results
Name | H-index | Papers | Citations |
---|---|---|---|
Tomonori Kawasaki | 0 | 1 | 0 |
Atsushi Uchida | 0 | 1 | 0 |
Takahiro Yoshimoto | 0 | 1 | 0 |
Ryo Funabashi | 0 | 1 | 0 |
Fu Kuroiwa | 0 | 1 | 0 |
Masami Tanaka | 0 | 1 | 0 |
K. Kawamoto | 0 | 1 | 0 |
Jyorthana Rajappa Muralidhar | 0 | 1 | 0 |
Yasuha Miyashita | 0 | 1 | 0 |
Chaomurilege | 0 | 1 | 0 |
Chaofeng Tang | 0 | 1 | 0 |
Takaomi Sasaki | 0 | 1 | 0 |
Hung Manh Ho | 0 | 1 | 0 |
Kurokawa Hideki | 0 | 1 | 0 |
Yuki Akimoto | 0 | 1 | 0 |