Éditeur(s) : HAL CCSD Inter-Research
Résumé : International audience
The effects of global change are particularly serious in areas where range shiftsof species are physically constrained such as the Ligurian Sea, which is one ofthe coldest sectors of the Mediterranean. In this basin, historical informationon water temperature (from the sea surface down to 75 m depth) dates backto the 1950s. Early studies also recorded warm-water species occurrence.Thanks to these data we provide the first detailed characterization of watertemperature variation from 1958 up to 2010 in the layer 0–75 m depth. Wecoupled this analysis with the available information on rocky reef epibenthiccommunities (literature review from 1955 to 1964 and field data from 1980 to2010). The analysis of water temperature revealed several patterns of variation:a cooling phase from 1958 to 1980, a phase of rapid warming from 1980 to1990 and a phase of slower warming from 1990 to 2010. Inter-annual variationin temperature increased over the entire period for the water layer down to20 m. Warm-water native and alien species richness increased during thewarming phases. Literature estimates suggest a decrease in warm-water nativespecies richness during the cooling phase. The analysis of quantitative data collectedin the early 1990s and late 2000s indicated a decrease in the cover ofwarm-water native species on shallow rocky reefs and an increase in deeperwaters. We argue that increased inter-annual variation in water temperaturemay disadvantage native warm-water species in shallow waters. Our resultsindicate that the effect of temperature rises in cold, constrained basins may bemore complex than the simple prediction of species changing their geographicalrange according to their thermal limits.
Marine Ecology Progress Series

hal-01239259
https://hal-univ-perp.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01239259
DOI : 10.1111/maec.12277

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