Éditeur(s) : HAL CCSD Elsevier
Résumé : International audience
Multi-proxy analysis of two marine sediment cores (MS27PT and MD04-2726) from the Nile continental slope provides evidence of changes in Nile sediment discharge related to changes in Ethiopian African Monsoon (EAM) precipitation, and allows us to reconstruct changes in Nile River runoff, vegetation and erosion in the Nile headwaters. Sediment element composition and neodymium isotopic composition reveal significant changes in clastic sediment provenance, with sources oscillating between a Saharan aeolian contribution during the Last Glacial Maximum/deglacial transition and during the Late Holocene, and a Blue/Atbara Nile fluvial contribution during the African Humid Period (AHP). This study provides a new understanding of past environmental changes. Between 14.6 and 14.13 ka there was a major input of sediments from the Ethiopian Highlands, consistent with a stronger EAM at that time. Climate in the Nile basin was wetter between 14.8 and 8.4 ka, with a corresponding increase in Blue Nile water and sediment discharge via the main Nile into the Eastern Mediterranean. The gradual climatic transition from the AHP to the present-day dry climate was reflected in a decrease in Blue Nile sediment deposition and flood discharge between 8.4 and 3.7 ka, with aridity at a maximum between 3.7 and 2.6 ka. The onset of drier conditions in the Blue Nile basin seems to have begun before the 8.2 ka cooling event in the North Atlantic. We speculate that the climatic change from the wet AHP to the dry late Holocene may have been a result of a break in the low latitude dynamic equilibrium between climate, vegetation and erosion, which may in turn have affected the climate in higher latitudes. Reduced Nile flow may also have had an impact on Levantine Intermediate Water originating in the Eastern Mediterranean through an increase in intermediate water formation.
ISSN: 0277-3791

hal-01277950
https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01277950
DOI : 10.1016/j.quascirev.2015.10.030

Éditeur(s) : HAL CCSD Landes Bioscience
Résumé : International audience
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.
Autophagy

hal-00735751
https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00735751
PUBMED : 22966490