| 1. |
-
- 2019
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)
|
|
| 2. |
- 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.
|
|
| 3. |
- Abbafati, Cristiana, et al.
(författare)
-
- 2020
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)
|
|
| 4. |
- Harju, Mikael, et al.
(författare)
-
Quantitative Structure–Activity Relationship Modeling on in Vitro Endocrine Effects and Metabolic Stability Involving 26 Selected Brominated Flame Retardants
- 2007
-
Ingår i: Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry. - 1552-8618. ; 26:4, s. 816-26
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- In this work, quantitative structure–activity relationships (QSARs) were developed to aid human and environmental risk assessment processes for brominated flame retardants (BFRs). Brominated flame retardants, such as the high-production-volume chemicals polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs), tetrabromobisphenol A, and hexabromocyclododecane, have been identified as potential endocrine disruptors. Quantitative structure–activity relationship models were built based on the in vitro potencies of 26 selected BFRs. The in vitro assays included interactions with, for example, androgen, progesterone, estrogen, and dioxin (aryl hydrocarbon) receptor, plus competition with thyroxine for its plasma carrier protein (transthyretin), inhibition of estradiol sulfation via sulfotransferase, and finally, rate of metabolization. The QSAR modeling, a number of physicochemical parameters were calculated describing the electronic, lipophilic, and structural characteristics of the molecules. These include frontier molecular orbitals, molecular charges, polarities, log octanol/water partitioning coefficient, and two- and three-dimensional molecular properties. Experimental properties were included and measured for PBDEs, such as their individual ultraviolet spectra (200–320 nm) and retention times on three different high-performance liquid chromatography columns and one nonpolar gas chromatography column. Quantitative structure–activity relationship models based on androgen antagonism and metabolic degradation rates generally gave similar results, suggesting that lower-brominated PBDEs with bromine substitutions in ortho positions and bromine-free meta- and para positions had the highest potencies and metabolic degradation rates. Predictions made for the constituents of the technical flame retardant Bromkal 70-5DE found BDE 17 to be a potent androgen antagonist and BDE 66, which is a relevant PBDE in environmental samples, to be only a weak antagonist.
|
|
