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
Résumé : International audience
BACKGROUND: Africa faces a number of unique environmental challenges. Unfortunately, it lacks the infrastructure needed to support the comprehensive environmental studies that could provide the scientific basis to inform environmental policies. There are a number of known sources of endocrine-disrupting chemicals (EDCs) and other hazardous chemicals in Africa. However, a coordinated approach to identify and monitor these contaminants and to develop strategies for public health interventions has not yet been made. OBJECTIVES: This commentary summarizes the scientific evidence presented by experts at the First African Endocrine Disruptors meeting. We describe a "call to action" to utilize the available scientific knowledge to address the impact of EDCs on human and wildlife health in Africa. DISCUSSION: We identify existing knowledge gaps about exposures to EDCs in Africa and describe how well-designed research strategies are needed to address these gaps. A lack of resources for research and a lag in policy implementation slows down intervention strategies and poses a challenge to advancing future health in Africa. CONCLUSION: To address the many challenges posed by EDCs, we argue that Africans should take the lead in prioritization and evaluation of environmental hazards, including EDCs. We recommend the institution of education and training programs for chemical users, adoption of the precautionary principle, establishment of biomonitoring programs, and funding of community-based epidemiology and wildlife research programs led and funded by African institutes and private companies. https://doi.org/10.1289/EHP1774.
Environmental Health Perspectives

hal-01616487
https://hal-univ-rennes1.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01616487
DOI : 10.1289/EHP1774
PUBMED : 28935616