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

Éditeur(s) : HAL CCSD Elsevier
Résumé : Field isolates of Toxoplasma gondii in Europe and North America have been grouped into three clonal lineages that display different virulence in mice. Whether the genetic structure of the parasite is related to clinical expression in humans has not yet been demonstrated. We developed an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay which uses lineage-specific, polymorphic polypeptides derived from the dense granule antigens, GRA5 and GRA6. Our goal was to compare serotypical patterns observed in asymptomatic versus symptomatic (ocular disease and severe infection in human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-positive patients) infections among patients from Europe and South America. Independent of the clinical presentation of the disease, serotypes differed according to geographical origin, with a homogeneous distribution of serotype II in Europe and of serotypes I and III in South America. We conclude that GRA5-GRA6 serotyping is an interesting tool to study serotype prevalence in populations but it is not an accurate marker of pathogenicity of Toxoplasma infection in humans.
ISSN: 1286-4579

hal-00306841
https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00306841
DOI : 10.1016/j.micinf.2008.04.001
PUBMED : 18539501