| 1. |
- Klionsky, Daniel J., et al.
(författare)
-
Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy
- 2012
-
Ingår i: Autophagy. - : Informa UK Limited. - 1554-8635 .- 1554-8627. ; 8:4, s. 445-544
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- 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.
|
|
| 2. |
- Felsberg, Michael, 1974-, et al.
(författare)
-
The Thermal Infrared Visual Object Tracking VOT-TIR2016 Challenge Results
- 2016
-
Ingår i: Computer Vision – ECCV 2016 Workshops. ECCV 2016.. - Cham : SPRINGER INT PUBLISHING AG. - 9783319488813 - 9783319488806 ; , s. 824-849
-
Konferensbidrag (refereegranskat)abstract
- The Thermal Infrared Visual Object Tracking challenge 2016, VOT-TIR2016, aims at comparing short-term single-object visual trackers that work on thermal infrared (TIR) sequences and do not apply pre-learned models of object appearance. VOT-TIR2016 is the second benchmark on short-term tracking in TIR sequences. Results of 24 trackers are presented. For each participating tracker, a short description is provided in the appendix. The VOT-TIR2016 challenge is similar to the 2015 challenge, the main difference is the introduction of new, more difficult sequences into the dataset. Furthermore, VOT-TIR2016 evaluation adopted the improvements regarding overlap calculation in VOT2016. Compared to VOT-TIR2015, a significant general improvement of results has been observed, which partly compensate for the more difficult sequences. The dataset, the evaluation kit, as well as the results are publicly available at the challenge website.
|
|
| 3. |
- Kristan, Matej, et al.
(författare)
-
The Visual Object Tracking VOT2015 challenge results
- 2015
-
Ingår i: Proceedings 2015 IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision Workshops ICCVW 2015. - : IEEE. - 9780769557205 ; , s. 564-586
-
Konferensbidrag (refereegranskat)abstract
- The Visual Object Tracking challenge 2015, VOT2015, aims at comparing short-term single-object visual trackers that do not apply pre-learned models of object appearance. Results of 62 trackers are presented. The number of tested trackers makes VOT 2015 the largest benchmark on short-term tracking to date. For each participating tracker, a short description is provided in the appendix. Features of the VOT2015 challenge that go beyond its VOT2014 predecessor are: (i) a new VOT2015 dataset twice as large as in VOT2014 with full annotation of targets by rotated bounding boxes and per-frame attribute, (ii) extensions of the VOT2014 evaluation methodology by introduction of a new performance measure. The dataset, the evaluation kit as well as the results are publicly available at the challenge website(1).
|
|
| 4. |
- Kristan, Matej, et al.
(författare)
-
The Visual Object Tracking VOT2016 Challenge Results
- 2016
-
Ingår i: COMPUTER VISION - ECCV 2016 WORKSHOPS, PT II. - Cham : SPRINGER INT PUBLISHING AG. - 9783319488813 - 9783319488806 ; , s. 777-823
-
Konferensbidrag (refereegranskat)abstract
- The Visual Object Tracking challenge VOT2016 aims at comparing short-term single-object visual trackers that do not apply pre-learned models of object appearance. Results of 70 trackers are presented, with a large number of trackers being published at major computer vision conferences and journals in the recent years. The number of tested state-of-the-art trackers makes the VOT 2016 the largest and most challenging benchmark on short-term tracking to date. For each participating tracker, a short description is provided in the Appendix. The VOT2016 goes beyond its predecessors by (i) introducing a new semi-automatic ground truth bounding box annotation methodology and (ii) extending the evaluation system with the no-reset experiment.
|
|
