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) : American Geophysical Union
Résumé : Two time series of deep ocean bottom pressure records (BPRs) in between the Crozet Islands and Kerguelen are compared with GRACE (Gravity Recovery And Climate Experiment) equivalent water heights. An analysis of the correlation is performed for four time series: 1) monthly averages of the equivalent water height at the Crozet Islands, 2) the same near the Kerguelen Islands, 3) the mean of the two preceding series and 4) the difference between the two locations expressed in terms of geostrophic transport. We find that smoothed GRACE solutions are strongly correlated with the BPR data with correlation coefficients in the order of 0.7-0.8. Consequently GRACE measures real oceanic mass variations in this region.
Geophysical Research Letters ( GRL ) (0094-8276) (American Geophysical Union), 2006-11 , Vol. 33 , N. 21 , P. NIL_10-NIL_13

Droits : 2006 AGU
http://archimer.ifremer.fr/doc/2006/publication-2088.pdf
DOI:10.1029/2006GL027452
http://archimer.ifremer.fr/doc/00000/2088/

Éditeur(s) : HAL CCSD European Geosciences Union
Résumé : International audience
The seasonal climate drivers of the carbon cycle in tropical forests remain poorly known, although these forests account for more carbon assimilation and storage than any other terrestrial ecosystem. Based on a unique combination of seasonal pan-tropical data sets from 89 experimental sites (68 include aboveground wood productivity measurements and 35 litter productivity measurements), their associated canopy photosynthetic capacity (enhanced vegetation index, EVI) and climate, we ask how carbon assimilation and aboveground allocation are related to climate seasonality in tropical forests and how they interact in the seasonal carbon cycle. We found that canopy photosynthetic capacity seasonality responds positively to precipitation when rainfall is < 2000 mm yr(-1) (water-limited forests) and to radiation otherwise (light-limited forests). On the other hand, independent of climate limitations, wood productivity and litterfall are driven by seasonal variation in precipitation and evapotranspiration, respectively. Consequently, light-limited forests present an asynchronism between canopy photosynthetic capacity and wood productivity. First-order control by precipitation likely indicates a decrease in tropical forest productivity in a drier climate in water-limited forest, and in current light-limited forest with future rainfall < 2000 mm yr(-1).
ISSN: 1726-4170

hal-01557759
https://hal.univ-lorraine.fr/hal-01557759
https://hal.univ-lorraine.fr/hal-01557759/document
https://hal.univ-lorraine.fr/hal-01557759/file/bg-13-2537-2016.pdf
DOI : 10.5194/bg-13-2537-2016