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 : International audience
Here we show that copper substitution in perovskite-type barium strontium cobalt copper oxide (BSCC) membranes confers extremely high oxygen fluxes well beyond the state of art, reaching 27.5 ml cm−2 min−1at 950 °C. A key feature of BSCC is the formation of a mixed matrix catalyst-perovskite membrane caused by the segregation of copper, leading to the formation of an intergranular network of copper-rich oxide between perovskite grains. BSCC membranes delivered pressure normalised oxygen flux (i.e. permeance) of up to 86 times higher, above pressure difference of 18 kPa, as compared to best perovskite membrane, BBSC, due to the catalytic effect of segregated copper oxide. Unlike conventional dual-phase membranes which contain ion and electron conducting phases, this work shows for the first time perovskite-type membranes consisting of a mixed matrix of oxygen ion/electron conducting (perovskite) and catalytic (copper oxide) phases, thus paving the way to the development of high performance membranes for oxygen separation from air for clean energy applications. © 2016 Elsevier B.V.
ISSN: 0376-7388

hal-01683219
https://hal.univ-antilles.fr/hal-01683219
DOI : 10.1016/j.memsci.2016.12.035